Should We Define Superior Performance?

I think most of us agree on the importance of setting performance goals and clearly communicating performance expectations to employees.  Without this, you're left with something like management by mental telepathy.

But here's a question that has dogged me for some time:  Should managers, as part of the setting of performance expectations, give employees information on what they must do in order for their performance to be considered "superior"?  What it would look like to "far exceed expectations"?  Or is it better, even necessary, that we fall back to the Justice Potter Stewart position - that excellence is hard to define but we'll know it when we see it?

I hear more arguments against than in favor of pre-defining superior performance.  That it would give too much - even too specific - direction to workers.  That it boxes employees in and limits the possibilities of what they might accomplish.  In a world as fast-moving and uncertain as ours, these are compelling points.  Yet I'm left with the nagging sense that we're letting ourselves off the hook too easily here.

And here's another angle to consider.  In my admittedly unscientific observations, I am left with the impression that compensation professionals favor predefining superior performance and that leadership/OD/learning professionals typically fall on the side of leaving superior performance undefined. 

Are these sweeping generalizations on target?  If they are - why would it be so?  Is it that we who practice in the rewards field feel tend to be too black and white, too linear in our perspectives and preferences?  Or, like me, have too many of us had conversations with motivated employees who want very much to do what it takes to excel (and to earn the rewards associated with excellence), but who are frustrated by a boss who refuses to provide concrete suggestions - or even hints - of what they can do to better their contribution to the organization's success.  For an employees in these shoes, the response of "I can't tell you but I'll know it when I see it" can feel like a big fat cop-out. 

Is it?

Where do you come down on this question?  I'd love to hear the thoughts of those both in and outside of the compensation field.

Ann Bares is the Founder and Editor of the Compensation Café,  Author of Compensation Force and Managing Partner of Altura Consulting Group LLC, where she provides compensation consulting services to a wide range of client organizations.  She earned her M.B.A. at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School and is a bookhound and aspiring cook in her spare time.  Follow her on Twitter at @annbares.

Creative Commons Image "Trophy 1" by Shorts and Longs/The Both And

Comments

[E. James (Jim) Brennan]

Comp people who are obsessed with cookbook rules and regulations prefer rigid performance categories defined to two decimal places. Of course, that is impossible, indefensible or at least incredible and flat silly to any serious student of human behavior.

I favor the latter more flexible and realistic view, that virtually everyone can agree on the truly superior performance level. If they can't agree, it might remain "very good" but not the "top best most excellent superior".

Adjectives are subjective and used too loosely. Simply require two or maybe even three additional higher levels of approval, and it will work. Like the US Medal of Honor which requires both full military chain of command and Congressional approval. Few are granted, but all are deserved.

[Ann Bares]

Jim:

I don't deny your characterization!

Thanks for weighing in - I'll put you in the "no" column relative to pre-definition.

I agree that a sound calibration process can help iron out the questions on the back end. I guess my concern lies more with the front end - and giving sufficient direction to the employee who yearns to excel, but can't get the info from their boss that they need to get there. We may be able to figure it out on the back end without pre-definition, but have we laid a sufficiently helpful path to success for the inspired employee?

[E. James (Jim) Brennan]

Heck no! and hence the great justification for your raising the entire issue. It is called "communication" and encompasses philosophies, directions, expectations, standards, feedback mechanisms, information access sources, instant corrective alerts, daily "atta-boys," etc. Not just the means and metrics but also the goals, standards and objectives tend to change constantly, too. No wonder both boss and subordinate yearn for a universal easy answer, because it just doesn't exist. Heck, I wrote a 500-page book on how to do it, and I don't have all the answers, either.

Granted, you can produce canned pre-established rigid sets of parameters for "clear" administration, but that neither makes them neither continually appropriate nor always effective. Like walking, management is a constantly changing balance of movement.

[Linux Hosting]

This is very amazing blog and information provided by the article of this blog is really nice and useful and i would like to visit the blog again.

[Thesis Writing]

Yes I agree with your statement clear vision or task make you achieve any goal what ever you want.This is the way that you can follow get yourself higher as you want...

[Funny Baby]

A mind blowing article is provided here. And it is written with great skill and the words directly explain the thought of author and it is nice to know the information provided around the Earth and really it is great topic of interest.

[china sourcing]

I think if you planned every thing with suitable timings, I guarantee that you will must be successful!!

[POLLYBaird30]

People in all countries take the credit loans from different creditors, just because it's comfortable and fast.

[Thesis Writing]

This post is quite interesting and awesome to read I wanna share it with my other friends because we are discussing about it last night and I told them I will search it tomorrow and finally I got all answer here too tell them ....
Thanks for sharing here with us...

[Donna Adams]

I have often been frustrated in jobs where I wasn't sure what "exceeds expectations" meant. I favor pretty clear and well defined standards. I can do excellent work, but usually find myself working in situations where I don't share the corporate culture or values. I'm willing to adapt, or at least fake it, since I don't really have a choice about working in such situations, but I'm not good at intuiting what management wants, because we have so little in common. Clear standards, or at least broad hints, would be helpful.