Posts Tagged "performance review’

Performance Review Redesign: Human and Social Capital

by Derek Irvine

Diagram of interconnected colleaguesRecognize This! – New ways of working rely on collaboration and relationships in addition to individual skillsets. Performance reviews should take this into account.

There has been a lot in the news lately as more and more companies have abandoned their traditional performance review processes in favor of both more immediate and more ongoing alternatives. So far, the Fortune 500 players have been leading the charge, and other mid-size and smaller companies are sure to follow.

Most of this trend has been attributed to a growing awareness that successful companies will need to have systems that not only evaluate, but also develop their workforces. There is also the realization that these processes need to occur more often than annually or semi-annually, and be much more human-friendly to impact performance. The companies on the front lines have been largely pursuing unique approaches to accomplish some of these goals and resolve other common challenges with the practice. It will be interesting to see which of these crosses the threshold into becoming a best practice.

In the meantime, I want to offer a perspective on these trends complementing many of the forces noted above. Fundamentally, human capital is no longer a sufficient force to sustain high performance. In its place, social capital is playing an increasingly important role in helping organizations to manage the complexity and pace of work, and achieve lasting competitive advantage. What’s the difference between the two?

Human capital is captured in the knowledge, skills, competencies, and other characteristics possessed by individual employees. It runs the gamut from tangible (like computer programming skills) to intangible (like creative thinking). Organizations have long sought to acquire and manage the collective human capital of their employees to drive productivity and performance. In this world, traditional performance reviews make a whole lot of sense. Managers want to be able to quantify what each individual brings to the team, and expand that level over time.

If human capital sets the foundation, social capital is what allows you to build upwards.

Social capital are the resources embedded in relationships between people, within and across companies. Proponents of social capital perspectives point to the critical role of these relationships in getting work done: contributing to improved communication, better access to information or resources, and more efficient large-scale action. These are exactly the type of assets that are most needed in solving today’s complex challenges, where novelty and ambiguity are the new normal. These are also the assets that traditional performance reviews are most ill-equipped to capture.

It may go without saying, but… social capital requires a more social approach to performance reviews.

In addition to the focus on improving the timeliness and developmental aspects of the performance review process, companies need to begin considering how best to quantify and develop the social capital of their employees. There is valuable data to be had in the collaborative relationships that employees develop to be at their most successful, as well as a chance to get in on the ground floor of career development discussions around which relationships are the most rewarding and productive.

From my perspective, high performing companies will be those that establish performance reviews that give weight to social capital in addition to human capital, to deliver insight into their employees’ skillsets and networks as key drivers of performance.

What about your own experiences with performance reviews, has anyone asked about the networks you rely on to get your job done?

What GE, Accenture, Adobe and Microsoft Have in Common

by Lynette Silva

Feedback is a conversationRecognize This! – More and more companies are turning a critical eye on the traditional annual performance review process as the primary means for employee feedback.

This month, Derek Irvine (our chief blogger here on Recognize This!) wrote a couple of posts on Compensation Café about decoupling pay from the performance review process. Drawing from the news about Accenture ending the traditional performance review process, Derek sparked a conversation among readers about why we seem to stick to what we know is a challenged process.

Readers chimed in, with comments seeming to focus on the fear factor as the primary reason for preserving the traditional annual performance review as the primary means for employee feedback. That fear appears to be driven largely by:

  • Legal concerns around how to defend performance terminations without the formal review as proof
  • Perceived inability to defend pay for performance decisions without the easy-to-point-to stack ranking of traditional reviews
  • Concern that managers won’t engage in any feedback exercise with employees without the review mechanism to force the issue

And then Quartz published this news story hit late last week that GE – originator of the “rank and yank” stacked performance review process – is ending the annual review, too. The article confirms these assumptions, pointing out:

“As much as researchers and many employees might applaud the decision, it doesn’t mean it’s going to be easy. There’s a reason reviews have stuck around for so long, and it’s hard to overemphasize how entrenched the annual review has become. It’s the way most were raised as employees, a huge part of their workload, and a comfortable framework to administer and to defend pay, promotion, and firing decisions.”

So why is GE changing their performance management approach? Susan Peters, GE’s head of human resources, says:

“It existed in more or less the same form since I started at the company in 1979. But we think over many years it had become more a ritual than moving the company upwards and forwards… The world isn’t really on an annual cycle anymore for anything. I think some of it to be really honest is millennial based. It’s the way millennials are used to working and getting feedback, which is more frequent, faster, mobile-enabled, so there were multiple drivers that said it’s time to make this big change.”

How does this new approach work at GE? The Quartz story explains:

“The new app is called ‘PD@GE’ for ‘performance development at GE.’ … Employees can give or request feedback at any point through a feature called ‘insights,’ which isn’t limited to their immediate manager, or even their division. Normally, you never get that feedback unless you manage to track someone down the next day, which people rarely do, and only from a direct manager. If you wait for an annual review, any specifics are probably long forgotten… There’s an emphasis on coaching throughout, and the tone is unrelentingly positive. The app forces users to categorize feedback in one of two forms: To continue doing something, or to consider changing something.”

