3 ms·

I don't think this is necessarily true. I realize most employers aren't like this, but my boss does a very good job of politely and clearly telling me what he e

I don't think this is necessarily true. I realize most employers aren't like this, but my boss does a very good job of politely and clearly telling me what he expects of me and what I can expect from him. Our performance reviews are always positive experiences, and I leave with specific goals to accomplish before the next review: sometimes goals to improve my job performance, sometimes goals to improve myself. Instead of focussing just on a bonus or pay increase, it's basically a reconciliation of "what would you like from us", and "what we would like from you". I think if more employers looked at it this way, and were more casual and open about the whole process, it would be a lot more beneficial to their companies.

noodle 17y ago
i don't necesasrily disagree with you here, but i think that the process would be better if it were a rolling review with constant feedback and dialog, instead of something built up as an important once-a-year event.
- Retric 17y ago
  Rolling feedback should be part of the annual review process at any competent company. Where I work the annual review looks at those above, below, and beside you and doing that several times a year is far to time consuming. IMO, the trick is managing the less formal feedback and using that as part of the formal review. Which is why your manager does not create your review. They might be biased by something from last week but your coworkers tend to think back to the important projects over the year.
- TallGuyShort 17y ago
  Oh I agree with that - it's important to cultivate an environment where constructive feedback is constantly being exchanged. That's hard to do - but when it happens, it makes a big difference.
hillel 17y ago
Constant honest and open feedback is always a good thing. My point is that performance reviews are often used as a substitute for constant honest and open feedback. And as such, they are a failure.

noodle 17y ago

i don't necesasrily disagree with you here, but i think that the process would be better if it were a rolling review with constant feedback and dialog, instead of something built up as an important once-a-year event.

Retric 17y ago
Rolling feedback should be part of the annual review process at any competent company. Where I work the annual review looks at those above, below, and beside you and doing that several times a year is far to time consuming. IMO, the trick is managing the less formal feedback and using that as part of the formal review. Which is why your manager does not create your review. They might be biased by something from last week but your coworkers tend to think back to the important projects over the year.
TallGuyShort 17y ago
Oh I agree with that - it's important to cultivate an environment where constructive feedback is constantly being exchanged. That's hard to do - but when it happens, it makes a big difference.

hillel 17y ago

Constant honest and open feedback is always a good thing. My point is that performance reviews are often used as a substitute for constant honest and open feedback. And as such, they are a failure.