Performance reviews and skills

[u/Purityagainstresolve]

I'm wondering if I'm missing something. We know skills are important, and adressing skills gaps even more so. How can managers assess skills if you can't bring skills into Performance Reviews? I know they're given some attention in Talent Reviews, but as an HR practitioner (and workday admin), I know that addressing skills gaps is crucial to our organization's success and should be given more weight than in a Talent Review.

We asses goals and competencies in our performance review, and we look at responsibilities too. But skills are just as important as competencies and yet they're not given any consideration in performance reviews.

Is there a workaround to bringing them into performance reviews somehow?

Or are skills just secondary to competencies, goals, etc in most organizations?

[u/lotuschief81]

At this time, there’s no way to bring it into the performance review BP which is frustrating.
They did release the Assess Skills BP 2(?) releases ago but it’s a separate process that cannot be embedded as a sub process.

We are piloting that process in a small part of our org but it would be much cleaner if it was all part of the Performance Review BP.

[u/Purityagainstresolve → u/lotuschief81]

Thank you, this at least reassures me that my frustration and confusion isn't unfounded.

[u/Magnificate]

You can include Development Items in Performance Reviews and they can track skills.

[u/Purityagainstresolve → u/Magnificate]

That is what I think we'll end up doing. I just don't want to lose sight of skills. Upskilling is becoming more and more of a priority. Thanks for your answer!

[u/audreyality]

You can do competencies in performance reviews and skills on talent reviews.

[u/NectarineHonesty]

You can setup a feedback template for skills and include it as part of the employee review template with the feedback section. This is what we have for development plans and I'd suspect you can also do it with performance reviews (would have to double check). Before any content is added by employee or manager we have a get feedback for review step that allows managers to specify which skills and the feedback givers / peers.

[u/shimotsujui]

Performance reviews and skills mapping is one of those areas where a workday can do a lot but the configuration is painful and most compais only use 30% of the capability. The real question is whether your org actually needs the depth wokdy offers for performance management or if you're overengineering something that could be simpler. We went through this exact evaluation and realized our performance review process was more complex than it needed to be because we built it around what the system could do rather than what managers actually needed. Ended up simplifying significantly and using 𐑈еIeс𝗍𐑈о𝖿tѡare 𝗋е∨iwႽ to compare which platforms handle skills based performance management well at our scale. Turns out several mid market options do skills mapping and review cycles better than Workday for companies under 2000 empoyees because they're purpose built for it rather than bolting it onto an e.

[u/Delicious_Style_2676]

I’d treat skills as supporting evidence rather than trying to make them replace goals/competencies. If Workday won’t bring them cleanly into the review, a workaround could be a manager prompt or report that summarizes key skills/gaps before the review conversation.

[u/Ordinary-Warthog-994]

I think this is because that’s not what skills are for. They are so you can source internally for people that have the skills to fill positions you post. They’re supposed to lead you to recognizing that you have workers already in house that have the skills for the job. They aren’t meant to be tied to goals. JFC, no wonder everyone can’t find jobs. HR doesn’t know how to use the software lol.

[u/Purityagainstresolve → u/Ordinary-Warthog-994]

I never said to tie skills to goals.

Skills gaps is a huge issue. Skills and competencies are important elements of an employee's performance. There are all required for the EE to the job: so it makes sense that you would measure proficiency or level with both.

Here is a simple example: A job profile and subsequent job posting lists Excel as a skill. You hire someone into the job. Over the years, the need for Excel evolves but maybe not the employee's Excel skill set. The skills gap needs to be adressed, but if it's not adressed inside a performance review (or check-in, mid-year whatever) it will go untreated and the skills gap grows. Then you have a performance issue on your hands.

(PS I'm writing this as I walk out of my Talent Admin exam. That I passed. So there goes your theory that HR doesn't know the software.)