Canadian HR Reporter

CANADIAN HR REPORTER February 20, 2017 28 FEATURES PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT Changing gears to get results DIALOG sees immediate results in abandoning annual performance reviews By Tania Oppedisano A s employers evolve, HR is becoming increasingly recognized as a crucial player in ensuring a corpora- tion's longevity and success. And as employers vie for top tal- ent on a global scale, there is a growing evidence that employee engagement, satisfaction and well-being directly affect em- ployee retention rates and per- formance. As a result, it's slowly becoming easier to justify the desire of HR executives to push boundaries, be creative and inno- vate long-standing, out-of-date organizational and performance management tools. One of the most common sys- tems used to measure employee satisfaction and rate performance management behaviour is the awkward, anxiety-inducing annu- al performance reviews. Employ- ers spend a significant amount of time and money on these reviews, but is all the effort worth it if they don't really create behavioural changes, improve retention or impact the bottom line? Is the system worth salvaging? Leading the HR team at DIALOG, I could see the five-point rating system was not complex enough to accurately review our dynamic talent. An integrated design firm, DIALOG employs more than 500 people from various backgrounds: engineering, design, urban plan- ning, architecture, to name a few. And under the performance rating system, 80 per cent of em- ployees achieved the rating "meets expectations." Realizing there is no way 80 per cent of people are performing at the exact same level, the question became: What does "meets expectations" mean? Every manager had his own defi- nition and reason for the rating, and it became apparent the rating itself was more a reflection of the manager than the employee. e standard performance re- views seemed to be rating the em- ployer more than the employee. For this reason, ratings are often skewed to be too high (for fear the result would be a bad reflection on themselves) or too low (to avoid hurting employees' feelings and any work that might be required for a disciplinary process), as seen in the 2016 article "Getting Rid of Performance Ratings: Genius or Folly?" in Industrial and Organi- zational Psychology. As a result, eliminating the re- views entirely and focusing on pro- grams that encouraged conversa- tion and collaboration seemed like the better, most viable option. Gaining senior support I decided to focus my research on performance management while completing a master's degree in HR management at York Univer- sity in Toronto. We realized that focusing on employee engage- ment and retention strategies would indicate to employees DIA- LOG was committed to them and cared about their future and well- being, leading to higher engage- ment and increased performance. To effectively implement this new performance management program, it was crucial for the HR team to have full support from its partners. Offering statistical data from extensive research, we clearly outlined how an overhaul of performance reviews and a focus on employee development would have a direct impact not only on the company's bottom line but on employee satisfaction and engagement, which made the program overhaul a priority. With York University as a part- ner, and by positioning a perfor- mance management overhaul as an investment in DIALOG's fu- ture, we gained the support need- ed from senior leadership to ef- fectively implement the program. We then spearheaded training sessions with employees at each office and selected designated ad- vocates or "coaches" who would assist with the program rollout. We walked through the new pro- gram strategy, the benefits and the techniques with coaches and HR managers responsible for owning the program. Like the program itself, the im- plementation process encouraged face-time between employees and partners, which allowed for trans- parency and the ability to deal with possible issues as they arose. e benefits of conversation e program focused on develop- mental conversations that would accurately take into consideration the nuances of different job de- scriptions, experience levels, be- haviours and personalities. Employees, direct manag- ers and dedicated senior leaders would have a development con- versation once a year where they would identify a goal that was realistic and attainable within 12 months. is would followed up by check-ins each quarter, where managers would ensure employ- ees were staying on track, and of- fer advice and encouragement on next steps. By encouraging employees to create obtainable goals — with the understanding their objec- tives would be monitored and supported throughout the year — employees are encouraged to consistently work on improving. is leads to increased engage- ment and overall satisfaction. e real conversations between em- ployees and managers also allow for greater accountability, result- ing in a genuine desire from em- ployees to focus on their personal development. Since their implementation in 2016, individual develop- ment plans have proven to have the highest impact on employee engagement, performance and retention — all of which have already dramatically improved. Developmental conversations in- creased visibility among manag- ers, partners and employees. is has allowed performance issues to be dealt with as they arise, rather than waiting until performance review season to address them. This means performance is- sues are dealt with more quickly, and are now separated from performance management and goal-setting. And principals, HR professionals and partners have ongoing face-to-face time with their employees, which has led to improved productivity and em- ployee satisfaction. Employees book and