At AT&T Right now there is an epidemic of interest in revamping employee performance management processes, and it’s overdue. I just had several of my best friends (generally in senior positions) tell me how frustrated they are at their current jobs because their performance appraisals were so frustrating. that is the reason high performers are been layoff, they don satisfy all markers, including the elusive "leadership" marker which can be anything, so make sure your boss likes you. No one wants to be rated on a five point scale, my unit layoff 24 of 39, mostly achievers, therefore ATT is loosing talent, may be because they are outspoken, so keep your mouth shut. First, much research shows that reducing a year of work to a single number is degrading. It creates a defensive reaction and doesn’t encourage people to improve. Ideally performance evaluation should be “continuous” and focus on “always being able to improve.” Instead we have a bunch of managers just looking for. Bad qualities in employees, overlooking the positive. I believe that the may get bonuses to save company money, by laying off employees. when we receive a “rating” or “appraisal” our brain shifts into “fear or flight” mode and shifts to our limbic brain. This shift, which takes place whenever we are threatened, immediately takes us out of the mode to learn or create, making us defensive. So the actual act of executing a performance appraisal itself reduces performance.
4 replies (most recent on top)
OP has a very strong point. A job rating based on a single number is worthless because it doesn't really tell you anything. The jobs I had where I grew and learned were ones where my bosses and I were all very clear on the work I was doing and they gave me constant coaching and evaluation. Also, as a degreed engineer, I can tell you feedback from a person with only a high school diploma and no understanding of anything complex is totally worthless.
OP actually has a point. Performance reviews ARE highly subjective. And L1s and L2s are stacked ranked against each other. So what happens when an L2 has an L1 report or another L2 report, what incentivizes her to rate "accurately" or "fairly" when it doesn't benefit her to do so? How would she then recognize someone who outperforms her?
There are nuances here which are HIGHLY flawed and need to be revamped.
Funny, so what system do you want where a boss doesn't rate you, and people aren't rated based on if the boss likes you. The only way to do that would be to put robots in charge. But I seriously doubt you would like the methods the robots would use to judge you on hard metrics. Just because you don't like your appraisal doesn't mean you are right. You don't want to jump through all the hoops but the hoops are there to keep you from being complacent. Everyone is reduced to a single number. It's called their salary. Everyone must be reduced to something. If you go to school and you get a grade on your test or the class do you complain about being reduced to a number?
They do not care about talent, it's a big machine that chews you up and spits you out.