3 ms·
I always understood the performance review, at least in large corporations (not small companies or startups), not just to judge you individually, but more impor
by dfxm12 8y ago
I always understood the performance review, at least in large corporations (not small companies or startups), not just to judge you individually, but more importantly to judge you against your peers.
In the context of judging us against our peers, it is isn't for us (so of course it's a waste of time for us), or our direct managers, but for upper management. The value there depends on the quality and candidness of feedback. Can this information be totally gleaned from task or ticket tracking systems? I don't think that tells the whole picture.
OK, so is it necessary for upper management to have this data? In a perfect world, this feedback data finds employees with great potential, ASAP and tracks their growth over time, from manager to manager and team to team, but since I'm a lowly professional and not upper management, I have no insight into how this is actually used.
- iamcasen 8y agoThis is so inhuman though, it seems obvious why it is a shitty process. How do you acquire data points about a person? Sure it's easy if their job is to produce MAX WIDGETS/HR, but what if they are a designer, or a software engineer? The only way to judge someone is to work with them closely for months/years. Translating that into data points to hand off to a series of managers will never ever work. Especially if it is for higher managers who actually don't know you, and have never worked for you. How can they be the judge of your abilities?
- dfxm12 8y agoThey rely on the word on their direct reports, who presumably have had training in how to judge their direct reports. Of course, the people filling out these reviews are also judged on their performance as well. The only way to judge someone is to work with them closely for months/years. I disagree here. At some point, you're going to have to delegate and give up in micromanaging this process. There's no way Satya Nadella has worked with each Microsoft VP for years or fills openings just with his intuition. If mostly every manager Python Pat worked for said they were head and shoulders above their peers and has an executive position in their future, then are you going to just ignore their feedback? Career advancement certainly shouldn't be a matter of being lucky enough to have enough face time with the people who make hiring decisions... I guess at the core of this process is trust, trust that the folks filing the review paperwork are doing so correctly, but if you can't trust your managers, you're problems are larger than a review process.
- iamcasen 8y agoSure, once you're at the VP level your reputation probably precedes you. If you're young in your career though, with little work history, your manager won't be able to gauge shit unless they see the work you produce. Even then, you won't produce good work unless your placed somewhere that matches your strengths. Your manager can't know your strengths/weaknesses without actually spending time with you. So at that level, it's exactly like I say it it is: a boss just decides if they like their report or not. They go with their biased gut feeling that's probably based more on superficial characteristics like clothes, hair, or the way a person talks. From there the person will either be thrown the sharks, or given a lot of support and opportunities. I'm sure not all organizations are like that, but most that have 5000 employees or more have been exactly like that from my experience.