First, understand what your employees are really wanting. They want regular updates on whether they are on track or not. That is significantly different than a formal performance review.

You can accomplish the feedback sessions as a monthly or weekly team meeting. If you make it monthly, team oriented, and casual, you'll also build the team and ensure transparent communication across the department.

Formal performance reviews vary by company, position, circumstances and employee. If there is a problematic employee, then more (i.e., monthly or bi-monthly) performance reviews might be reasonable. If the company is in the midst of significant change, quarterly performance reviews and one-on-one talks might help minimize tension and confusion. Typically, most formal performance evaluations that review the employee's entire scope of performance are limited to quarterly, twice a year, or (less ideally) annually.

I think in situations like this, the employees - like your customers - are "always right." It sounds as though the younger staff members are communicating that they are not getting the feedback they need to feel comfortable that they're performing their duties effectively. That may not require that you do formal performance review sessions on a monthly basis, but it may mean that you need to set up more regular one-on-one interactions with these employees to provide them with the coaching and feedback they feel they need.

Feedback can be provided in many different ways. Sometimes the job itself, and its outcomes, can be set up in such a way to provide immediate feedback, assuming that specific outcome objectives have been developed and communicated. For instance, in a call center environment employees might be expected to handle X number of calls during a certain period of time. In a data processing environment, they might be expected to process X number of documents, etc. In other situations, feedback from customers (internal or external) might be used on an ongoing basis to give employees a sense of how they're performing.

The right answer is going to depend on each situation, but the answer may be broader than just considering performance reviews. Part of the answer may also lie in evaluating whether job expectations and outcomes are being clearly communicated and understood and whether additional means of providing employees with feedback "real-time" might be necesary.

Your employees are reflecting the need and desire for more feedback. Providing feedback regularly can be an effective tool, but it needs to be done well and thoughtfully.

First, I would suggest having an annual performance review. It should be linked to the written expectations of the position. I'd also suggest that in this session you incorporate an element that speaks to each person's top 2-3 strengths and 1-2 opportunity areas. Within that section, you can provide specific actions that they can take to build on strengths and address opportunity areas.

With a solid annual review, I'd suggest a formal 6 month review. This mirrors the annual review. The goal is to keep the employee on track with expectations.

Now, with the two big rocks in place, you can provide feedback along the way and keep it project specific. You have two meaningful windows to provide deep one on one feedback. This approach will move meaningfully to meeting the needs for feedback, direction and alignment.

Monthly "feedback sessions" could be a time-waster, or not. I agree with keeping to a traditional approach to formal reviews, and responding to individual needs on an ongoing basis. An employee wonders what you think about a project they completed or their handling of a new responsibility they've been given? They should be comfortable asking and getting a verbal response. To plan monthly sessions, when many employees are confident in their performance and don't need constant reassurance, is unproductive. I know we hear the new generation wants constant pats on the back. To some extent, they'll have to grow up and get over it.