Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 53,770
Re: Performance review
Is [broken link removed] on Irish Jobs.ie any use?
Brendan
Is [broken link removed] on Irish Jobs.ie any use?
Brendan
A
Aphrodite
Guest
Appaisals
The preference nowadays is to separate the performance review from the salary review however the salary review can take place immediately after the performance review if this suits everybody.
As far as i know the reason for separation is that under the integrated system the dicussion often gets bogged down on salary which is "the main event" for the employee who will be concentrating all his efforts on this.
By having a separate performance review the employer has a better chance of focussing the employees mind
on what has been achieved and then agreeing the objectives for the coming period.
I think its pretty obvious.
The preference nowadays is to separate the performance review from the salary review however the salary review can take place immediately after the performance review if this suits everybody.
As far as i know the reason for separation is that under the integrated system the dicussion often gets bogged down on salary which is "the main event" for the employee who will be concentrating all his efforts on this.
By having a separate performance review the employer has a better chance of focussing the employees mind
on what has been achieved and then agreeing the objectives for the coming period.
I think its pretty obvious.
P
piggy
Guest
Re: Appaisals
I think its pretty obvious.
I would have thought it was equally, or perhaps more obvious to have both performance review and salary review within the same meeting...keeping salary to the end of the meeting so that you can discuss performance first and so that everything is fresh in everyone's mind when you discuss salary. This way you do not get bogged down with salary. As a matter of fact it's in the employees interest to spend as long as possible proving his performance in the meeting before moving onto potential salary increases. At least that's the way I've had every single performance review in every company I've ever worked in....bar as a contractor.
I think its pretty obvious.
I would have thought it was equally, or perhaps more obvious to have both performance review and salary review within the same meeting...keeping salary to the end of the meeting so that you can discuss performance first and so that everything is fresh in everyone's mind when you discuss salary. This way you do not get bogged down with salary. As a matter of fact it's in the employees interest to spend as long as possible proving his performance in the meeting before moving onto potential salary increases. At least that's the way I've had every single performance review in every company I've ever worked in....bar as a contractor.
A
Aphrodite
Guest
No money honey (at appraisals)
Piggy
"it's in the employees interest to spend as long as possible proving his performance in the meeting before moving onto potential salary increases"
I don't ike to contradict you but this is precisely what we try and avoid, a situation where the employee feels his purpose at the meeting is to justify a salary increase. This may meet the employees objective at the meeting but probably not the employers. Its not hard to imagine that when you try to combine these two meetings into one that the employee is disproportionally interested in the salary discussion to the detriment of the performance discussion and hence the need to separate.
By the way and for what it is worth, I don't believe there are too many companies out there that handle appraisals very well. Many managers seem to have difficulty in striking the necessary balance between the theory, the practice and the human elements of this process.
A good appraisor will communicate a crisp and clear message about the employees performance, a clear message about future objectives, a clear training plan to strengthen necessary skills and some sort of road map to help achieve the objectives, everything tangible, measurable and to a clear timetable.
Piggy
"it's in the employees interest to spend as long as possible proving his performance in the meeting before moving onto potential salary increases"
I don't ike to contradict you but this is precisely what we try and avoid, a situation where the employee feels his purpose at the meeting is to justify a salary increase. This may meet the employees objective at the meeting but probably not the employers. Its not hard to imagine that when you try to combine these two meetings into one that the employee is disproportionally interested in the salary discussion to the detriment of the performance discussion and hence the need to separate.
By the way and for what it is worth, I don't believe there are too many companies out there that handle appraisals very well. Many managers seem to have difficulty in striking the necessary balance between the theory, the practice and the human elements of this process.
A good appraisor will communicate a crisp and clear message about the employees performance, a clear message about future objectives, a clear training plan to strengthen necessary skills and some sort of road map to help achieve the objectives, everything tangible, measurable and to a clear timetable.
P
piggy
Guest
Re: No money honey (at appraisals)
Hi Aphrodite,
I'm assuming you're a HR person?
I still disagree with you though
"it's in the employees interest to spend as long as possible proving his performance in the meeting before moving onto potential salary increases"
I've heard all the HR...em...stuff about performance reviews in the past. You'll have to forgive me if I think a lot of it is nonsense. Essentially, what a review is to me is quite simple and often gets jargonised unneccesarily.
In my mind it should be a discussion with one's manager(s) about your performance in your job and then an agreement on your salary based primarily on that discussion.
Let's just say you separate the two...do you honestly think an employee isn't thinking money in the back of his mind anyway when he/she's talking up his/her performance over the past year?
