Sapphire_Synapse 2014 | Page 12

SYNAPSE 2014 SYNAPSE -- 2014 Performance reviews, if at all, become project update meetings, difficult employees are best avoided, sharing feedback becomes a goody-goody affair We had to go back to basics, make it simple and focus on the real intent other employees deserve the same attention, if not more? Rationale such as business being too dynamic to set goals is just a wrongly used defense mechanism. In fact, in stable business environments, the rationale shifts to ‘employees know everything’ and thus they are aware of their goals The consequence in either scenario is that the performance review process focuses on what has been achieved and not what was meant to be achieved. Only those goals are listed where there is enough to showcase even if they were not the primary ones. If Tomorrow Comes While organizations spend enough effort and time in sharpening and wordsmithing on leadership goals, the plunge happens when the cascade and reality reaches the first line managers. Here is a set of people who possibly are individually brilliant but just starting on people leadership. Promoted or hired into this capacity their single biggest credibility builder is to get work done as per schedules. Any slippage is deemed unpardonable and a red cross somewhere. Being in this position is not enviable either as their team would consist of a lot of nerds who have not had the reality check and continue to believe they are godsend. Performance reviews, if at all, become project update meetings, difficult employees are best avoided, sharing feedback becomes a goody-goody affair and development – why do we need it at all? The employee may not even stay long enough. This is where the organization starts becoming hollow. But again it is not just about the readiness of the managers and employees for thinking tomorrow today. The inertia is compounded due to the complexity built into such processes through overdesign and standardization – jargons, tools et all. Mangers then resist and go into an avoidance syndrome. The Buck Stops There And finally the year end arrives. Half cooked goals, honeyed feedback and left out development plans is a sure recipe for failure. Conformance to the bell curve distribution while being a stated intent becomes a classic case of upward delegation. Most managers would go all out to express how his/her team has the best density of top talent, was challenged with the most demanding of situations and is faced with high attrition risks. If the shouting helps and secures the right positions on the bell curve distribution then mission achieved, if not it becomes a case of blame it on higher management or HR. One of the leaders I encountered had built up a reputation over a period of time. He used to decide the fates of every employee in his group by having the final say. Quite understandably he did not have the right visibility down the ranks. It was a classic case of ignorance is bliss – for the people he did not know he stuck to what the manager had rated, but for the people he knew or he thought he knew, he had an opinion and in most cases the swing was significantly on the left side of the bell curve. The managers feared to even suggest disagreement. Checking In So after years of varied experiences on performance management it was surely refreshing to hear about something different. Whether this would be perfect, time shall tell. But surely it resonated with my belief that we had to go back to basics, make it simple and focus on the real intent. I took my plunge and six months on into my current organization am a believer. Termed ‘Check-In’ the new approach to performance management shifts the focus from the dreaded year end ‘difficult discussions’ to lighter