Finding 2
Many employees see performance reviews as biased, with downstream effects that show up in higher levels of quiet quitting.
A majority of employees say performance reviews are biased, which explains why many see them as somewhat or completely ineffective. This negative sentiment shows in important outcomes such as productivity and discretionary effort — resulting in the kind of quiet quitting discussed on social media. Our data shows that when employees get feedback from team members as well as managers — and the feedback is used in reviews — it correlates with employees’ feeling that reviews are fairer.
A majority of employees say performance reviews are biased, which explains why many see them as somewhat or completely ineffective. This negative sentiment shows in important outcomes such as productivity and discretionary effort — resulting in the kind of quiet quitting discussed on social media. Our data shows that when employees get feedback from team members as well as managers — and the feedback is used in reviews — it correlates with employees’ feeling that reviews are fairer.
Those who see the review process as very biased are more than twice as likely to say they are looking for work elsewhere.
In addition to lackluster feelings of confidence in performance management systems, 25% of employees told us they see their current performance review systems as either biased or very biased
Those who see the review process as very biased are more than twice as likely to say they are looking for work elsewhere.
In addition to lackluster feelings of confidence in performance management systems, 25% of employees told us they see their current performance review systems as either biased or very biased
Fewer than 1 in 3 employees see performance reviews as very fair and equitable
They are somewhat fair and equitable
They are very fair and equitable
They are biasedProductivity is up to 23 points higher (83% vs. 60%) and engagement is up to 14 points higher (71% vs. 57%) among employees who see their reviews as very fair and equitable.
Another 37% said they see the system as only somewhat fair, and only 30% of employees said they believe their review process is completely fair and equitable.
This directly correlates to some of employees’ most important metrics around performance and engagement. When they see performance management as biased, they often also exhibit signs of quiet quitting. Productivity and engagement levels drop measurably for people who believe reviews are somewhat or very biased.
Similarly, those who see the review process as very biased are more than twice as likely to say they are looking for work elsewhere — whether actively or passively.
Feelings of belonging are up to 60 percentage points higher among employees who see their reviews as very fair and equitable.
Feelings of overall equity and fairness in the employee experience also take a hit. When people feel there is bias in the system, their feelings of belonging and value at work drop 42 to 60 percentage points from a high of 70% (when they feel reviews are very fair and equitable).
Nearly 4 in 5 employees said that they think incorporating feedback from two or more colleagues would make the performance reviews feel unbiased.
One way to address the fairness gap in reviews may be to look more closely at the people involved in the process. Input from a broader array of stakeholders correlates with increased confidence in fairness: 84% of this survey’s respondents work in teams at least some of the time, but only 29% said feedback from team members is part of how their performance is measured. Nearly 4 in 5 employees said that they think incorporating feedback from two or more colleagues would make the performance reviews feel unbiased.
For reviews to feel unbiased, 78% of employees want more than one source of feedback on their work
1 person
2 – 5 people
6 – 10+ people
No amount of people will make me feel feedback is fair and unbiased
The sweet spot here seems to be between two to five people — but just having more than a manager involved in giving feedback is likely to help.
When we asked employees if they had the ability to get feedback from team leaders or members, 70% said ‘yes’ and 46% said that managers used feedback in performance conversations.
Employees who get feedback from their team in reviews are 2―4.5x more likely to feel reviews are unbiased
Employees who see reviews as very fair and equitable
- 50%
- 19%
When no team feedback is received
- 11%
Workers who had feedback from team leaders and members included in reviews were 2.5x less likely to report bias. Those who had no ability for teams to give them performance feedback were 4.5x more likely to say they saw bias in the system.
Read our recommendation
2
Use feedback data and workforce audits to root out bias.
Implement an anytime feedback model so that employees and managers can freely request and provide written feedback, and use peer feedback in the performance review process. Additionally, review your performance management process for biases, such as recency, confirmation, and negativity bias. To truly root out bias, HR should go one step further. Leverage AI, data, analytics, and reports to determine whether there are systemic biases. Audit your workforce practices, including performance ratings, calibration, promotions, and compensation decisions. Investigate “leading indicators” of bias.
These could include whether underrepresented employees receive coaching conversations with the same frequency as other employees and whether the language used in feedback questions and responses varies across underrepresented employee groups.
