In many companies, annual performance reviews remain focused on three main areas: achieving financial targets, technical proficiency in the role, and the employee's overall conduct. Health and safety, environmental, quality of work life, and corporate social responsibility issues are sometimes mentioned, but only peripherally, often at the end of the review, without clearly defined objectives.
Including HSE-CSR objectives in annual performance reviews does not mean turning every employee into an expert in these areas. Rather, it means recognizing that, regardless of their position, everyone can contribute, at their own level, to risk prevention, environmental protection, a positive work environment, and ethical practices.
The first best practice is to start with the reality of the job. What are the main risks to which the person is exposed or which they can influence? What are the company's expectations in this area? For example, a production team leader might have objectives related to leading safety briefings, reporting hazardous situations, participating in accident analyses, and incorporating ergonomics into workstation design. A traveling salesperson might have objectives related to road safety, optimizing their travel, and adhering to certain ethical guidelines in customer relations. An HR manager might be evaluated on the quality of employee relations, leading employee well-being initiatives, and implementing diversity policies.
The second key is to ensure that these objectives are concrete and observable. Vague formulations such as “be attentive to safety” or “contribute to CSR” are likely to have no effect. Conversely, specifying that a manager is expected to conduct a certain number of safety visits per quarter, to include a QWL (Quality of Work Life) topic in their team meetings, and to participate in at least one CSR project per year provides a clear direction. These objectives must be realistic, adapted to the context, and negotiated during performance reviews to avoid being perceived as top-down directives.
Human Resources plays a crucial role in structuring this system. They can provide templates for standard objectives by job family, allowing for local adaptation. They can also train managers to integrate these dimensions into their performance reviews: how to discuss them without resorting to a formal checklist, how to recognize and reward efforts, and how to collaboratively develop relevant objectives with employees. Performance review software will need to be adapted to clearly include these sections.
It is also important to consider the relationship with variable compensation, where it exists. If it is stated that HSE-CSR objectives are important, but have no impact on bonuses or premiums, while these remain exclusively based on financial or production criteria, the message may seem contradictory. Without overhauling compensation systems overnight, it is possible to gradually introduce weighting linked to these criteria, at least for managerial positions and certain key roles.
Finally, it is essential to avoid making HSE-CSR objectives a mere cosmetic exercise. If employees perceive these objectives as simply added "for appearances' sake," without real follow-up, without impact on career decisions, and without a link to concrete actions, they risk becoming just another meaningless formality. Conversely, when they are integrated into the overall talent management strategy, when they are taken into account in promotion decisions, and when they are linked to training and projects, they help to firmly embed these issues in the management culture.
Including HSE-CSR objectives in annual performance reviews is therefore much more than a simple form adjustment. It's a way of affirming that how work is done—with attention to health, safety, the environment, and respect for people—matters as much as raw results. It restores the full importance of a broader vision of performance, in which HR and managers become key players in the transition.
