|
|
Post by seeingcrimson on May 23, 2015 9:56:25 GMT -5
Just a side note while awaiting more information about changes to the health plans for next year.
Given that staff are in the middle of the performance management process, what are your thoughts (pro or con) about it? And out of curiosity, using the performance scale (needs immediate improvement, building consistent performance, solid, strong, or leading) how would you rate administration at creating and sustaining a culture and structure that allows you to best support the educational and research missions of the University? What is done well and what could be improved?
|
|
|
|
Post by frankly on May 23, 2015 15:01:41 GMT -5
I love it. Talk about your 180-degree performance reviews! Thanks for asking for our thoughts about administration efforts, seeingcrimson - I feel more engaged already!
|
|
|
|
Post by vivaveritas on May 26, 2015 11:58:22 GMT -5
I am about to begin the dreaded performance review and no doubt will return with renewed anger at this demoralizing process. So thank you for setting up the poll and starting this conversation. I have yet to meet ANYONE -- A-N-Y-O-N-E who has found the new performance review process helpful; instead EVERYONE, E-V-E-R-Y-O-N-E I have spoken with finds this intrusive, disrespectful, and a waste of time -- especially since HR has put caps on the ratings we are permitted to give. It seems designed for those in HR to check off participation -- I believe they would prefer the term engagement -- rather than acknowledging, promoting, and/or rewarding the dedication and "leading" work of its employees.
|
|
|
|
Post by Strolid on May 26, 2015 15:14:31 GMT -5
So one thing that strikes me as odd is the steadfastness with which we hold onto the current tool and related processes. The issue of performance management is one that is the focus of some extensive study and evolution. We seem to have settled on a model that is from some point in the corporate past; a model that many innovative and effective corporate entities have moved from. And instead of modifying it to maximize effectiveness and value we seem to become ever more rigid in its implementation. The "rightness" of how we do what we do is presented as being without question. The reasoning seems to be that if anything is wrong it must be the manner in which those are employing the tool are doing so! Even the notion of analyzing the true effectiveness of our approach and the return on investment of the enormous time spent seems to be out of bounds. Instead, statistics that x% of employees think there is value in performance discussions and the fact that x% of staff have completed what is after all a mandatory process are put forth as indicators of the value of our approach. So in the vein of clumsily adopting arguably dated corporate practices years late, we also seem to be embracing some of the principles of "1984" in 2015! Here is a link to a Harvard Business Review article from just last month (!) highlighting some of the contemporary thinking on the performance management process. hbr.org/2015/04/reinventing-performance-management |
|
