Lon Badgett wrote in Employee Ranking Systems LO17158
>but why didn't his previous PA system catch and identify his >shortcomings?
There were many factors at work here, the major one being that it is
generally illegal to share personnel information without employees
consent. Obviously the guy was a good bullshit artist who had good
friends as references. If he had bad performance appraisals, there
would be no way our hiring manager could have known it unless he
volunteered the information. Also a former employer can be sued (at
least in massachusetts) for giving any derogatory information that
results in a candidate not being hired.
>Are you implying that because a particular appraisal system worked in >your favor that it is a good thing? Racism works in favor of a few >people too, but I hardly think that qualifies it as a good policy.
You're comparing apples to buicks here (or should I say edsels). A
fair and objective PA system does not discriminate against people
based on innate characteristics, it measure performance against a
previously established and agreed upon (by both boss and worker) goal.
Apartheid rated people based on the color of their skin. I find your
analogy ludicrous and bordering on ignorance.
>I think it is the tuning and the wholesomeness, not the intrinsic >value of appraisals in general, that creates these successes.
I could not agree more. I have said all along that it is the
implementation of the PA system, not the system itself.
Bad management will destroy the best of systems.
Good management will make even bad systems work.