5 ms·

Meh, sounds like a typical C-type. Where the data at? How do you quantify performance? How do you ensure you're actually rewarding top performers rather than

Meh, sounds like a typical C-type. Where the data at? How do you quantify performance? How do you ensure you're actually rewarding top performers rather than the top politicians/sales people. For example, going through someone's resume to try and find 'a history of winning' is a good way to get the latter. It's a measure of someone's ability to tell a story and sell themselves (which, to be honest, kinda sounds like this guy). Better to give them a case study or some other more concrete measure of reasoning and analytical ability. It's like how Jeff Atwood started the whole 'test that coders can actually code' thing. It turns out that relevant work tests are a really good idea but these c-types would rather just hire people like themselves.

erikpukinskis 9y ago
Is data really necessary? Can't you just describe the behavior you think is lacking, why you think that behavior is important, and then ask them what they think? If you can't come to consensus with your employee about what aspects of their job matter, then you have a bigger problem than poor performance. I don't think having data or metrics is really critical here. Some people like to think in metrics and that's great if you like it, but I don't think that's universal, necessary, or sufficient for a relationship that facilitates good performance.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
Spooky23 9y ago
Metrics are an important part of leadership, but not necessarily the whole story. I inherited a group at work who in the surface appeared to be both successful and well-led. They were hitting their KPIs, the management were recognized with rewards, and everything was great. Their upstream management had kept a distance, as the metrics looked great. I'm a hands on type of guy. After the re-org I started sniffing around and discovered that not only were they not performing, they were negligent to the level of deriliction of duty. The point is, you need to look beyond the numbers and below the surface. Otherwise, your role as a manager isn't adding any value to the organization.
- mgkimsal 9y ago
  just talked to a family member yesterday who's in charge of "quality assurance" - reviewing internal medical documents for errors. Her team has the lowest scores. It's because she and her team keep finding the most errors. She was told to start counting every 6 errors as 1 error so they're numbers will 'match' the other teams. The "errors" have to do with grammar and punctuation with (US) English. The "other teams" are offshored in various countries, and her team is US based. But hey... the other team numbers look better, so just... just quit counting so many damn errors so our numbers can all look good...
Consultant32452 9y ago
I've found the best way to figure out who your top performer is is to ask your team. Sure, liking someone on a personal level is going to sway their answers some, but in aggregate they aren't going to give someone a pass when they know they aren't pulling their weight.
- siliconc0w 9y ago
  360 reviews can play a part but it can also create a popularity contest or create an incentive for 'incrementalism'. An engineering example you might see is something like - "I spent the weekend refactoring the foobar to foobaz instead". And it's like yeah, foobaz is marginally better but it could have been exponentially better to question the premise of foobar and remove it or replace it entirely. However this is, professionally, a lot riskier. It's a lot harder to sell, can generate a lot of work for a lot of people, may take awhile before it pays off, or may run counter to the 'roadmap' or other personal/organizational investment in foobar. Thus such avenues are implicitly discouraged. This leads to a lot of small 'improvements' but maybe not the long-term or radical changes you'd optimally pursue.

erikpukinskis 9y ago

Is data really necessary? Can't you just describe the behavior you think is lacking, why you think that behavior is important, and then ask them what they think? If you can't come to consensus with your employee about what aspects of their job matter, then you have a bigger problem than poor performance. I don't think having data or metrics is really critical here. Some people like to think in metrics and that's great if you like it, but I don't think that's universal, necessary, or sufficient for a relationship that facilitates good performance.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

Spooky23 9y ago

Metrics are an important part of leadership, but not necessarily the whole story. I inherited a group at work who in the surface appeared to be both successful and well-led. They were hitting their KPIs, the management were recognized with rewards, and everything was great. Their upstream management had kept a distance, as the metrics looked great. I'm a hands on type of guy. After the re-org I started sniffing around and discovered that not only were they not performing, they were negligent to the level of deriliction of duty. The point is, you need to look beyond the numbers and below the surface. Otherwise, your role as a manager isn't adding any value to the organization.

mgkimsal 9y ago
just talked to a family member yesterday who's in charge of "quality assurance" - reviewing internal medical documents for errors. Her team has the lowest scores. It's because she and her team keep finding the most errors. She was told to start counting every 6 errors as 1 error so they're numbers will 'match' the other teams. The "errors" have to do with grammar and punctuation with (US) English. The "other teams" are offshored in various countries, and her team is US based. But hey... the other team numbers look better, so just... just quit counting so many damn errors so our numbers can all look good...

Consultant32452 9y ago

I've found the best way to figure out who your top performer is is to ask your team. Sure, liking someone on a personal level is going to sway their answers some, but in aggregate they aren't going to give someone a pass when they know they aren't pulling their weight.

siliconc0w 9y ago
360 reviews can play a part but it can also create a popularity contest or create an incentive for 'incrementalism'. An engineering example you might see is something like - "I spent the weekend refactoring the foobar to foobaz instead". And it's like yeah, foobaz is marginally better but it could have been exponentially better to question the premise of foobar and remove it or replace it entirely. However this is, professionally, a lot riskier. It's a lot harder to sell, can generate a lot of work for a lot of people, may take awhile before it pays off, or may run counter to the 'roadmap' or other personal/organizational investment in foobar. Thus such avenues are implicitly discouraged. This leads to a lot of small 'improvements' but maybe not the long-term or radical changes you'd optimally pursue.