CHAPTER 22

How to React to a Biased Performance Review

by Paola Cecchi-Dimeglio and Kim Kleman

We’re all familiar with bias in performance reviews. Whether it’s the halo-or-horn effect, where the manager’s overall favorable or negative opinion of an employee colors their entire assessment, or the so-called recency bias, where the employee’s latest behavior overshadows earlier actions, many employees feel they have been rated unfairly during their evaluation.

But women, especially, are subject to biased performance reviews—and this is the case whether their manager is male or female. According to research conducted by one of us (Paola) working with large domestic and international professional services firms and using content analysis of individual annual performance reviews, women are 40% more likely to receive critical subjective feedback or vague feedback during their review, as opposed to either positive or critical objective feedback. And their performance is more likely to be attributed to characteristics such as luck or their ability to spend long hours in the office (perceived as real commitment to the firm), rather than their abilities and skills. As such, they often don’t receive due credit for their work.

What’s more, they’re more often held to a double standard—criticized for the same attributes that men are praised for. “Heidi seems to shrink when she’s around others, and especially around clients, she needs to be more self-confident,” a manager wrote in one of the many company reviews that Paola has analyzed. But a similar problem—confidence in working with clients—was given a positive spin when a man was struggling with it: “Jim needs to develop his natural ability to work with people.”

In another pair of reviews, the reviewer highlighted the woman’s “analysis paralysis,” while the same behavior in a male colleague was seen as careful thoughtfulness: “Simone seems paralyzed and confused when facing tight deadlines to make decisions,” while “Cameron seems hesitant in making decisions, yet he is able to work out multiple alternative solutions and determine the most suitable one.”

So what should you do if this happens to you? You could accept the evaluation at face value and question your competence. You could begin looking for work elsewhere. Or you could dispute the evaluation, reacting angrily and defensively in the moment.

But responding in those ways won’t get you anywhere. Instead, consider two alternatives: Start a conversation with your manager to understand how you were rated and what they might have overlooked, and make a plan of action so that next time, you avoid this situation and are recognized for exceeding expectations.

How to React

When you’re in a performance review meeting with your boss that you feel is unfair, remain calm. Use the following tips to better understand your manager’s evaluation and what it was based on.

Listen—really listen

Seek to understand exactly what your boss is saying. You’re trying to figure out the metrics your manager used to evaluate you. Ideally, metrics are SMART—specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time bound—based on goals that were established at the beginning of the evaluation cycle. But not all workplaces have these strict definitions. If expectations were fuzzier, aim to under stand what metrics your boss did use to assess your performance.

Dig for more details

Ask questions. Phrase them in a way that suggests you’re trying to understand, not second-guess, your manager’s assessment. For example, a common scenario for women is to get penalized for taking too long on a project—when no deadline had been set. In a situation like this, you might respond, “You say that I took too long to complete project X. What was the time frame you were looking for? How could I have done this differently?”

Ask about a similar project that you know to have been led by a male colleague. Was your boss happier with that project? How long did it take to complete? What did that team leader do that your manager wishes you did? You don’t want to expressly state that you believe your boss is gender biased. But these questions can help reveal that maybe you aren’t held to the same standard as your male colleague.

Research and follow up

At the end of the conversation, tell your boss that the evaluation surprised you and that you’d like to talk again. Don’t rush that next conversation; you need to give yourself time to calm down. But try to schedule it within a week or two of the first one. During that time, review your notes about the projects your boss focused on, and ask your teammates for their thoughts about your performance.

Keep in mind that you’re not asking your teammates to go to bat for you against your boss. Nor are you seeking ammunition for every comment and criticism in your review. You want to know what your colleagues honestly thought about working with you and how you could have performed better.

When framing the question to your colleagues consider the following rules: Identify a specific situation (the beginning, middle, and end of project X, for example), a specific behavior (problem solving or communicating, for instance) and its impact on others (related to collaboration, deadlines, and so on). Ask them to be candid and to tell you what you can do better going forward. Listen without judgment, and write down what they say. You’ll get a lot of detailed feedback.

