Performance Review Confidentiality

A Los Angeles public school teacher killed himself after the Los Angeles Times recently published the database of  “value added analysis” for all LA public school teachers on which the teacher in question didn’t fare well. The “value added analysis” uses improvements in student test scores to evaluate teacher effectiveness. The analysis is designed to replace the tenure system with a performance system. Its critics use the teacher in question as proof of its flaws. This teacher was regarded by his students and colleagues as a good teacher. He tututored students before school started and stayed with them after school if necessary.

Much of this story relates to a debate on whether the public is entitled to know personnel information about any public employee paid by the taxpayers. I’m not going to engage in this debate. That isn’t the purpose of this post.

The LA story reminded me of the importance, at least in the private sector, of keeping employee personnel information confidential. Only those with a need to know should have access to it. If that’s not the case, employee trust will be lost, and the workplace will be dominated by distractions instead of productivity. Some employers take confidentiality seriously, implementing systems to make sure personnel information remains private. Some are sloppy. Performance reviews are copied and circulated throughout the workplace.

If an employee needs to be disciplined or fired, deal directly with the employee. Don’t use what should be confidential information to force the employee out because he’s embarrassed and can’t imagine continuing to work in a place where everyone knows what may or may not be his flaws. Confidentiality should be taken seriously in all workplaces.