Xref: utzoo misc.jobs.misc:12343 misc.misc:12558 comp.software-eng:6091
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!think.com!samsung!uunet!pilchuck!ssc!mcgp1!flak
From: flak@mcgp1.UUCP (Dan Flak)
Newsgroups: misc.jobs.misc,misc.misc,comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Elimination of performance ratings.
Message-ID: <5103@mcgp1.UUCP>
Date: 26 Jun 91 07:09:17 GMT
References: <1991Jun18.133646.12361@auto-trol.com>
Organization: McCaw Cellular Communications, Inc., Kirkland, WA
Lines: 27

alesha@auto-trol.com (Alec Sharp) writes:
> I recently posted the following, but wasn't clear about what I am
> asking, as I learned from e-mail I received.
> 
> > We are a high-tech (CAD/CAM) company that is interested in looking at
> > alternatives to reviews/appraisals.
> 
> Yes, we still want to do reviews/appraisals so we can help employees
> develop and improve their skills.  What we want to eliminate is the
> 1,2,3,4,5 ratings

Ideally, ratings should be given on a continuous basis. You
wouldn't drive a car by looking out the window, aim the vehicle,
close your eyes for 12 minutes, open your eyes ...

Unfortunately, in our sue happy society, you have to document
everything. Otherwise, the employee who doesn't get promoted will
have you in court claiming 20 years salary. A 1,2,3,4,5 rating
system is an easy-to-do "square filling" fix for this problem.
(Fixes the symptom, leaves the disease raging unchecked).

Like so many other things in business, (and government,
education, etc.), people tend to measure what's easy, not what's
important.
-- 
       Dan Flak - McCaw Cellular Communications Inc., 5400 Carillon Point
      Kirkland, Wa 98033-7397, 206-828-8006, (usenet: nwnexus!mcgp1!flak)