Development Discussion is Not a Form but a Conversation

Rethinking development discussions.

2025-04-15 · Janne Ruohisto

When someone mentions the words development discussion, many people's first thought is: "Do I have to fill in that form again?"

• A form that gets filled in – because it has to be.
• A form that gets saved in a system – and forgotten there.
• A form that gets criticised – and that nobody feels is their own.

A few years ago, the reputation of development discussions was so poor that some large companies ran newspaper ads announcing that they no longer held them at all – because, supposedly, they only weakened employee motivation.

The bad reputation led many organisations to start calling the same processes by new names. Development discussions became success conversations or check-ins.

The name changed – but the forms stayed.

But why was the development discussion turned into a form in the first place?

Is that the only, or the best, way to do it?

Development discussions began as a way to improve soldiers' performance

The roots of development discussions go back to early performance appraisals of soldiers – specifically, the US Army during the First World War. Their aim was to improve efficiency, allocate personnel and, above all, identify underperformers – not so much to support individual growth.

During the Second World War, appraisal systems were developed further, among other things to identify potential officers and to grant promotions.

Gradually, the purpose of appraisals began to broaden: from screening out weak performers towards identifying and rewarding talent.

Management by objectives and the evolution of conversation practices

In the 1950s, Peter Drucker introduced the Management by Objectives (MbO) model. At its core was the idea of collaboration: the manager and the employee agree on goals together. Conversation became part of the structure – but strictly through goals, results and metrics.

MbO introduced structured conversations used to follow up on goal achievement, development and performance. It emphasised collaboration and employee participation in goal setting, bringing a more participatory approach to management than the earlier top-down models. This shift recognised the value of employees' contribution and its impact on motivation and commitment.

It laid the foundation for modern performance management – and later for development discussions.

Development discussions arrived in Finland in stages

In Finland, goal- and results-oriented conversations (in Finnish) began to spread more widely in the 1960s and 1970s. In the 1970s, international companies brought "goal discussions" to Finland as part of management by results.

In the early 1980s in particular, a practice called "development discussions" (in Finnish) became more common, and its use has gradually increased in many Finnish organisations ever since. In the early 1990s, Finns used the term "superior–subordinate discussions" (in Finnish), but towards the end of the decade today's most common term, "development discussions", took over.

The change in terminology – from superior–subordinate discussions to development discussions – reflects a shift from hierarchical control towards collaboration, feedback and growth.

In many organisations, the conversations were split into three separate parts held according to the annual cycle: a goal discussion, a results discussion and a development review. In others, the goal and results discussions were combined, and development was handled separately.

Today, development discussions are an established management practice in many Finnish organisations. According to statistics (in Finnish), around 60% of Finnish employees have an annual development discussion with their manager.

Forms were introduced to ensure structure

Development discussion forms were introduced out of a desire to:

• bring structure to the conversations
• make sure important topics are covered
• document what was agreed
• promote fairness and comparability
• make preparation and follow-up easier

In large organisations especially, the form has offered a way to standardise practices and make sure everything essential is covered. Forms have also served as documentation: decisions and goals can be followed up later.

But what happens when the form takes over?

Good intentions do not always guarantee a good outcome.

Organisations often think about development discussions purely from the form's point of view:

• Development discussion = form
• Having a development discussion = filling in the form
• Improving development discussions = designing a better form
• Criticism of development discussions = criticism of the form

…and so the original purpose of the conversation is forgotten: support, growth, direction and interaction.

In practice, focusing too much on filling in the form can weaken the quality and meaningfulness of the development discussion.

Several studies and practical experience show that:

• forms can make the conversation rigid
• interaction can disappear
• individuality and context get trampled by standards
• attention goes to filling in the form and reporting on the conversation instead of its content
• the employee experience suffers

At its worst, a development discussion becomes just another box to tick, counted in HR reports. And that kind of conversation serves no one.

Can a development discussion be done well without a form?

The goals a form aims to achieve – such as consistency, documentation, follow-up and uniformity – can also be achieved in another way. A way that keeps the conversation alive and meaningful.

The key is a balance between structure and interaction. You need ways to prepare, guide and document – but without them making people passive or restricting interaction.

The Skillhive way: not a form – but a template for conversation

Skillhive approaches the development discussion in its primary sense: as a conversation. We provide all the structure and follow-up the conversation needs – without forms.

How a development discussion works in Skillhive:

1. A template is created for the conversation, built from themes and questions that guide the discussion, along with other content.
2. The conversation starts by copying the template, done by the manager, the employee or the administration.
3. Participants can comment on and react to each other's thoughts – before, during and after the conversation.
4. Goals, metrics and development plans live as part of the conversation.
5. The conversation is confidential – visible only to its participants.
6. All documented information is kept, serving as a memory and supporting continuous development.

We meet the goals of the form – but better

More than a form

We are not against forms – we simply believe they are no longer the only option, nor the most modern user experience. Skillhive's approach does not remove structure; it frees the conversation from underneath it.

A development discussion does not have to be a performance.

It should be an opportunity – for growth, direction and shared understanding.

📌 Finally

If you are developing development discussion practices in your organisation, stop for a moment and ask:

Do we need a better form – or a better way to talk?

At Skillhive, we believe in the latter. And we have built a tool that makes it possible.