Let’s Not Kill Performance Evaluations Yet.

• Autores: Lori Goler, Janelle Gale, Adam Grant
• Localización: Harvard business review, ISSN 0017-8012, Vol. 94, Nº 11, 2016, 94 págs.
• Idioma: inglés
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Resumen

  • Performance reviews are awkward and biased. They stick people in boxes and leave them waiting far too long for feedback. It’s no wonder that by the end of 2015, at least 30 of the Fortune 500 companies had ditched them altogether. But even when companies get rid of performance evaluations, ratings still exist—employees just can’t see them. Ratings are done subjectively, behind the scenes, and without input from the people being evaluated. Employees’ contributions to the organization over time need to be assessed in some way. Decisions about pay and promotions have to be made. In the absence of formal evaluations, those decisions are made in a black box. Facebook has chosen to hang on to evaluations despite their costs to help ensure fairness, transparency, and talent development. When the company analyzed its performance management system a few years ago, it conducted focus groups and a follow-up survey with more than 300 people. The feedback was clear: 87% of people wanted to keep performance ratings. They wanted to know where they stood. Evaluations were put into place for good reasons; getting rid of them might be an overreaction to poor execution. Leaders at Facebook think it’s more constructive to mitigate the risks by building a culture that recognizes and rewards growth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]