>I would very much like to have subject to critical discussion John
>Constantine's contention that ranking systems "bring(st) fear to the
>workplace."
>
>My own experience in education and industry would confirm John's
>conclusions, and I am wondering if there is research supporting this
>position, or its opposite.
I know of no such research, although others might. In 1995, when I
conducted the web-based survey that led to my article about scrapping
performance appraisal systems, fear was one of the factors cited by
the people who responded to my inquiry about the costs and benefits
of performance appraisal systems. Peter Scholtes' company might be
a starting point regarding research data.
"Research" yields data, which might or might not change beliefs and
perceptions, yet it is these latter two factors that must be dealt with
in social settings, especially in organizations, where cooperative,
collaborative endeavor is essential to collective success.
What I find fascinating about the ranking/rating/appraisal thread is
that the defenders of performance appraisal argue in terms of the
benefits to the organization, and the attackers focus on the harmful
effects. In my paper, I tried to balance these two views and came to
the conclusion that the costs far outweighed the benefits (which is a
far cry from a "shrill" call for scrapping them). The reason appraisal
came up wanting in the balance is that the costs are very, very real,
and the benefits are mostly imagined.
So, the research I'd like to see is really good research substantiating
the supposed benefits of performance appraisal systems. What I suspect
we'll see are surveys in which advocates of performance appraisal systems
swear by them and opponents swear at them. Lots of heat and not much
light.
It helps also to understand that people do not fear performance appraisal
systems per se. They fear instead the consequences of appraisals. In my
experience, most people fear the long-term consequences far more than the
short-term consequences. Short-term, the consequences generally tie to
some piddling little pay raise called the merit increase, a sad substitute
for a cost of living increase or more genuine recognition. Longer term,
however, performance appraisals affect assignments and opportunities for
promotion, both of which carry big-time consequences. It is the "record"
created by performance appraisal systems that people fear, not the system
itself. In many companies, there are two such records: the one maintained
centrally, by Human Resources, and the one maintained locally, in your
supervisor's desk drawer. Both follow you around.
>My own hunch is that the rigourous ranking system is a vestige of the
>early factory system--and that knowledge-based organizations perform
>better in a collegial rather than a competitive environment.
Couldn't agree more. As a matter of fact, I wrote the following in a
posting to the list earlier this month:
"Performance appraisal systems are a vestigial remnant
of the waning days of the industrial era."
I also agree with your observation about knowledge-based organizations.
Knowledge work and knowledge workers present a very real challenge to the
continued existence of performance appraisal systems. You see, when work
was materials-based and working was muscle-centered, overt behavior was
the focal point for managerial control. Behavioral prescriptions could
be and were written and then enforced. Compliance was the order of the
day. Now, however, work is increasingly knowledge-based and working is
increasingly a mental activity. Most important, the work routines are
no longer routine; they have shifted from a prescriptive, prefigured form
to an adaptive, configured form. As Peter Drucker likes to point out
from time to time, supervisors can't supervise; knowledge workers must
supervise themselves. Neither, I would add, can supervisors any longer
appraise as easily as once they could. The collegial environment you
mention seems to manifest itself in what are now being called
"communities of practice." I don't know much about them, yet, but I
plan on looking into them.
Regards,
Fred Nickols
The Distance Consulting Company
nickols@worldnet.att.net
http://home.att.net/~nickols/distance.htm
--Fred Nickols <nickols@worldnet.att.net>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>