World Monitor Mag, Industrial Overview WM_November_2018_WEB_Version | Page 80

additional content
to feedback, encourages them to set
stretch goals, makes it easier for them
to put in extra effort toward a worthy
project, and helps them learn from
positive role models.
You can hear the difference between
the fixed mind-set and the growth
mind-set in the subtle nuances of
conversation, and managers can
make a difference in a company by
deliberately choosing one kind of
phrasing over another. For example,
in giving feedback to employees,
the phrase “You did well; you must
be talented” activates a fixed mind-
set. Talent is perceived to be innate
and changeless. If the manager says
instead, “You did well; you must have
worked hard on this” or “I see you put
everything you had into this,” a growth
mind-set is activated in the employee.
The effort and creativity that people
bring to bear makes a difference.
The employee can also prime the
boss. For example, saying “I want to
be the top performer” primes the fixed
78
world monitor
mind-set. It implies there can be only
one. By contrast, saying “I want to take
on challenges where I can learn new
things” primes the growth mind-set.
It’s worth the trouble to prime people
for the growth mind-set. In one study,
priming a group of managers that way
consistently made them more confident
in their abilities and more likely to
follow the example of a positive role
model. That could be because the
growth mind-set allows people to
follow others with no perceived loss in
status. Conversely, the fixed mind-
set automatically implies a zero-sum
competition: If someone rises in status,
everyone else must fall. People holding
that mind-set are more likely to attack
one another’s success instead of
focusing on their own development.
Another intriguing trend in productive
performance review conversations
surprised us at first. Some firms that
got rid of most numerical ratings have
left one type of rating in place: the
determination of whether someone
is essentially “in or out” as a fit with
the company’s culture. At Juniper, this
is defined as being a “J-Player” or a
“Non-J Player.” A J-Player is someone
who generally behaves according to
Juniper’s values and delivers reasonably
good performance. Juniper clearly and
consistently explains which types of
behavior result in Non-J Player status
and helps those employees fit in if they
choose to stay. More than 80 percent
of the people rated as Non-J Players
have opted to leave the company;
they understood why they would never
succeed there.
The success of this “in or out” rating
system seemed disturbing until we
recognized why it was necessary.
Executives were reluctant to remove
rankings, but not for the reasons we
thought they would be. They didn’t
care much about identifying problem
performers. The new system addressed
that issue. They wanted to weed
out people who did not fit with their
culture, and who were thus holding
back their departments and colleagues.
We also saw another virtue: This simple