Tell me about a time when you got a performance rating you disagreed with.

Question Analysis

This question is designed to assess how you handle feedback, especially when you perceive it as unfair or inaccurate. The interviewer is looking to understand your approach to conflict resolution, self-awareness, and professionalism. It's important to demonstrate that you can handle criticism constructively and can communicate effectively to resolve misunderstandings or disputes. The STAR method (Situation, Task, Action, Result) is an effective way to structure your response, ensuring clarity and focus.

Answer

Situation: In my previous role as a project manager, during an annual performance review, I received a lower-than-expected rating. The feedback suggested that I had not effectively managed team communication, which surprised me as I had implemented weekly updates and feedback sessions.

Task: I needed to address this feedback to understand the reasoning behind it and to ensure accurate evaluation. It was important to approach the situation professionally and seek clarity to improve my performance.

Action: I scheduled a meeting with my manager to discuss the feedback in detail. I prepared by gathering evidence of my communication efforts, including meeting notes and emails. During the meeting, I listened actively to my manager's concerns and shared my perspective, highlighting specific instances where I had facilitated communication effectively. I asked for specific examples where I could improve and also suggested additional strategies I planned to implement to enhance team communication.

Result: Through this discussion, it became clear that while my efforts were in place, there was a perception issue due to a lack of visibility on some of the communication channels I used. My manager appreciated my proactive approach and agreed to reconsider the rating. Furthermore, we established a more transparent system for tracking communication efforts, which ultimately led to improved team dynamics and better performance evaluations in subsequent reviews.