W. Edwards Deming, the quality guru-of-gurus, called the standard evaluation process the worst of management de-motivators. I don't disagree. For some reason or other, I launched several tweets on the subject a couple of days ago. Here are a few of them:
Do football coaches or theater directors use a standard evaluation form to assess their players/actors? Stupid question, eh?
Does the CEO use a standard evaluation form for her VPs? If not, then why use one for front line employees?
Evaluating someone is a conversation/several conversations/a dialogue/ongoing, not filling out a form once every 6 months or year.
If you (boss/leader) are not exhausted after an evaluation conversation, then it wasn't a serious conversation.
I am not keen on formal high-potential employee I.D. programs. As manager, I will treat all team members as potential "high potentials."
Each of my eight "direct reports" has an utterly unique professional trajectory. How could a standardized evaluation form serve any useful purpose?
Standardized evaluation forms are as stupid for assessing the 10 baristas at a Starbucks shop as for assessing Starbucks' 10 senior vice presidents.
Evaluation: No problem with a shared checklist to guide part of the conversation. But the "off list" discussion will by far be the most important element.
How do you "identify" "high potentials"? You don't! They identify themselves—that's the whole point.
"High potentials" will take care of themselves. The great productivity "secret" is improving the performance of the 60% in the middle of the distribution.
Before blogging became all the rage, Tom was posting book reviews and Observations (essentially early blog posts) to this site. You can find the archives below.
What we're talking about
on the front page.