|
|
|
|
|
|
by IlPeach
883 days ago
|
|
|
Seconding you here. This reads like a very shallow analysis of a much complex problem. There's a good amount of data that suggests that we should indeed can performance reviews. The best approach here would be to start assessing and questioning the assumptions behind the "need" to have them. Like for example how fair (objectively) you think you can be when you're "evaluating" someone and not risking alienating the rest? |
|
|
there have been a lot of little prizes and awards to collect at some places i've worked. sometimes people had to interview for those awards. and i always wondered how much unnecessary damage we did to the morale of the people who didn't win the awards.
and i'm big on fairness. it's a challenge to make sure Performance Reviews are as fair as possible, especially with larger teams. you think it's obvious who is a good worker and who is a bad worker right up until you have to manage a large team.