Discussion: View Thread

Hello All,

Charles Wankel, the list director, has invited me to post this for your comments. If you would like to respond, please post to the list, or privately, as seems wisest for your particular insights.

The link below is to a white paper that I wrote recently on performance feedback. It presents the (perhaps controversial) argument that a manager's subjective assessment of how he or she thinks an employee is "doing" is a very important part of the appraisal process. For example: "personality" issues; more generic abilities like "problem-solving", "interpersonal skills", and "political savvy"; or other subjective perceptions of ability (such as "good at writing reports" or "good at building teams") probably carry more weight in determining the outcome of an employee's career than any official/formal appraisal does. Yet these assessments are rarely communicated to the employee.

The paper looks at the reasons for this and examines why the common types of formal appraisal systems fall short as a vehicle for having this kind of heart-to-heart discussion of performance and potential. It then outlines a method for mangers to validate their subjective perceptions and opinions and shows them how to effectively communicate this feedback to the employee. Special emphasis is placed on how to deal with difficult poor performance issues like, "you have no leadership ability" since it is these kinds of situations that managers generally have the most trouble in addressing.

My hope is that, because this method works with the natural approach to employee evaluation that managers seem to take (rather than against it), it will finally help them to achieve a level of comfort in discussing performance with their employees that they currently just don't have. I think that the method could be used informally as another "tool" in the manger's tool box, or in conjunction with a good objectives-based performance management system.

(As an aside, I have tested the method once - currently in the format of a 1-day training session - with a group of managers and HR people. They said that they thought that the method was good because it showed them how to get to the specifics of discussing performance - especially the "hard stuff").

The link to the on-line version is:

http://www.infopost.com/ItemDescription.asp?navtyp=CCT249&ItemI=79896

I'm looking forward to getting your feedback.

Regards,
Julie

Here is a bit of background about me if it helps any ...

I have a BA in psych (minor in commerce), a grad degree in Computer-Assisted Learning, and an MA in Ed Tech (the training degree). Basically, I'm a training and development professional with about 13 years experience - most of it in the large corporate environment. However, I've spent the last five years in a consulting role doing design and development contracts. I specialize in managerial soft-skills training, and am particularly interested in the role that managers play in employee success or failure. I'm originally from the UK, but now live in Montreal, Canada.

Julie:

I would recommend that you investigate W. Edwards Deming's views on PA for a different, perhaps radical, perspective. You can contact Oriel, Inc. (formerly Joiner Associates) and ask for an article by Peter R. Sholtes: "An Elaboration on Deming's Teachings on Performance Appraisal." I just tried their article archive and couldn't find it. If you can't run it down, I can send you a copy. Here's their archive:

http://www.orielinc.com/oriel_library/articles/archive_index.htm




Best regards,
Scott Cragin
-----
Assistant Professor >Voice: (417) 625-9609
School of Business Admin. >Fax: (417) 625-9604
Missouri Southern St. College >E-mail: cragin-s@mail.mssc.edu
3950 E. Newman Rd; Joplin, MO 64801-1595

>>> jfreeman@globalserve.net 10/02/01 10:05AM >>>
Hello All,

Charles Wankel, the list director, has invited me to post this for your comments. If you would like to respond, please post to the list, or privately, as seems wisest for your particular insights.

The link below is to a white paper that I wrote recently on performance feedback. It presents the (perhaps controversial) argument that a manager's subjective assessment of how he or she thinks an employee is "doing" is a very important part of the appraisal process. For example: "personality" issues; more generic abilities like "problem-solving", "interpersonal skills", and "political savvy"; or other subjective perceptions of ability (such as "good at writing reports" or "good at building teams") probably carry more weight in determining the outcome of an employee's career than any official/formal appraisal does. Yet these assessments are rarely communicated to the employee.

The paper looks at the reasons for this and examines why the common types of formal appraisal systems fall short as a vehicle for having this kind of heart-to-heart discussion of performance and potential. It then outlines a method for mangers to validate their subjective perceptions and opinions and shows them how to effectively communicate this feedback to the employee. Special emphasis is placed on how to deal with difficult poor performance issues like, "you have no leadership ability" since it is these kinds of situations that managers generally have the most trouble in addressing.

