"Results! Why,
man, I have gotten a lot of results.
I know several thousand things that won’t work!" ~
Thomas Edison
PERFORMANCE
APPRAISALS — THE HORNS OF A DILEMMA
Since
the first human threw his spear at a saber-toothed tiger becoming
chief in recognition of his performance (or becoming dinner because
he missed) we have been performing performance appraisals. According
to Dulewicz (1989), we share “a basic human tendency to
make judgments about those one is working with, as well as about
oneself.” While the consequences of performance appraisals
are rarely life-or-death in the working world, they can be severe,
and the real potential for damage may be greater than the probability
of positive outcomes.
If we
inevitably judge, the challenge becomes one of judging in a fair,
equitable, and legally defensible manner. Unless our performance
review processes are structured and systematic, we have little
chance of meeting this challenge.
Performance
review system goals may be readily divided into two major camps.
In the first camp, the performance review is intended to determine
differential compensation between employees with different levels
of performance. In the second, performance review is a developmental
tool designed to help everyone in the system improve performance
over time. Each has advocates, but the general trend of recent
years seems to favor the developmental approach, as more evidence
has indicated the compensation model contains more negatives than
positives.
Considering
only the developmental goals of performance review, how do we
execute the process while meeting the challenge of “fair,
equitable, and defensible?” Methods may be divided into
three broad categories; rating scales, essays, and results-based
appraisals, with ratings of some type being by far the most popular.
The ratings approach can also be defined in terms of who does
the ratings: downward (boss rates employee), upward (supervisees
rate supervisor), lateral (peer reviews), and 360 degree (employee
is rated by members of each of these relationship groups.) While
each of these approaches has its own devotees and rationales,
only the 360 degree approach has balance.
The field
is full of 360-degree instruments, ranging the gamut from hastily
prepared, locally specific attempts to fully researched and scientifically
validated tools. As with any other employment-related assessment,
a business seeking results and defensibility is well advised to
carefully investigate the science (validity, reliability) behind
the instrument. Once results of the appraisal are available, the
real work begins: How to obtain real change in a positive direction,
based on the results?
Employee
buy-in is an important factor; the more the employee is involved
in self-auditing the results, the more buy-in and change is likely.
In the best situations, results form the basis for real, meaningful
communication.
Finally,
if results are widely valued in the organization and systematically
analyzed, an efficient training and learning program can be devised
around the outcomes leading to real and positive organizational
change. A well-designed 360 degree appraisal, properly executed,
may be the most useful form of performance review in business
today — fair, equitable, defensible, and productive. Consider
making 360 degree assessment a part of your organization’s
developmental process!
[Back
to Top]
FISHING
FOR BETTER APPLICANTS — DEEPEN YOUR POOL
Expanding
Job Markets Increase Recruiting Challenges
As the economy
expands, however unevenly, the search for the elusive
quality applicant becomes more and more difficult. When
your business begins to feel like there are no more quality
applicants to be found, consider the model of the fisherman:
When drought strikes: The lake is dry, no quality applicants
to be found—move to a new lake, or build one, or
find a new water source! Are you tapping all of the sources
in your area? Have you worked with the employment service,
college placement departments, senior services? Have you
tried online resources? Virtually every community has
not-for-profit agencies seeking to place workers rehabilitated
after injuries, or retrained after losing their jobs in
a factory closure. Reaching 65 years is no longer synonymous
with retirement. Are you reaching out to the older, more
experienced workers, perhaps with a better work ethic
as a bonus? Find new water, you’ll catch fish again!
When the fish
quit biting: Change your bait! Examine your recruiting
advertising. Are you still using the same tired ads in
the same unproductive venues? Change your bait, and the
fish may bite again! Compare the two ads in the next column:
For one Profiles client, the second ad produced a new
“bite” of quality applicants! It cost more,
took some thought—but it worked!
When the pond
only contains small fish: Grow them bigger! Investing
in your existing employees, carefully identifying their
potential for growth, and nurturing their development
may be your best chance to grow big fish for your business—people
who have the skills you need, combined with loyalty to
your organization, for giving them the chance to grow!
Providing resources and opportunities for growth can be
challenging, but almost always pays dividends in the long
run. Compared to a long, uncertain trip in search of bigger
fish, fish food may be cheap! |
|
HVAC
Installer
Stable
company seeks hard worker for long term
employment. Dependable, honest, enjoys
working with hands. Construction environment,
great benefits with retirement option.
