Ed commented,
> 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.
Yes, it happens lots of places, under different names. But the process is
to assess, not to rank in anyway. Portfolio assessments (I know by this
name, but other places use a similar process naming it differently), for
example, generally have no tie to pay. While part of the assessment
involves 360, the bulk is the partnership involving the individual and the
group and/or group leader. The thinking is simple: it's everyone's
responsibility to make sure everyone else is effective and successful.
The focus is not, What is this person doing right or wrong? but what are
>we> doing well, and what do we need to refine in order for this person to
be more effective? This is an important part of a vital or naturalized
workplace. Effectiveness is collaborative, involving solidarity more than
empowerment.
And you are right, from what I've seen there is a tendency for trust to
increase, morale boosted, a stronger sense of community to evolve, and
ultimately productivity to increase. People who have gone through them,
while describing them as being frustrating at first, say they are a far
more effective learning tool than the systems that had previously been in
place (including just the 360).
--Terri Deems tadeems@aol.com
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>