Latest / New Manager Conversations with Fexingo: First 90 Days, Managing Former Peers, and Leadership Basics / The Performance Review Paradox for New Managers
Transcript
- Lucas: Most new managers walk into their first formal performance review feeling like they are about to deliver a verdict. It feels like a courtroom moment where you hold the gavel and the employee sits on the other side waiting for judgment. Luna: Right, and if you have been doing your job well all year, that review should not be a revelation. It should just be a summary of conversations you already had. Lucas: Exactly. The problem is that too many people treat the annual or semi-annual cycle as the primary vehicle for feedback. By the time the meeting happens, the employee is often shocked by the criticism because it never came up in real-time. Luna: So the review becomes a source of conflict instead of a tool for alignment? Lucas: Precisely. And here is the thing about managing former peers. If you were friends with someone last month, handing them a document that says you need to improve your project management feels like a personal betrayal. Luna: It does feel like a betrayal unless you have normalized the idea that feedback is just part of the workflow. Lucas: Which brings us to the structural shift we need to make. We are talking about decoupling feedback from evaluation. You can give corrective feedback on a Tuesday morning without it being tied to a quarterly rating. Luna: How do you actually do that without micromanaging every little interaction? Lucas: You create a lightweight documentation habit. I am not talking about writing essays. I mean a simple note in your CRM or project tracker after any significant deviation from expectations. Luna: Like a timestamped record of what happened and what was discussed? Lucas: Yes. When the review comes around, you pull those notes. You say, look, we talked about this in March, and again in June. Here is the pattern. Now we are looking at the solution. Luna: That removes the element of surprise completely. The employee cannot claim they did not know. Lucas: It also protects your relationship. You are not attacking their character. You are reviewing data points that both of you acknowledged earlier. Luna: But doesn't some people still get defensive when they see the written record? Lucas: They might. But then you pivot to the forward-looking question. What support do you need to change this trajectory? That shifts the dynamic from police officer to partner. Luna: I think that works best when you frame it around their own goals. Everyone wants to succeed in their role. Lucas: Agreed. If their goal is promotion, and the review shows gaps in execution, you are helping them close those gaps. You are not blocking their path. Luna: This feels much more sustainable than the traditional end-of-year scare tactic. Lucas: It is. And honestly, if you are relying on the review to fix behavior, you have already failed as a manager. Luna: That is a harsh way to put it, but it is probably true. Lucas: We want to take a quick moment to mention that this show is kept ad-free by listeners who value deep career insights. If we've helped you navigate a tricky management situation or career move, consider supporting us at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. It helps us keep producing these detailed conversations. Luna: Thanks for listening. Now back to the mechanics of giving feedback. Lucas: Let's drill into the content of that feedback. There is a massive difference between judging intent and judging impact. Luna: What is the distinction there? Lucas: Judging intent means you assume they meant to cause harm or delay. Judging impact means you describe the actual outcome. The email went out late, and the client felt confused. Luna: So you focus on the observable result rather than guessing what was in their head. Lucas: Always. Because you cannot read minds. You can only address the reality that affected the team. This keeps the conversation grounded in facts. Luna: And it prevents the manager from sounding arrogant or controlling. Lucas: It does. When you talk about impact, you are inviting the employee to explain the context. Maybe they lacked resources. Maybe they misunderstood the priority. Luna: That opens up a diagnostic conversation instead of a defensive one. Lucas: Exactly. You become detectives solving a puzzle together. Who has the information? Where did the breakdown happen? How do we prevent it next time? Luna: I love that framing. It makes the manager less of a boss and more of a facilitator. Lucas: And that is the key for former peers. You want to be seen as someone who enables success, not someone who polices failure. Luna: Does that work if the employee is consistently underperforming despite the impact-focused feedback? Lucas: If they are consistently underperforming, you escalate the structure. You move from informal notes to a formal improvement plan. But even then, you anchor it in those documented impacts. Luna: So the paper trail is essential for protection, but the conversation is about partnership. Lucas: Correct. The paper trail proves fairness. The conversation builds trust. You need both. Luna: What about positive feedback? Does it follow the same rules? Lucas: Absolutely. Specificity matters there too. Do not just say good job. Say the way you handled that client escalation saved the account. Luna: Because that tells them exactly what behavior to repeat. Lucas: Yes. Vague praise is nice, but it is useless. Specific praise is actionable. It reinforces the exact actions that drive value. Luna: So the review becomes a mirror of the daily interactions, just polished and organized. Lucas: That is the ideal state. If the review surprises anyone, the system is broken. Luna: And if the system is broken, the manager is failing to communicate. Lucas: Right. So the question for new leaders is not how to write a better review form. Luna: It is how to build a culture where the review is obvious. Lucas: Exactly. Make the invisible visible through constant, clear communication. Luna: Do you think this approach changes how employees view the manager's authority? Lucas: I think it strengthens it. Authority comes from competence and clarity, not from title. When you are clear and consistent, people respect the process. Luna: Even when the news is bad. Lucas: Especially when the news is bad. Because they know you are fair. Luna: So the first review is less about grading and more about setting the tone for the whole tenure. Lucas: It is the foundation. Get the feedback loop right early, and everything else gets easier. Luna: Or harder if you let it slide. Lucas: Definitely. Avoiding the hard conversations now guarantees a crisis later. Luna: So what is the one takeaway for a manager starting tomorrow? Lucas: Start the notebook. Write down the wins and the misses as they happen. Do not wait for the calendar. Luna: Simple, practical, and it builds trust over time. Lucas: It does. And it turns a scary event into a routine check-in. Luna: Where do you go from there once that habit is set? Lucas: You focus on development. You use that data to help them grow into the role you hired them for. Luna: That sounds like a much healthier place to be. Lucas: It is. Management is really just coaching with accountability. Luna: I will have to remember that distinction. Lucas: Keep it in mind. The balance is delicate but worth mastering.