HR-Glossar
Mitarbeitergespräch (structured employee conversation)
Which kinds of employee conversation exist, what belongs in the personnel file and why an annual review alone achieves too little.
1. What is Mitarbeitergespräch (structured employee conversation)?
The Mitarbeitergespräch is the structured conversation between a manager and an employee about working together, performance, development and expectations. The term gathers up very different kinds of conversation which serve different purposes and mix badly.
At least four are to be distinguished: the feedback conversation about working together and performance, the development conversation about prospects and qualification, the objectives conversation about priorities – and, clearly separate from these, the conversation prompted by an incident, which can have consequences in employment law.
A statutory frame exists only in places. There is no duty to hold conversations regularly. What is regulated are particular occasions – company integration management, for instance – and the limits: what is gathered and documented in a conversation is processing of personal data and is subject to data protection law.
2. Origin and development
The annual review comes from a working world with long planning cycles and stable tasks. Once a year there was a stocktake, an assessment and a plan – which fitted an organisation in which little changed fundamentally within a year.
Two developments have called that into question. First, tasks and priorities now change faster than annually. Second, it is known that feedback achieves less the further it lies from what prompted it – a remark about something that happened in the spring has no effect in December.
From this has come the shift to shorter, more frequent conversations. The annual review does not disappear but loses its role as the only occasion: it takes stock and plans, while the running feedback happens in between.
One difficulty has not changed: as soon as pay hangs on the assessment, the conversation becomes a negotiation. Anyone who needs both should separate them in time.
3. Core principles and how it works
Different purposes, different conversations
Feedback, development, objectives and problem-solving sit badly together in one appointment. Combining them usually achieves none of the aims.
Feedback works close to the event
The further a remark lies from what prompted it, the less it achieves. An annual review cannot replace running feedback.
A link to pay changes the conversation
Where a payment hangs on the assessment, people negotiate rather than talk. Separating them in time helps both purposes.
Documentation is data processing
Notes of a conversation are personal data. The principle of necessity applies, and the employee has a right of access under Article 15 GDPR.
Not every note belongs in the personnel file
What belongs in the file is what is necessary for the employment relationship. Personal impressions and irrelevant detail do not.
Incident-driven conversations have their own rules
Where consequences in employment law are in prospect, there may be a right to have a works council member present. That belongs said, not circumvented.
No statutory frequency
There is no duty to hold conversations regularly. One can arise from a collective or works agreement.
4. Who is Mitarbeitergespräch (structured employee conversation) relevant for?
- Managers – it is the most widely used leadership instrument there is.
- Employees – their most important occasion for settling expectations and prospects.
- HR – they design the guidance, the frequency and the documentation.
- Works councils – assessment principles are subject to co-determination.
- Data protection leads – documentation and retention have to be settled.
5. How it differs from related terms
- Employee conversation and target agreement – the conversation is the frame, the agreement one possible content. Not every conversation needs objectives. - Employee conversation and a formal warning – a warning is a declaration in employment law with a censuring and a warning function. It is not a conversation format, even where it is handed over in one. - Employee conversation and company integration management – integration management under Section 167(2) SGB IX is a separate, statutorily provided procedure with its own purpose. - Employee conversation and appraisal – an appraisal is an assessing document, the conversation an exchange. Combining them makes the exchange impossible. - Employee conversation and exit interview – the exit interview serves the organisation's learning, not the person's development.
6. Variants and adaptations
The common forms and their purpose:
- Annual review – takes stock and plans; too rare as the only occasion. - Short conversations weekly or monthly – prompt feedback and prioritisation; they do not replace the stocktake but make it easier. - Development conversation – prospects, qualification, career; better kept separate from the performance conversation. - Return conversation after a long absence – delicate: it may not ask for a diagnosis and must not work as leverage. - Incident conversation on conflict or breach of duty – with possible consequences in employment law; observe rights to have someone present. - Exit interview – voluntary, of limited value, because open criticism is rare.
7. Advantages and challenges
Advantages
- Makes expectations explicit instead of assuming them
- Creates a reliable occasion that otherwise disappears into daily work
- Allows development wishes to be spotted early and turnover to be anticipated
- Documented conversations support later decisions traceably
- Regular feedback considerably lowers the stakes of the annual review
Challenges
- As the only annual appointment it achieves little – feedback needs proximity to the event
- Mixing several purposes makes the conversation unsatisfying for everyone
- A link to pay turns exchange into negotiation
- Documentation creates data protection duties that are often overlooked
- Standardised forms encourage formalism rather than conversation
- Managers are rarely trained for difficult conversations
8. Best practices for implementation
Separate the purposes, in time as well
Performance and development in one appointment, plus the pay question – that overloads any conversation. Separate occasions achieve more than one comprehensive annual meeting.
More often and shorter rather than rarely and long
Feedback works close to the event. Short, regular conversations relieve the annual review of an expectation it cannot meet.
Write down only what is necessary
Agreements and outcomes belong documented, personal impressions do not. The employee can request access under Article 15 GDPR – what is written should withstand that.
Prepare managers for difficult conversations
Criticism, performance problems and the return after illness are the cases where damage occurs. They are exactly the ones training usually leaves out.
Where employment law is in prospect, name the rights
Anyone holding a conversation with possible consequences should point out existing rights. It costs nothing and removes the basis for any complaint of being ambushed.
9. Tips for employers and employees
For employers
- **Separate the purposes** – feedback, development and pay do not mix in one appointment
- **Promptly rather than annually** – feedback works close to the event
- **Document only what is necessary** – notes are personal data
- **Do not ask for a diagnosis** – not in a return conversation either
For employees
- **Prepare** – your own points, examples, development wishes
- **You can request access** – to the data documented about you, Article 15 GDPR
- **Where employment law is in prospect** – ask about having a works council member present
- **Your illness is nobody's business** – what counts in a return conversation is your ability to work
10. Conclusion
The employee conversation is not a single format but a collective term for very different conversations – feedback, development, objectives, problem-solving. They serve different purposes and sit badly together in one appointment. The most common error is not holding too few conversations but packing too many purposes into one.
The classic annual review suffers additionally from distance: a remark about something from the spring has no effect in December. Shorter, more frequent conversations do not replace the stocktake but make it easier – and relieve the annual meeting of an expectation it could never meet.
In law the frame is loose – there is no duty to hold conversations regularly – but the documentation is not: notes are personal data, are subject to the principle of necessity, and must be disclosed on request. What is written down should withstand being read. For a group running a central performance tool, two further points apply: assessment principles are subject to co-determination under Section 87 BetrVG, so a rating framework cannot simply be rolled out; and where a conversation may have consequences in employment law, there can be a right to have a works council member present.
Sources
- Section 26 BDSG – Data processing for the purposes of the employment relationship (official English version, as at 23 June 2021; the German text governs) (opens in a new tab)
- Section 87 BetrVG – Co-determination rights in social matters (official English version) (opens in a new tab)
- Section 167 SGB IX – Prevention and company integration management (German original; no official English version) (opens in a new tab)
- German Association for Human Resource Management – leadership instruments (opens in a new tab)
Related terms
Our promise
Software supports. People take responsibility.
Let us talk about your payroll – no strings attached, specific, and with a dedicated contact from day one.