Performance management or Performance acceleration?

You've probably sat in one of those meetings. The numbers are on the screen. Targets look mostly fine. A few comments are exchanged about collaboration. Someone nods, someone takes notes, and the meeting moves on.

 On paper, performance was reviewed. In reality, nothing moved forward.

 That moment captures the quiet problem with how many organisations approach performance. We say we're managing it, when what we're really doing is documenting the past. Performance becomes something we assess after the fact, instead of something we actively help people build.

 That's why the term “performance management” often misses the point. What teams actually need is “performance acceleration”.

 Performance is the outcome. Growth is what creates it. And as a leader, you're responsible for both.

 The backward-looking trap

 Traditionally, reviews exist to support decisions. Raises. Promotions. Signals that something is off. These decisions matter, but they turn performance into a backward-looking exercise. You learn what someone did. You rarely change what they'll do next.

 Leadership demands more than that.

 Every leader holds two responsibilities at the same time, even if they're not always aware of it. The first is to monitor performance. The second is to help it grow.

 Monitoring performance is the familiar part. You set expectations. You clarify what success looks like. You agree on goals, measures, and priorities. At certain moments, you pause and evaluate. You look at results. You look at how the work was done. You offer feedback, and sometimes you invite others to do the same. These conversations lead to decisions about scope, readiness, or next steps.

 This work is necessary. It creates clarity and fairness. But it's only half the job.

 Where the real leverage lives

 The real leverage comes from what happens next.

 Feedback isn't meant to close a chapter. It's meant to open one. When feedback is treated only as an evaluation, it becomes static. When it's treated as input for development, it becomes a catalyst.

 This is where performance acceleration begins. You take what you learned and turn it into direction. What should this person strengthen next? What skills need attention? What behaviours are worth practising?

 Then you shorten the distance between insight and action. Instead of waiting for the next formal review, you create smaller loops. Action. Reflection. Feedback again. The shorter the loop, the faster the growth.

 In teams where this works well, feedback doesn't feel heavy or formal. It shows up in everyday work. People talk about what's working and what's not while it still matters. They're open to hearing it because they know it's meant to help them move forward, not to judge them.

 What intentional development looks like

 This kind of growth doesn't happen by chance. It requires intention.

 Leaders make time for development conversations. They treat coaching as part of their role, not as an extra. They revisit goals. They adjust direction. They stay close enough to the work to notice progress while it's happening.

 Research consistently supports this approach. McKinsey has shown that organisations that invest in developing their people over time outperform those that rely only on evaluation and control. The difference isn't talent. It's leadership attention.

 Elena's shift

 Elena had been running quarterly reviews for three years. They were thorough—detailed feedback, clear ratings, documented goals. Her team respected the process. But something nagged at her: the same development areas kept appearing, cycle after cycle.

 She decided to try something different. Instead of saving feedback for the quarterly conversation, she started weaving it into weekly one-to-ones. Small observations. Specific moments. "I noticed how you handled that client pushback yesterday—what made you approach it that way?"

 Within two quarters, she saw movement on issues that had been stuck for over a year. One direct report finally cracked a presentation skill she'd been working on. Another started delegating work he'd always hoarded. The quarterly reviews became shorter because there were fewer surprises. The real work was happening in between.

 The fragility of speed without development

 Of course, there's another path. You can choose speed over development. You can push for results, minimise investment in growth, and accept higher turnover as a cost of doing business.

 Many organisations do. Some are profitable. Some move fast. They also become fragile.

 When development is missing, capability plateaus. Leaders turn into bottlenecks. The same problems keep coming back, just with different names attached to them.

 A people-focused culture makes a different choice. It treats development as essential work. It assumes that if people grow, performance will follow.

 The signal your process sends

 Your review process tells people what matters. Not in theory, but in practice. Every conversation, every cycle, every follow-up sends a signal.

 So the real question isn't how often you review performance. It's whether your reviews are designed to judge the past—or to actively shape what comes next.

 Building a culture of continuous development is a skill in itself. Our Leadership Fundamentals programme (link) helps leaders create the feedback loops and coaching conversations that turn performance reviews into genuine acceleration.