My hope is that, because this method works with the natural approach to employee evaluation that managers seem to take (rather than against it), it will finally help them to achieve a level of comfort in discussing performance with their employees that they currently just don't have. I think that the method could be used informally as another "tool" in the manger's tool box, or in conjunction with a good objectives-based performance management system.

(As an aside, I have tested the method once - currently in the format of a 1-day training session - with a group of managers and HR people. They said that they thought that the method was good because it showed them how to get to the specifics of discussing performance - especially the "hard stuff").

The link to the on-line version is:

http://www.infopost.com/ItemDescription.asp?navtyp=CCT249&ItemI=79896

I'm looking forward to getting your feedback.

Regards,
Julie

Here is a bit of background about me if it helps any ...

I have a BA in psych (minor in commerce), a grad degree in Computer-Assisted Learning, and an MA in Ed Tech (the training degree). Basically, I'm a training and development professional with about 13 years experience - most of it in the large corporate environment. However, I've spent the last five years in a consulting role doing design and development contracts. I specialize in managerial soft-skills training, and am particularly interested in the role that managers play in employee success or failure. I'm originally from the UK, but now live in Montreal, Canada.

Scott,
A related Scholtes article is available for free on the web:
TOTAL QUALITY OR PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL: CHOOSE ONE
by Peter R. Scholtes
http://www.iqpic.org/per.htm
Cybercollaborating,
Charles Wankel
mg-ed-dv list director

-----Original Message-----
From: Management Education and Development Discussion

Julie:

I would recommend that you investigate W. Edwards Deming's views on PA for a
different, perhaps radical, perspective. You can contact Oriel, Inc.
(formerly Joiner Associates) and ask for an article by Peter R. Sholtes:
"An Elaboration on Deming's Teachings on Performance Appraisal." I just
tried their article archive and couldn't find it. If you can't run it down,
I can send you a copy. Here's their archive:

http://www.orielinc.com/oriel_library/articles/archive_index.htm

Best regards,
Scott Cragin

Thanks for the info. I had read some writings in this area (the one by
Scholtes that Charles suggested looked very familiar) so I was aware that he
doesn't believe that TQM and performance "appraisal" are compatible. I
don't really know a lot about TQM so I can't comment on this with any
degree of certainty. Most of my exposure to it was when a company I worked
for adopted it - my recollation of the implementaion was that the majority
of people just didn't seem to understand or buy into it
and if memory serves it just faded away.

However, from what I understand, I'm not sure that the issue is as black and
white as Deming's states. Fundamentally the goals of a TQM approach seem
sound to me and I have to agree that, while there are problems with
traditional methods of appraisal (as I've indicated in the paper) some form
of assessment is necessary.

I'm not advocating a new form of performance "appraisal" in the traditional
sense of the word. Rather I hope that what is coming across is that having
a
heart-to-heart talk with employees about how they are doing in the eyes of
management and what they need to continue to do, or how they need to change
to become more successful, has value in its own right. I can't see that
such a
conversation can be in conflict with TQM or anything else.

What are your thoughts on this?

(Just as as aside, I have a tendency to think that anything that requires
"nothing less than the transformation ofWestern management" for it to work
as advocated is facing an uphill battle!)

Julie

----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Cragin" <Cragin-S@mail.mssc.edu>
To: <MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: Feedback Sought on PA Method


Julie:

I would recommend that you investigate W. Edwards Deming's views on PA for a
different, perhaps radical, perspective. You can contact Oriel, Inc.
(formerly Joiner Associates) and ask for an article by Peter R. Sholtes:
"An Elaboration on Deming's Teachings on Performance Appraisal." I just
tried their article archive and couldn't find it. If you can't run it down,
I can send you a copy. Here's their archive:

http://www.orielinc.com/oriel_library/articles/archive_index.htm




Best regards,
Scott Cragin
-----
Assistant Professor >Voice: (417) 625-9609
School of Business Admin. >Fax: (417) 625-9604
Missouri Southern St. College >E-mail: cragin-s@mail.mssc.edu
3950 E. Newman Rd; Joplin, MO 64801-1595