Lon Badgett writes:
>I can think of a few interesting times when a performance review
>system might become truly valuable.
>1. Any time it was administered continuously so there was no gap or
>lag between behavior and feedback.
This is the mark of a concerned and competent manager. You don't wait
until a situation requires drastic actions and or sanctions. No one
benefits by "surprising" the employee with a less than satisfactory
performance review. This simply creates animosity and rifts between
all parties involved.
>2. Whenever it was updated continuously to improve its content by
>people hired and trained for this activity.
Not updating performance review criteria is analogous to not updating
your process or product. To borrow from Woody Allen, a manufacturing
facility is like a shark. It has to keep moving forward or it will
die. To stop monitoring the performance of the employees will result
in a dead shark.
>3. When it recognized the systematic relationship of performance and
>behavior and avoided punishing people for events that were within
>process control limits.
A) The relationship between performance and behaviour is well known
and understood here from both aspects, the effect of the performance
review on behaviour and the effect of behaviour on the review.
B) Why the hell would you want punish someone for results that were
within the expected parameters?
>4. Moments after pigs learn to fly.
Let's turn this around for a second.
When you hire a contractor to work on your house, do you ask for
references (in order to evaluate their abilities, or performance)?
When you get a baby sitter or hire day care for your children, do you
ask for references (to evaluate their performance and abilities with
children)?
When you consultants on this list try to sell your services to a
prospective client, what do you use as evidence of your alleged
prowess on the issue at hand?
Do you use references from satisfied clients? Is this not a
performance review of sorts? Or are you just good enough of a bullshit
artist where you can convince someone that you can help them with
their problems without any prior evidence.
(I am reminded of a story on All Things Considered on management
consultants that stated a 30% success rate of saving failing
businesses. Yet they always seemed to get paid!)
Just what would _you_ use to determine whether or not someone is doing
the job that you have paid them to do?
As an employee of Hewlett-Packard, I have been hired to do a job. I
have expectations that I will receive wage increases and promotions
based on my abilities. I expect that my managers will objectively
evaluate my abilities and use as evidence my past performance. I am
not a good bullshitter, brown-noser, or any other type of sycophant
(as evidence of this I offer that I have not had a hair cut in 3-1/2
years, have not worn a tie in four years, and have even been greeted
with incredulity on the part of my co-workers after telling the Site
General Manager he should lay off the doughnuts), and to this date I
have not been disappointed in my expectations my managers here at HP.
I admit that there are plenty of organizations out there that are rife
with nepotism, favoritism, racism, and sexism. Even I used to work for
a fascist, but my whole point of this diatribe is to tell the skeptics
that a performance review system can work and that there are places
where it does, indeed, it _must_ work.
Gee, is it possible that some one who gets paid for their opinion
(a.k.a consultant) may be wrong?
--"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In
practice, there is." - Scott Levine
James Carrington
New Product Development - Test Support Group
CERJAC Telecom Operation
Hewlett-Packard
Westford, MA
--JAMES_H_CARRINGTON@HP-Chelmsford-om1.om.hp.com
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>