Thanks Rol for your kind words.
I would like to take your thought another step.
I would venture to say that when an evaluator gives a subordinate a poor
rating, it is reality the evaluator or supervisor who should be partly
responsible for that rating. The ideal situation, I think, is one where
the supervisor has a commitment to seeing that the supervisee is given the
opportunity and resources to achieve their goals. And if that means
provide assistance in training, then provide it.
My experience was one where I was out there on the limb having it sawed
off behind me. It is like a friend who used to referee college basketball
games in Michigan. He was taught that whenever a technical foul is given
it is the referee's fault for allowing game conditions to get out of hand.
I think if evaluation was seen as not just 360 degrees but a partnership,
then it would change the morale of the workforce, trust would increase and
performance and profitability would go up.
Hey, its great theory. What I want to know is if that is happening
anywhere? Would the list please share anecdotes of places where
evaluation works.
Thanks,
Ed Brenegar
Leadership Resources
edb3@msn.com
--"Ed Brenegar" <edb3@msn.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>