Posted: 6/23/2010 7:33:01 AM EDT
Out of all my management duties, I think this is the most worthless. I don't think it does anything more than put undue stress on my already stressed out crew. Just plain stupid...
|
| I think they can be alright, but it depends on how the company insists they be structured. If you want to sit down with me for 10 minutes and just tell me your views on what I'm doing well and what you think I could do better in, thats great. Its smart, it lets me know where to focus to earn that next promotion, etc. If it turns into some corporate BS thing of an hour with forms where I'm expected to first rate myself, etc then its just busy work. |
|
Why would your crew be stressed out if you give them honest evaluations? Or is it that you work for one of these companies that expect the employees to give peer info for you to assemble into an eval? There is nothing worse in my opinion than having someone who is unskilled in doing evals or worse yet potentially jealous or otherwise bias doing your eval.
Subordinates should never evaluate seniors either because of course they haven't the perspective to understand all that they observe, which can only come from experience and maturity. Maturity likely being the more important factor as it can often be found laking in some of the most experienced of employees. JMOFWIW based on my experience. I know with some fortune 500 companies that is the game you have to play and it really blows! |
|
My company does it okay. You rate yourself, then your manager rates you, then you sit down and talk about it and what you're looking for in the next year. Then you get your bonus. It actually works well and you get to see where you were and where you need to go. The only part I hate is that they essentially give your manager a pot of money and say, "this is how much you have. Give out bonuses based on that." Which wouldn't be bad except that your manager has to give themselves their bonus out of it too. Which I think is kinda unfair to my boss. |
|
Ford Motor was trying to shrink their white collar ranks. They ordered that 20% of all direct reports be ranked below average on each eval, two bad evals and the employee was fired.
Part two of the directive was that no diverse employee could be marked below average. |
|
Quoted:
Out of all my management duties, I think this is the most worthless. I don't think it does anything more than put undue stress on my already stressed out crew. Just plain stupid... and an absolute pain in the ass to do.. Last go round I had to do 300. took me 6mo...glad to be retired.. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Out of all my management duties, I think this is the most worthless. I don't think it does anything more than put undue stress on my already stressed out crew. Just plain stupid... and an absolute pain in the ass to do.. Last go round I had to do 300. took me 6mo...glad to be retired.. 300?!?!?!? That's insane! No way you can actually review the performance of 300 people. |
|
Quoted:
As a pawn, I look forward to my review. I like to know how I'm doing, and areas that I can improve on. Too bad my supervisor sees them as worthless and never did our reviews, though he's supposed too.  This. Their worth is determined by the person doing the eval. My wife when she had several direct reports would do them an put forth and effort to make them meaningful, strengths, weaknesses, areas of improvement and so forth. I'll give two real examples. I remember one employee my wife ended up firing (after it went through and was approved by HR) that tried to get unemployment benefits. Upon her works appeal, her evals (and documentation that she was late several times...for which she was ultimately fired) were presented as evidence that this person wasn't competent at the required job and was fired with cause and was denied unemployment payments. I had a friend who was fired earlier this month. His last eval in April was good. No deficiencies were noted on his eval. When he was terminated performance issues was the cited reason. He was 6 months behind on his paperwork (he told me this). Thing is, he could have kept skating along thinking he was getting away with not keeping up to date paperwork/records, but his second DUI while with the company started the hunt for reasons to let him go...even though the DUI issue I'm sure would have been enough. So his supervisor pencil whipping the eval gave this person a false notion that he was getting away with turning in paperwork way late. And yes, it's a performance issue for the supervisor as well by him not effectively using a management tool (eval) put in place by higher ups. CYA! I don't understand why documentation is often thought of as being meaningless. |
|
Quoted:
I think they can be alright, but it depends on how the company insists they be structured. If you want to sit down with me for 10 minutes and just tell me your views on what I'm doing well and what you think I could do better in, thats great. Its smart, it lets me know where to focus to earn that next promotion, etc. If it turns into some corporate BS thing of an hour with forms where I'm expected to first rate myself, etc then its just busy work. I do this every week during our dept staff meeting. I meet my staff on Fridays and then I meet each staff individually on Tuesdays. They all know where I stand and I expect each and everyone of them to be professional. If they can't abide to that, then I lateral them out. |