Thanks for raising this topic. “Thanks for the feedback” is one of my top ten recommended books. When there is “process on process” you get the high process cu

Thanks for raising this topic. “Thanks for the feedback” is one of my top ten recommended books. When there is “process on process” you get the high process culture you described. It’s subtle in application, but significant in impact. I’m imagining the low process culture also was single node - your performance review was more an encoding of an organic discussion. The high process culture positions the performance review as an input to another process, I’m imagining how your leadership evaluates where you are as an org. The overhead cost of high process is usually what people discuss - is it worth it? Is it justified? Could it be easier? Yet in practice I’ve seen making the process easier creates an incentive to add more to the process. For me that begs the question - who is this process truly for? I like to keep all employee surveys/feedback systems anchored to a simple principal - it must provide more value to the participant than the perceived effort to provide it. I’m curious - how do your two experiences compare on that?