On 4 Feb 98 at 13:49, Christian Giroux wrote:
> My question, Rol, would be "Why do you need to go any further
> and actually rank the employees ?" Once you have done this, you have
> done everything, as a manager, you could do to help the employee improve
> his performance according to your expectations.
> If you do the next step of ranking or rating the employee and
> use the rank or the rating for any other purpose (which, in that case I
> assume would be known to the employee) than coaching, don't you signal
> that employee to give you more biased (in his/her favor) or, worst,
> incorrect data onto which you will base your coaching ?
You've hit on a basic paradox on the subject--the difficulty of being in a
development/coaching role while at the same time having and using a power
position that can affect someone's life. There are two distinct function
here, and many (I would guess most) simply can't function in both roles
(although some can).
Like with kids in school, teachers have the "learning helper" role AND the
evaluative function...hence a built in incentive for kids to lose the
first, and "fudge" in the second.
The key seems to be decoupling the two, which good managers seem to be
able to do, and stay in coaching mode.
Robert Bacal, Inst.For Cooperative Communication, rbacal@escape.ca
Visit our Resource Centre for articles on mgmt.,training,communication, and defusing hostility
at http://www.escape.ca/~rbacal (204) 888-9290
*Site Last Updated On Jan 24, 1998*
--"Robert Bacal" <rbacal@escape.ca>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>