Dump HR's performance methods

By Paul Marsh (not AI)

For a profession that spends so much time talking about innovation, HR has an extraordinary talent for doing the same things over and over again.

Many HR practices survive not because they work, but because they have become institutional habits. Someone inherited them from a previous employer, copied them from a CIPD course, or implemented them because they are considered "best practice". The result is an endless cycle of organisations repeating processes that consume huge amounts of time while delivering little measurable value.

Performance appraisals are perhaps the clearest example. Every year, managers and employees spend countless hours completing onerous forms and discussing ratings. Yet ask a simple question: where is the evidence that annual appraisals significantly improve organisational performance? In many cases, there isn't any. Instead, HR teams continue measuring things like completion rates as though getting 95% of forms submitted somehow proves the process is working.

HR loves administrative statistics! I recently overhauled an organisations performance review processes, and at least an hour was spent debating with HR the value of analysing performance ratings as a measure of how good a manager was! Forget the fact that most ratings are pointless, subjective and 90% get the 'meets expectations' indicator in any event.

Imagine a sales director reporting that 100% of salespeople completed their database records accurately while revenue fell by 15%. Nobody would celebrate. Yet HR routinely reports appraisal completion, training attendance, policy acknowledgements, and engagement survey participation as indicators of success without demonstrating any connection to business results.

Meanwhile, organisations sit on enormous amounts of people data that remain largely unused. Modern statistical techniques can identify which leadership behaviours predict performance, which recruitment channels produce the highest-performing hires, and which factors drive retention. Artificial intelligence can analyse patterns across thousands of employees and uncover insights that would never emerge from spreadsheets and intuition alone.

But many HR teams remain focused on manual administration and subjective judgement. They are more comfortable debating competency frameworks than applying predictive analytics. More comfortable discussing best practice than testing whether a practice actually works.

Part of the problem is that HR has traditionally rewarded risk avoidance. Implementing the same process as everyone else feels safe. If it fails, at least it failed in a familiar way. Challenging accepted wisdom carries greater personal risk, even when the evidence suggests the conventional approach is ineffective.

The CIPD and other professional bodies provide valuable guidance, but guidance should not become dogma. What is considered best practice is often simply common practice. The two are not the same thing.

The future of HR belongs to those willing to think differently. Instead of asking whether a process follows accepted practice, HR should ask whether it creates measurable value. Instead of tracking activity, measure results. Instead of relying on tradition, use data. Instead of fearing AI, embrace it.

Simply put: HR must stop following the herd.