4 ms·
I've always been a big believer that during review time, people should be able to choose others they've worked with to review. It need not be a full on performa
by awillen 6y ago
I've always been a big believer that during review time, people should be able to choose others they've worked with to review. It need not be a full on performance review, but at least provide the opportunity to provide documented feedback to their boss.
I've worked with people from other departments who were both awful and wonderful, and if their bosses didn't include me in their set of peer reviewers, I couldn't highlight that. I think my cross-departmental peer review would've been much more valuable than some of my reviews of some of my teammates, since my boss already had a pretty good idea of how we work together.
- qntty 6y agoThis is one of the advantages and disadvantages of democratically-run workplaces (worker cooperatives etc). On the one hand, sometimes the people who are best positioned to make decisions about a person aren't their managers but their coworkers. On the other hand, it would really change the work dynamic if everyone potentially had the power to be your manager.
- eythian 6y agoThat is how it works at my workplace, you choose who you get feedback from that is presented to your manager. Usually you choose your team and a couple of people you've worked closely with outside the team.
- giantg2 6y agoWe have that choice too. It might make an impact, but I see the politics and the manager's opinion to be way more important.