Skills can be taught while employed.
Sharp uniforms, professional looking.
Satisfaction with job well done. Call
555-2222 for appt.
|
|
HVAC
Installer
Want
to learn a trade while you make a good
living?
Leave
that low-paying, dead-end job behind,
and start down the road to a better
career! If you like working with your
hands, know how to work hard, are dependable
and honest, we need you! We will teach
you skills on the job, help with your
ongoing education, and provide long-term
benefits that allow you to meet your
personal and family goals! If you are
motivated and have long-term goals,
Call us at 555-2222 today! We can offer
you a way to start, and a way to go
for the rest of your life!
|
|
|
[Back
to Top]
IN
SEARCH OF “COMMON SENSE” — BY JOHN W. HOWARD
& JOHN HAUBER
Often, when we ask a hiring manager
or business owner what they look for in a prospective employee,
the concept of “common sense” comes bounding to the
forefront. We talk about it, we see it as desirable, and most
of us assume we have it (just as all of the children in Lake Woebegone
are “above average.”) Unfortunately, we seem to lack
agreement on exactly what it means. A Google internet search on
the term yields over 8 million hits, with a strong preponderance
of political viewpoint sites, each convinced their position “has
it.” The more confident among them even name their group
or site with the words, as though wearing the label insures the
characteristic. In fact, that’s a valid question —
is common sense a characteristic, at all? Is it just a label,
with no consistent grounding in human behavior? Is it a political
term? Or does it, perhaps, mean “thinking just like I do?”
Since common sense is valued in the business world, and given
the general lack of agreement, we have decided to scientifically
pursue this elusive idea, and will keep you apprised of any progress
we may make!
[Back
to Top]
EARLY
MEASUREMENT OF EFFECTS OF A STRATEGIC HIRING SYSTEM
A good-sized credit union is thoroughly committed to
a learning culture, and development of superior leadership from
within its own ranks. It was a natural step in their evolution
to institute a strategic hiring system with multiple goals; to
reduce turnover and increase retention of quality employees, to
improve the overall quality of employees hired, and to hire people
who were likely to succeed and develop within their service and
sales oriented culture.
To
accomplish these goals the credit union, working closely with
their Profiles representative, adopted a “funnel”
model of selection. At the wide end of the funnel, applicants
are screened for suitability on the basis of their application
documents. Those chosen to enter the interview process first complete
an honesty-integrity assessment (the Step One Survey IITM, or
SOS2). With a strong applicant pool, the credit union applies
a relatively high criterion to the scores on that instrument.
The criterion, combined with an initial interview (using the assessment’s
interview guide ) selects approximately 40% of the pool to continue
the process. At this point, candidates remaining in the pool complete
a job match assessment specific to customer service jobs (the
Customer Service PerspectiveTM): If their match to the success
pattern for the job under consideration is favorable, they also
complete a job match assessment specific to sales, the Profile
Sales IndicatorTM (PSI). A final interview is conducted, considering
the complete file of information on hand (assessments, employment
history, reference checks, and interview results) and a job offer
decision is reached.
This
very comprehensive strategic hiring system is expected to produce
a superior set of hiring decisions, within the context of the
goals stated above. When will effects be apparent?
This
program was implemented in the Spring of this year, with 20 hires
under the system between the end of March and the middle of July.
At the end of July, supervisors were asked to rate these employees
on a simple, three-tier system: Top-excellent, expected to be
a top performer. Middle-average, acceptable, expected to become
a good employee, but not a top performer. Bottom-below average
performance, may not be a long-term employee.
The
table below summarizes the very preliminary findings. Supervisors’
ratings weakly correlated on the Customer Service Perspective
job match scores, more strongly with employee’s performance
on the Company Service Perspective score (a measure of agreement
with the company’s approach to customer service.) A positive
correlation also appeared with the job match on the Profile Sales
Indicator, and with the distortion scale (only) on the Step One
Survey II.
Of
the 18 employees hired in the six months prior to the system,
five failed to remain employed for four months beyond their hire;
of the 17 hired under the new system, only one has failed, so
far.
These
preliminary findings, and the turnover results support the general
direction of the hiring system, and provide support for continuation
of this effort. A more thorough data analysis will follow in the
4th quarter.
[Back
to Top