drive the conversations, which also leads to increased accountability. Assessing effectiveness e program overhaul is by no means a definite solution; it's or- ganic and constantly evolving. After the first year wraps, we'll be able to look at the data and measure how much of an impact the program has had on perfor- mance and retention. Perhaps most importantly, the program rollout has positioned the HR team as key players in improving the company's bottom line and as a voice in the decision- making process. Tania Oppedisano is national director of HR at DIALOG in Toronto. She can be reached at TOppedisano@dialog- design.ca or for more information, visit www.dialogdesign.ca. DIALOG employees are benefitting from their employer's decision to abandon annual performance reviews and the five-point rating system in favour of developmental conversations. Credit: DIALOG PM40065782 Emplo y ment Law Today Canad ad a ian www.employmentlawtoday.com September 14, 2016 Wrongful dismissal damages — Bonus entitlement BY RONALD MINKEN FOR some workers, a bonus makes up a signifi cant portion of their remuneration. For others, a bonus is something that may or may not be provided by their employee at specifi c times of the year — such as Christ- mas, for example. Often, an employee who is dismissed without cause will ask whether her entitle- ment to wrongful dismissal damages will in- clude a component for lost bonuses. Compensation for wrongful dismissal can include an amount for a bonus which the employee would have been entitled to re- ceive during the notice period. In the absence of an employment agree- ment specifying to the contrary, the question is whether the bonus has become an essen- tial component of the employee's remunera- tion or whether it is essentially a gift — to be delivered at the employer's sole discretion. A recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal, Paquette v. TeraGo Networks Inc., dealt with this issue. When Trevor Paquette was fi red by Tera- Go Networks, the dismissed employee and his former employer could not agree on a severance package. Paquette brought a sum- mary judgment motion to determine the pe- riod of reasonable notice and damages. e motions judge awarded notice at 17 months and based damages on salary and benefi ts that Paquette would have earned during the 17-month notice period. e motions judge did not award damages for bonuses, because the employer's bonus plan required an em- ployee to be "actively employed" at the time the bonus was paid. Paquette appealed that decision on the issue of whether the motion's judge made a mistake in not including compensation for lost bonuses. e Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal. e motion judge erred in focusing on the Nurse fi red for forcing care on resisting care home resident Intentions were good but nurse made a mistake forcing protesting resident to have a shower, resulting in injuries to resident BY JEFFREY R. SMITH AN ARBITRATOR has upheld the dismissal of a registered practical nurse at an Ontario long- term care home after a resident suff ered injuries after resisting care and the nurse failed to fi le an incident report. Chester Posada was a regular part-time reg- istered practical nurse (RPN) at Bendale Acres, a long-term care home operated by the City of Toronto. He was hired in September 2008 and worked in the behavioural response unit, a locked area housing cognitively impaired residents who could act out. On Aug. 20, 2014, Posada was working in the unit with three other staff members. One of the patients, an 86-year-old man referred to as TS, suff ered from dementia and several other affl ic- tions that required him to be on blood thinners. e blood thinners increased TS' susceptibility Intoxicated, dishonest -- and reinstated with full pay pg.3 Employe ignored sunset clause in collective agreement CREDIT: LIGHTHUNTER/SHUTTERSTOCK Getting ready or legalized marijuana pg. 4 Employers will have to treat employee use somewhat differently -- but still as an intoxicating substance ASK AN EXPERT pg. 2 Employee harassment outside work ACTIVE on page 7 » EMPLOYER on page 6 » with Stuart Rudner Canadian Employment Law Today is an indispensable tool in keeping managers, business owners, trade unions, HR professionals and law firms up-to-date on the latest developments in employment law. COMPLY WITH THE LATEST EMPLOYMENT LEGISLATION To order your subscription call 1.800.387.5164 | 416.609.3800 www.employmentlawtoday.com/subscribe Subscribe today for only $299 Order No. 20612-17 policy feature provides drop- down coverage for when a certain loss is excluded from the under- lying coverage. In essence, it is meant to bridge the gap between unavailable corporate indemni- fication, an unresponsive or un- available underlying D&O limit of liability, and the directors' and officers' personal assets. Argu- ably, the real value of this policy is its exclusivity; the Side A DIC can never be accessed by the com- pany, but is dedicated to the very individuals who serve it. Attracting, retaining talent One of the less obvious benefits of D&O liability insurance is its role in the attraction and reten- tion of corporate talent. is is more often the case in early-stage businesses, where a single heavy- hitting executive can significantly propel the company through cer- tain milestones, secure additional capital investment, win a key con- tract, or improve its relationship with stakeholders. at being said, somebody of this calibre will come at a cost — and, in many cases, she will require an adequate insurance program prior to the execution of her employment contract. Ryan R. Seager is a senior underwriter, executive and management liability, at RSA Insurance Company of Cana- da in Toronto. For more information, visit www.rsagroup.ca. Insurance helps with retention PROTECTING < pg. 24

• Cover