There is no muddying the water as far as I can see. Of course, it's too simple to say that people are only motivated by money but that's ultimately why we all work!
This is why I asked the question earlier...if a performance review is performance review then what is a salary review based on?
The answer, as far as I'm concerned, is it's based on the performance review. Hence, the two are always related.
A good appraisor will communicate a crisp and clear message about the employees performance, a clear message about future objectives, a clear training plan to strengthen necessary skills and some sort of road map to help achieve the objectives, everything tangible, measurable and to a clear timetable.
This is limited only to certain jobs. I can think of many jobs where this just doesn't always apply...software development being one of them.
Hi Aphrodite,
I'm assuming you're a HR person?
I still disagree with you though
"it's in the employees interest to spend as long as possible proving his performance in the meeting before moving onto potential salary increases"
I've heard all the HR...em...stuff about performance reviews in the past. You'll have to forgive me if I think a lot of it is nonsense. Essentially, what a review is to me is quite simple and often gets jargonised unneccesarily.
In my mind it should be a discussion with one's manager(s) about your performance in your job and then an agreement on your salary based primarily on that discussion.
Let's just say you separate the two...do you honestly think an employee isn't thinking money in the back of his mind anyway when he/she's talking up his/her performance over the past year?
There is no muddying the water as far as I can see. Of course, it's too simple to say that people are only motivated by money but that's ultimately why we all work!
This is why I asked the question earlier...if a performance review is performance review then what is a salary review based on?
The answer, as far as I'm concerned, is it's based on the performance review. Hence, the two are always related.
A good appraisor will communicate a crisp and clear message about the employees performance, a clear message about future objectives, a clear training plan to strengthen necessary skills and some sort of road map to help achieve the objectives, everything tangible, measurable and to a clear timetable.
This is limited only to certain jobs. I can think of many jobs where this just doesn't always apply...software development being one of them.
A
Aphrodite
Guest
The End
Hi Piggy
Let's have a time out. I think I do agree that it depends on the position to a large extent.
No I'm not a HR "type" but I am a senior manager in a multinational environment and regularly faced with the ominous task of appraising other directors and managers.
Hi Piggy
Let's have a time out. I think I do agree that it depends on the position to a large extent.
No I'm not a HR "type" but I am a senior manager in a multinational environment and regularly faced with the ominous task of appraising other directors and managers.
S
Spacer
Guest
..
Piggy
I think the point you make about the IT industry is interesting.
My experience of SOME (not all) IT professionals is that they think their undoubted technical expertise is reason enough to be promoted. SOME (not all) I know have become embittered at their lack of progress and their performance has suffered as a result. It's not the money they necessarily care about (although they certainly wouldn't refuse it!) - rather the recognition that they're a valued resource to the company.
The reality is that in order to progress, like everyone else, they also need to prove their capacity to operate effectively at the next level. This is something they're not often encouraged or faciliated in doing.
A performance appraisal could address this aspect of their career by communicating the a clear path by which they could advance - a prospect more attractive and valuable than being thrown a few extra quid every now and again.
Money is important of course - but if it was the sole/primary motivator than surely everyone would follow a life of crime/prostitution. There are other factors of varying relevance of course, and IMHO, it shows a poverty of thought by managers to assume that money is the main means by which the issue of peformance can be addressed.
Piggy
I think the point you make about the IT industry is interesting.
My experience of SOME (not all) IT professionals is that they think their undoubted technical expertise is reason enough to be promoted. SOME (not all) I know have become embittered at their lack of progress and their performance has suffered as a result. It's not the money they necessarily care about (although they certainly wouldn't refuse it!) - rather the recognition that they're a valued resource to the company.
The reality is that in order to progress, like everyone else, they also need to prove their capacity to operate effectively at the next level. This is something they're not often encouraged or faciliated in doing.
A performance appraisal could address this aspect of their career by communicating the a clear path by which they could advance - a prospect more attractive and valuable than being thrown a few extra quid every now and again.
Money is important of course - but if it was the sole/primary motivator than surely everyone would follow a life of crime/prostitution. There are other factors of varying relevance of course, and IMHO, it shows a poverty of thought by managers to assume that money is the main means by which the issue of peformance can be addressed.
P
piggy
Guest
Re: ..
Hi Spacer,
From reading your previous posts on various topics you always seem to make very astute comments on a wide variety of topics...but I think you've misinterpreted (a little) what I was saying...or perhaps I didn't clarify fully what I meant.