When you do meet with your manager again, come prepared with examples and talking points that speak to the metrics your boss has cited, including some of the feedback that your colleagues shared with you. Tell your manager, too, that you understand there’s room for improvement in your performance. Research shows that people who engage in blatant self-promotion tend to put others off, but those who have open and productive dialogues are more likely to have their viewpoints heard.¹

Don’t demand a reevaluation, but ask your manager if the appraisal can be revised to reflect your manager’s insights and some of your information, too, so it communicates a fuller picture. If your boss says yes, terrific! If the answer is no, then you’ve at least let your manager know that you take your evaluation seriously and that you’re eager to improve. Then you can take steps to avoid such an assessment again.

Looking Ahead

How can you set yourself up to receive a better appraisal next year? Based on the results of a field experiment that Paola performed at an international professional service provider, we’ve discovered an effective exercise women can do throughout the year to make sure that their contributions are noticed and evaluated fairly.

At the beginning of every project, write several brief paragraphs describing its scope and your role in it. Here are some specifics to include:

• Define your responsibilities for the task. If you’re the lead infographic designer on a job and your team is responsible for the design that will be the centerpiece of a client presentation, the junior consultant in charge of managing the presentation might help you highlight the key content, but you have authority over the design of individual elements.
• Identify who has the final authority. You and the junior consultant are charged with producing the content, but the lead senior consultant is responsible for how the whole presentation and infographics work together.
• Determine outside resources to be consulted. Perhaps specific charts require discussion with subject-matter experts outside your team.
• Clarify who needs status updates and how often they need them. For instance, the lead senior consultant and the partner in charge of the client relationship will need to be updated weekly.

Use this document as a personal roadmap, so you are reminded of everyone’s roles and responsibilities, as well as whom you should keep informed. Then, at the end of the project, summarize key points: what went well and what you believe needed to improve based on the feedback you received during the work. Also, seek specific feedback from your project teammates. What could you do better next time? How could they simplify their work during the next project?

You don’t need to share these documents and feedback with others, but they should communicate what you’ve learned and how it is influencing your work. At the onset of the next project, let your teammates know that you are implementing changes based on their recommendations.

Last, right before performance appraisal time, send a short note to all the colleagues you’ve worked with on various projects throughout the year. In a few paragraphs, recap the project deliverables, the project’s tasks and challenges, and how you overcame them. Include what you learned from your colleagues’ advice and how it benefitted your professional development throughout the year. In doing this, you remind your colleagues of all you’ve contributed in the past year, so they can keep this in mind in 360 reviews or if asked for feedback from your manager. (If your company doesn’t have 360-degree reviews or your manager isn’t part of the process, make sure they get a version of this project summary as well.)

The advantage of adopting this proactive approach is that it makes you more visible to colleagues and managers and includes them in your success. It also reduces the halo-or-horn effect and the recency bias described earlier. Moreover, colleagues and managers feel heard when they see that you’ve acted on their advice and represent it to the leaders above you.

Even better, with this approach colleagues will rate you much more similarly to how they rate men. You’ll receive better reviews and will be more recognized for your accomplishments. And your future evaluations will be three times less likely to show gender bias.

__________

Paola Cecchi-Dimeglio, JD, LLM, PhD, is a behavioral scientist and the chair of the Executive Leadership Research Initiative for Women and Minority Attorneys at the Center for the Legal Profession at Harvard Law School and a senior research fellow at HLS and at Harvard Kennedy School (WAPPP). She is also the CEO of PCD Consulting Group, a leading consulting firm dedicated to solving business and policy challenges related to gender using behavioral science, behavioral economics, big data, and artificial intelligence. Reach her at paola @paolacecchidimeglio.com and follow her on Twitter @HLSPaola. Kim Kleman is the former editor in chief of The American Lawyer and Consumer Reports magazines and teaches journalism at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. Reach her at [email protected] and follow her on Twitter @kdkleman.

NOTE

1. See C. A. Moss-Racusin and L. A. Rudman, “Disruptions in Women’s Self-Promotion: The Backlash Avoidance Model,” Psychology of Women Quarterly 34, no. 2 (2010): 186–202 and H. R. Bowles, L. Babcock, and K. L. McGinn, “Constraints and Triggers: Situational Mechanics of Gender in Negotiation,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89, no. 6 (2005): 951–965.