Artificial Intelligence Used in Performance Reviews by Corporate Managers

Managers are increasingly using artificial intelligence (AI) to assist in writing performance reviews, with 78% of corporate employees reporting that their managers used AI in this capacity over the past year. This trend is part of a broader movement towards automation in the workplace.

A recent survey conducted by professional development firm Highwire found that nearly three-quarters of managers are leveraging AI to draft, edit, summarize, or inform feedback and performance reviews. However, it appears that many employees are not being transparent about their use of AI in this process.

Only 16% of non-managerial employees surveyed reported knowing that AI had influenced their review, suggesting a lack of transparency around AI's role in the evaluation process. This could be due to concerns among managers about being perceived as overly reliant on technology.

The use of AI in performance reviews is not without its challenges. Some experts have noted that over-reliance on AI can lead to negative consequences, such as employees feeling undervalued or misunderstood.

The way in which AI is being used in performance reviews also matters. For instance, having an AI tool format human-written observations is different from using AI to generate a review from scratch.

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in performance reviews is having a mixed impact on employees. While 54% of those surveyed said their feedback has become more specific and actionable, 34% found it to be generic and 32% less useful.

This disparity is not insignificant, as nearly a third of employees may be pulling less value from their reviews than before AI entered the picture. The survey suggests that while many are benefiting from AI-generated feedback, others are not seeing the same level of improvement.

Another area where AI is being used to support employees is in rehearsing difficult workplace conversations. Nearly one-quarter of employees are now using an AI tool to prepare for these types of interactions. This trend is driven by a gap in support for nervous employees, with only 44% reporting that their manager provides them with the opportunity to practice high-stakes conversations.

This lack of support has created a vacuum that AI tools are filling, allowing employees to rehearse and receive feedback on difficult conversations without needing human intervention. One company, Synthesia, is taking this trend further with its latest release, Sessions.

Sessions allows employees to practice conversations with an AI avatar and receive an assessment from an "AI coach", essentially an automated version of one-on-one training provided by managers. This feature has been developed in response to feedback from enterprise customers who want to expand access to managerial touchpoints without overstretching human resources.

The development of Sessions highlights a broader trend towards simulation-based learning, with AI playing a greater role in how employees learn and develop their skills. While the effectiveness of these training experiences remains to be seen, they are certainly becoming more prevalent as companies seek to support their employees in new and innovative ways.

As companies increasingly seek innovative ways to support their employees, some are turning to AI-generated performance reviews as a means of streamlining the evaluation process. This trend raises questions about the role of human judgment in workplace assessments and the potential consequences for employee morale.

While Highwire's survey findings might be seen as biased given its focus on human-led professional training, they echo other concerns about the over-reliance on AI in the workplace. Some employees may view unhelpful AI-generated performance reviews as a form of work-slope, where tasks are delegated to machines without proper consideration for their impact.

The shift towards relying on AI for routine tasks has significant implications for employee development and job satisfaction. As companies continue to explore new ways to use agents more effectively at work, it is essential that they prioritize the human element in performance evaluations to avoid exacerbating existing workplace issues.