Employee Ranking Systems LO16633

Roxanne Abbas (rabbas@comp-web.com)
Wed, 21 Jan 98 15:20:17 PST

Replying to LO16573 --

Eric Budd wrote:

> It makes as much sense to rank people as it does to rank components of
> your automobile. When you are done identifying the top performing parts,
> are you going to get rid of the under-performers (the wheels aren't doing
> their job, lets 'reassign' them outside' the company)? Are you going to
> turn the under- performers into copies of the top performers (we will be
> better off having two outstanding engine blocks and that poor performing
> exhaust system will no longer be a strain on our management resources)?
> The characteristic behavior (or results) of any system is the result of
> how its components interact, not how well the individual components
> perform on their own. The automobile, as a system, delivers
> transportation. None of the parts by themselves can deliver
> transportation. None of the parts can even transport themselves. In an
> organization, none of the people by themselves produce the results of the
> organization. Ranking ignores the fact that organizational performance is
> the result of the quality of the interactions of the organization, not the
> quality of the individual performances.


I thought your analogy of ranking the automobile parts was brilliant and
very useful in helping me to undersand why ranking is intuitively
justabsurd. Tell your daughter that there is no need for her to go to
college, she already has a natural talent that is in demand in the
corporate world. Thanks for your post.



Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>