3 ms·
This article is good but imho misses a big potential issue: the manager’s perception of performance. Managers, especially newer ones can have lots of biases. S
by xivzgrev 4y ago
This article is good but imho misses a big potential issue: the manager’s perception of performance.
Managers, especially newer ones can have lots of biases. Someone you think is underperforming may actually be doing ok, they’re just not approaching the work in the way or at the exact same performance you or superstar Sam does. Not everyone is a rockstar, and if you insist on that you are going to have trouble scaling.
So my first question is “how is this manager evaluating performance?”
Follow ups
-have those expectations actually been communicated to employee?
-what specifically has been done to help the employee? Is it lip service or actual help? Has HR and managers manager been looped in and do they all agree employee is underperforming?
Only then do I think you should move to reassigning / firing
- ResearchCode 4y agoMostly agree but HR would have no clue about that.
- watwut 4y agoI agree. And I am not even trying to bash HR, it is just that individual developer, artist, writer or whatever is something they are not equipped to evaluate.
- flappyeagle 4y agoHigh performance work is a partnership between manager and contributor. Employees are not helpless. You don’t have to wait for the manager to do the right thing. You can tell them what to expect from you. You are leaving power on the table by taking a passive stance
- consp 4y ago> You are leaving power on the table by taking a passive stance No everyone is able to be assertive.
- flappyeagle 4y agoNot everyone is able to perform at a high level
- trinovantes 4y agoA poor initial perception of performance, e.g. blunder during interview, may also set the employee up for long term failure due to the Pygmalion effect. For example, they may less likely be chosen for future easy/high recognition projects that are essential for promotion packages.