What does the learning organization learn from ranking?
A possibility.
If a sales manager wanted his salespersons to compete with each other for
salary, commissions, bonuses, and respect he might institute a ranking
system.
If he wanted his salespersons to share prospects and selling
techniques--to learn to cooperate and collaborate with each other--he
might drop the ranking system and all other tools and devices that
inhibited cooperation and collaboration.
Isn't it true that an organization learns little from the rhetoric of
mission statements and managerial speechmaking but a great deal from the
institutional practices that exhibit its true values?
Steve Eskow
>I would say that a good manager, willing to learn, motivated to help
>others learn, and motivated to help the company succeed, is the only
>ingredient necessary. Many systems will provide an adequate platform for
>rating. I have used bits and pieces of many. Rating and ranking to me
>are merely tools to help me understand something about someone who works
>for me.
>
>If even the best of tools becomes more than tool and process, but instead
>becomes an end in itself, then it is not performing its task. On the
>other hand, an average tool, in the hands of the right person will serve.
>
>Going back to what Fred says above, companies really do depend on good
>performance from their employees. The task then is to understand what
>'good performance' really is, and how to help raise that standard
>regularly.
--"Dr. Steve Eskow" <dreskow@magicnet.net>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>