Does your performance review really reflect your performance?

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally Posted by vwbobd

Reviews are just a control mechanism. I think you should tell your boss that annually you are going to give him a review to let him know how is is doing. Tell him you want to schedule it after you get your results

Managing up is the single best way to be successful while working for someone else. Once a year won't work, must be done in real time.

[jyl]

My performance reviews are a single number. "Last year you added (subtracted) X pct of performance from the portfolio." Nothing else really matters. That number has to be substantially positive in most years. If it is too negative for too long, you are fired. Refreshingly simple.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by jyl

My performance reviews are a single number. "Last year you added (subtracted) X pct of performance from the portfolio." Nothing else really matters. That number has to be substantially positive in most years. If it is too negative for too long, you are fired. Refreshingly simple.

I think this is how it should be. In the mortgage biz we always said, "Your review is your W2."

[cab83_750]

My performance review last was awesome on paper. Percent-wise, it is just .5% higher. So, again, reviews are crap.

On the other hand, they instituted an OT-program and the workers/producers were selected. To my recollection, our monthly earnings shot up by 80% . I was thanking the almighties for correcting the wrongs in my career life.

Obviously, they killed the OT after 4 months.

[jyl]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

I think this is how it should be. In the mortgage biz we always said, "Your review is your W2."

I agree.

If it is possible to measure performance objectively, then the objective measurement should be used.

Sure, the person needs to be civil to co-workers, not a back-stabber, help out in other aspects, etc. That's kind of a given minimum standard of conduct, like wearing clothes to work, I don't think people should get extra credit for it.

[imcarthur]

Results matter, of course. But there is also 'circumstance' considerations & a wise manager see this & takes it into account in review. Look at the last 18 months. While business is down everywhere, certain markets have been decimated.

Florida is my decimated market. Due to 'circumstance' my Florida market is a fraction of previous years. Should I be black-balled or fired? Many managers in many companies are doing just that because the revenue no longer supports the expense or they dream of reaching budget & panic & hire some new body. Many corporate environments give them no choice.

Of course, it is short-sighted but many managers exist in rigid 12 month cycles.

Ian

[jyl]

The performance requirement has to make sense given what's going on in the market or industry, I agree. I'm just saying it should be objective whenever possible. I hate subjective, touchy-feely, 360-degree, A for effort, stuff.

[imcarthur]

I guess, because I am an old bastard, I am therefore - in theory - wise. Must be some reason I am still here other than my cynicism.

Ian

[mattdavis11]

Performance reviews...

I think I may have had one yesterday. I was told yesterday evening about the bad news by the boss. I had two choices for Friday, I could work as usual, or I could hang around the office for awhile in the morning and cut loose.

I chose to help out with deliveries, make a few calls, enjoy a fish fry, and meet a fellow pelican instead. I didn't leave work until almost 7.

I think it's far beyond time for people to get off their a$$.

[88-diamondblue]

My first boss gave me what I considered very good PA's. We got a new CEO and I knew my boss would be gone in the near future. It happened and the guy who replaced him worked in an HR department for 16 years and never advanced. Got the boot from there and was then hired by the company. Was supposed to manage IT. He didn't even know how to put a mouse on his computer He had no clue. My review went from great to on a scale of 1-3 to about as bad as it gets. we eventually were outsourced to get better service at a lower cost.

There were 2 of us servicing 450 users with about 400 devices on the network. 18 servers, an IP phone system, networked copiers and 4 locations total. We averaged about 20 minutes from request for service till the time we got there. They now have 24-48 hour turn around on service requests. And cost have gone through the roof... Feel so bad about that, not.

I guess it didn't help matters that I told my boss he had no clue what he was doing after my first bad review. Looking back on that now telling him that and when I left reiterating how clueless he was is very satisfying. And I only believe that PA's are only as good as the person doing it. If they know nothing about what you do and trying to educate them on brings a blank stare, then you know that it can't be good.

[drew1]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

Ok, next question. Has anyone here told their boss they knew their review was total BS?

I did. A boss I had, wrote that I was responsible for all the failures & delays on projects since another guy had left. He even put this guy's name down.

I told him I was going to talk to his boss & asked him if he wanted to come along. He didn't. His boss told me that he appreciated my work he would attach his opion along with my review. I wasn't fired & got a raise.

[Rick Lee]

Well, as much as I disagree with a lot of what my boss says, I certainly respect the guy. I've worked for him for almost nine years now and he's one of the sharpest people I've ever known. Obviously, I couldn't stand to work that long for someone I don't respect. The problem is that I still think reviews are predetermined and he feels he has to sell it to all of us unless it's gonna be a really good review. I know 100% he's had to pretend to believe some of the stuff he was saying because it was dictated from above.

Get this. In Jan. our company decided to no-charge all work related to the earthquake in Haiti as a PR stunt. Sounds good to me.....except they didn't adjust our quotas for it. They basically forced all account managers to eat the losses on no-charged work. One of my largest clients, whose main mission is disaster relief work, was comp'ed $24k in services in Jan. alone. Had we billed for that work, I'd have been at 132% of goal and gotten another few grand in commission. But I was below goal because of these freebies and so didn't make as much. Not only was I forced to donate my commission check, I didn't even get a receipt to deduct it from my taxes next year. My boss, ever the salesman, said, "Well, if there hadn't been an earthquake, they'd have not spent that money on us anyway and you'd still be where you are." Yes, but there was an earthquake, disaster relief work is all this client does and they'd have gladly paid for the work they sent us. Instead, we comp'ed it. And then there was another earthquake in Chile the following month, for which we also comp'ed work. Hell, we might as well give these guys free service for life, since we end up comp'ing work surrounding events they pretty much exist to work on.

This is the price I pay for working for the man. But I'm gonna lose my composure if I ever get the slightest heat for being below goal in a month when senior mgt. decides to waive invoicing clients on whose previous revenue I am goal'ed.