A performance appraisal could address this aspect of their career by communicating the a clear path by which they could advance - a prospect more attractive and valuable than being thrown a few extra quid every now and again.
Absolutely...but it really depends on the individual, and the type of IT company. I used to work for an American company which was full of the same types of individuals you're referring to.
However, I now work in a small stream-lined IT company with, generally speaking, only very specialised, or very experienced software developers. A lot of these guys would have very similar experience to say their boss (who just happens to be in the company the longest)...so a traditional form of appraisal as laid out by Aphrodite may not always be the most appropriate. It's also a very much sink or swim business these days. The customer needs x, y & z by this date next month. If we meet it and the code is clean then yippee. If not then heads will inevitably roll. So, the point I'm making is some businesses just don't run along the traditional, predictable lines of other office jobs. Not that I'm trying to belittle traditional office jobs.
The idea of a career path is just not that important in my current environment. Every day is about 'learn as you go'...its written into your job spec...it's the very nature of open source software development...its not something can that be clearly defined in an appraisal every year.
Money is important of course - but if it was the sole/primary motivator than surely everyone would follow a life of crime/prostitution
Why didn't I think of that...which to choose???
There are other factors of varying relevance of course
Absolutely, of course there are. I probably should have made that clear..I was just trying to make the point that money is probably the most important of these factors for a lot of people.
Hi Spacer,
From reading your previous posts on various topics you always seem to make very astute comments on a wide variety of topics...but I think you've misinterpreted (a little) what I was saying...or perhaps I didn't clarify fully what I meant.
A performance appraisal could address this aspect of their career by communicating the a clear path by which they could advance - a prospect more attractive and valuable than being thrown a few extra quid every now and again.
Absolutely...but it really depends on the individual, and the type of IT company. I used to work for an American company which was full of the same types of individuals you're referring to.
However, I now work in a small stream-lined IT company with, generally speaking, only very specialised, or very experienced software developers. A lot of these guys would have very similar experience to say their boss (who just happens to be in the company the longest)...so a traditional form of appraisal as laid out by Aphrodite may not always be the most appropriate. It's also a very much sink or swim business these days. The customer needs x, y & z by this date next month. If we meet it and the code is clean then yippee. If not then heads will inevitably roll. So, the point I'm making is some businesses just don't run along the traditional, predictable lines of other office jobs. Not that I'm trying to belittle traditional office jobs.
The idea of a career path is just not that important in my current environment. Every day is about 'learn as you go'...its written into your job spec...it's the very nature of open source software development...its not something can that be clearly defined in an appraisal every year.
Money is important of course - but if it was the sole/primary motivator than surely everyone would follow a life of crime/prostitution
Why didn't I think of that...which to choose???
There are other factors of varying relevance of course
Absolutely, of course there are. I probably should have made that clear..I was just trying to make the point that money is probably the most important of these factors for a lot of people.
S
Spacer
Guest
..
Piggy
I think we're coming to the same conclusions but from different angles.
The sort of results-driven environment you describe is one that some people enjoy and in which they would absolutely thrive. For others it would be a living hell.
One of the underlying principles of HR is that people should be in jobs that they enjoy and in which they're capable of performing effectively. How this is achieved is what I believe should be addressed in the context of the Perf App process. I accept that it's difficult to achieve but I believe it's worth pursuing.
IMHO, the successful application of these principles in your company would ensure that it was staffed by competent people who were happy to work in this type of environment - to create a whinger-free workplace that benefits everyone.
As for the crime/prostitution dilemma, I'm in two minds myself. :$
Piggy
I think we're coming to the same conclusions but from different angles.
The sort of results-driven environment you describe is one that some people enjoy and in which they would absolutely thrive. For others it would be a living hell.
One of the underlying principles of HR is that people should be in jobs that they enjoy and in which they're capable of performing effectively. How this is achieved is what I believe should be addressed in the context of the Perf App process. I accept that it's difficult to achieve but I believe it's worth pursuing.
IMHO, the successful application of these principles in your company would ensure that it was staffed by competent people who were happy to work in this type of environment - to create a whinger-free workplace that benefits everyone.
As for the crime/prostitution dilemma, I'm in two minds myself. :$
P
piggy
Guest
Re: ..
IMHO, the successful application of these principles in your company would ensure that it was staffed by competent people who were happy to work in this type of environment - to create a whinger-free workplace that benefits everyone.
I agree with that. It's a fair point.
IMHO, the successful application of these principles in your company would ensure that it was staffed by competent people who were happy to work in this type of environment - to create a whinger-free workplace that benefits everyone.
I agree with that. It's a fair point.