When Performance Evaluations Get Tricky

By Rose O. Sherman, EdD, RN, NEA-BC, FAAN

Nurse leaders, especially those new in their role, are sometimes faced with giving staff a different performance review than they anticipated.  These situations can bet very tricky. What follows is a typical case that managers present to me:

A Case Scenario

Sarah is a new leader in a 30-bed ICU. She is new to this organization, but this is not her first leadership role.  Jane is a seasoned staff member in the ICU who has achieved a Nurse 3 on the organization’s clinical ladder. Those in a Nurse 3 role are expected to be actively involved in preceptor activities, serving as champions for a quality project and participating in Unit councils. Jane is currently doing none of these activities. From the limited experience that Sarah has had with her, she appears to be disengaged. Sarah has tried to get her involved in unit activities, but Jane finds excuses for not doing so.  It is now time for Jane’s performance review. Sarah has reviewed her file and noted that Jane has received highly satisfactory evaluations for three consecutive evaluation cycles. In looking at the role expectations for Nurse 3, Sarah determines she can only evaluate her satisfactorily. She asked Jane for a self-evaluation, but Jane had little to contribute to support that she was going above and beyond in her role. Sarah meets with Jane, who is extremely unhappy with her satisfactory evaluation.  She storms out of Sarah’s office and tells her colleagues she is being evaluated unfairly by a new manager who barely knows her.

The Leadership Challenge

The challenge in this situation is Sarah is holding Jane accountable for her professional performance. The previous manager may have checked the Highly Satisfactory box year after year without setting clear expectations for performance at the Nurse 3 level. Sarah is dealing with the fallout of perhaps being the first leader who has held Jane to the standards expected on the clinical ladder.

Performance reviews like this one are crucial conversations. Crucial conversations involve opposing opinions, strong emotions, and high stakes. These are not easy conversations to have. Nurse leaders often avoid them for fear of handling the situation poorly. Yet, for any improvement in Jane’s behavior, Sarah needs to use what is described as radical candor.  Brene Brown often says, “clear is kind – unclear is not kind.”  Without improvement, Jane could potentially lose her Nurse 3 grade or derail in other ways.

A challenge for Sarah is that because she is new to her role, she might not have earned enough trust to provide Jane with the psychological safety to believe that she has Jane’s best interest at heart.  It is critically essential that Sarah lets Jane know that she has confidence in her ability to perform at a highly satisfactory or outstanding level, but this will not happen unless she becomes more engaged.  Because Sarah had this conversation, leadership research indicates that staff will have a higher respect for her adherence to a strong set of expectations.

From a leadership perspective, Sarah should let Jane deal with her anger and schedule a follow-up coaching meeting later to look at ways to help Sarah re-engage.  Hopefully, she will, but that is her choice, and if she chooses not to – Jane can do little to influence this behavior beyond providing a supportive environment.