On Fri, 19 Jul 1996, MR GEOFFREY F FOUNTAIN wrote:
> Recently I posted the progress of a team tasked with improving our site's
> performance evaluation/development system. Our scope has expanded. We
> have since been tasked with defining the relationship of this system to
> the compensation system. The scope includes developing one system for
> both exempt and non-exempt.
My practice for the last 12 years has taken me into over 100 organizations
to conduct assessments (typically through focus groups and employee
surveys). Performance evaluations systems are typically the No. 1
complaint, even worse than meetings, which is the other traditional sore
spot in organizations.
A few lessons have surfaced from the discussions:
(1) It is imperative to separate evaluations leading to pay/bonus from
evaluations leading to development plans. If my pay is on the line, my
candor about my shortcomings and openness to criticism quickly evaporate.
(2) Performance-based pay is better linked to process performance than to
individual behavior. If such a strategy links my fate with others
involved in the same process, so much the better. For example, if I am
involved in the Accountable Payable process, my pay should rise and fall
with how quickly and accurately that process operates, not whether or not
I have performed my individual job correctly.
To those who claim they want more control over their own fate or a reward
based on their own efforts, I would say "Grow up!" Organizations can no
longer afford people who "just want a job" or think they are still
independent spheres are action. We will eventually rise or fall together;
our pay structures should provide a constant reminder of interdependencies
and the need for cooperation.
I look forward to other items in this discussion.
Jerry Talley <email@example.com>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <firstname.lastname@example.org> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>