3 ms·
Ex-deloitte employee here. I left before this change in performance review took place, but here's some thoughts & context based on my experience: - People may
by willchen 11y ago
Ex-deloitte employee here. I left before this change in performance review took place, but here's some thoughts & context based on my experience:
- People may be concerned that relying on four questions may be too narrow, but at the end of the day, regardless of which questions are officially on the performance eval form, those are the questions that matter. At Deloitte, I had to consistently find new projects every 2-6 months, and the question of "Given this person's performance, I would always want him or her on my team" is not hypothetical. Project manager and partners answer this question implicitly all the time when they hand-pick their team members, now it's just answered more explicitly. At the end of the day, if you're an employee, what's more important to your career: that your boss thinks you're an Excel whiz or that she enjoyed working with you and will put you on an interesting, challenging project next month?
- I think some of the criticism that these questions essentially about your likability or ability to "manage upwards" are fair. But for a firm, whose business is all about providing client service, evaluating people on their people's skills for "managing upwards" seems like a reasonable proxy for their ability to "manage clients", which really is a valuable skill to the company. On the other hand, for engineering orgs, these four questions may need to be rephrased - (e.g. off the top of my head: "do I want this person responsible for delivering and maintaining critical production services").
- exelius 11y agoI especially agree with your second point. While many performance measurement programs do screen for the most likable or personable people, this is actually intended in consulting. Consulting is about selling work, and you will sell more work if people like you and you're pleasant to work with. And you're right, managing upwards can be rephrased as "getting people to do what you want them to do without any authority to make them do it" -- basically the entire job of a management consultant. That said, many consulting companies have overly-complex performance measurement systems. At the end of the day, if you're not very good, you won't get staffed on projects and you will be laid off. If you are good, push for a promotion and you'll probably get it. None of that changes based on the measurement system you use; because people at either end of the spectrum will/won't game whatever measurement system you enable. And IMO if you can get the same results with a lot less overhead, it's a win/win.