« Dinosaurs are Alive and Well | Main | Compensation Dentistry – 4 Things We Learned (part 5 of 5) »

11/13/2019

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Yes, Performance Appraisal should be an objective assessments of the subject's ability to cope with context. Did they maximize the advantages and overcome the obstacles affecting their leverage position?

Overlaying the Mager-Pipe Performance Model with the individual's responses to those circumstances would be far superior to the generally terrible status quo practice. Expecting a naked worker to reach the North Pole without any supplies, equipment or transportation is dumb.

Most performance deficiencies stem from defects in the organizational system, not from anything under the control of the typically highly competent worker. A few superstars may successfully overcome the many obstacles created by the contextual circumstances the employer imposed on their positions. The majority, however, get a balky Model T mired in the mud and are rated accordingly. The lucky minority who fall into the seat of a smoothly running machine on a superhighway get high ratings with little effort, as long as they don't mess things up.

Fixing the context is the organization's responsibility; it is beyond the usually mundane talents of individual contributors.
You can't win races with flat tires and bad engines. Give everyone a good "vehicle" and they will all look like superstars!

Focus on what management did wrong to defeat all subordinate efforts, rather than blame the victims for not overcoming the obstacles they faced.

Maybe its a heresy that needs to be spoken. You can't fix problems whose existence is denied.

The comments to this entry are closed.