This is very interesting. If we want to help our employees achieve their best work, we can no longer kowtow to the fear of lawsuits, pay discussions or poor managerial practices. We must not cater to the lowest common denominator. We must instead look to ways that people best receive and process feedback, both positive and constructive. That’s Eric Mosley’s message in his book The Crowdsourced Performance Review) — we need both the informal and formal, manager-driven and employee-empowered.

Achieving change and refining a deeply embedded if flawed process, is not easy of course. It’s going to take more and more companies not just replacing or revising the traditional review process, but also sharing publicly how they are avoiding or overcoming the perceived fears as GE is now doing.

How are reviews handled in your organization? What are the perceived benefits or detriments to the approach?

Feedback Is Critical (but Don’t Say Anything Negative)

by Lynette Silva

Unbalanced beamRecognize This! – Positive feedback has more power than negative criticism for boosting performance.

In an article sure to inspire a good bit of negative “kids today!” comments, the Wall Street Journal recently published an article on a “kinder, softer” approach to performance management and the performance review process. Here’s an excerpt:

“‘Accentuate the positive’ has become a new mantra at workplaces like VMware Inc., Wayfair Inc., and the Boston Consulting Group Inc., where bosses now dole out frequent praise, urge employees to celebrate small victories and focus performance reviews around a particular worker’s strengths—instead of dwelling on why he flubbed a client presentation…

“Now, managers [at BCG] are expected to extol staffers’ strengths during reviews and check-ins, explaining how the person can use his or her talents to tackle aspects of the job that come less naturally. Bosses are advised to mention no more than one or two areas that require development, [BCG Partner Michelle] Russell adds.”

Does that mean we ignore constructive criticism, or – dare I say – negative feedback, when needed? Of course not. Here’s the opinion of three people (an academic, an employee, and an executive), also from the WSJ article:

“Still, companies that ramp up the positivity need to make sure they’re not totally bypassing the evaluation of employees, [Sheila Heen, a lecturer at Harvard Law School and co-author of Thanks for the Feedback] says…

“Caitlin Marcoux, a senior associate at [PricewaterhouseCoopers], says she still gets told when she messed up. But she appreciates the extra dose of appreciation, which she says has helped to build her confidence. Without it, “I’ll be a harsher critic on myself,” she says….

“Yahoo’s [Chairman, Maynard] Webb cautions that overly positive managers run the risk of ignoring problems festering in their workplace, making for a crisis down the line. Overall, though, the evolution isn’t a bad thing—people perform better when they’re encouraged and inspired, he says.”

The real message in this is all about finding the right balance. When discussing performance improvement needs, it seems most logical to focus on those areas needing improvement – your weaknesses. Yet studies show people are far more effective and productive at work when they focus on work that plays to their strengths and not expending too much effort on improving their weaknesses. This doesn’t mean we ignore performance challenges. It does mean we stop trying to fit round pegs into square holes.

If a member of your team is better at writing exciting materials, and less proficient at creating presentations, it makes good sense to funnel more writing projects to him and finding someone else who has PowerPoint running in their blood to create presentations. Penelope Trunk shares a great example of a member of her team who did this quite successfully by outsourcing what she least liked to do to others who are better at it.

And just because I can’t help throwing out research, don’t forget the findings that it takes five positive comments to balance one negative in our psyches. If you want employees to be able to correct one area, be sure to praise them for five areas they do well.

Remember, too, the worst thing you can do is ignore someone. Employees would rather you focused on their weaknesses than ignored them altogether. We all need feedback. We all deserve to know how we’re doing.

How are you typically evaluated – on your strengths or on your areas needing improvement? How do you typically evaluate others? Which approach do you believe to be more effective?


Crowdsourcing How to Re-Engage Fatigued Employees

origami birdsRecognize This! – Kind commenters shared additional wisdom on how to re-engage fatigued employees.

Last week, I shared here on Recognize This! a summary of my SHRM 2014 annual conference presentationHow to Transform Employee Fatigue into Employee Engagement – and also shared it on my LinkedIn profile blog. That posting received several comments, which I appreciate greatly. A few of these comments in particular raised additional points that add tremendous value to my original post.

Defining and Communicating the “WHY”

To engage more fully, employees need to know the deeper meaning and value of the work they do every day. Mike Denison | FIC | Executive Coach made this additional point:

“Companies and managers could do a lot worse than making sure THE WHY of the organisation is fully understood. Many employees don’t have anything to feel part of, they come to work to live outside of work. Engaged employees come to work because they have a sense of purpose that in line with the purpose and meaning of the organisation. Try megaphoning and articulating THE WHY of the organsation more and see what happens. Oh, by the way, the WHY is never money / profit / shareholder value, those are results and outcomes, the WHY is a feeling of the value you bring to society and a sense of direction and purpose.”

Eric Branham added on to Mr. Denison’s comment:

“I agree with Mr. Denison. Many companies’ ‘core values’ read more like your list of impacted results above. For many employees the inspiration will come not from being told how they impact the bottom line, but whether or not they feel that their own work is contributing to something positive for the community at large. So, just how big is the picture you are presenting, and how do your core values align with it?”

Making Performance Reviews Relevant

Mr. Branham went on to say:

“In addition, I would suggest that performance reviews should be adjusted to include some input from direct reports. Giving the supervised some level of input on the performance of the supervisor would help in a number of ways, not the least of which is that crucial factor in any business: ownership. Many employees become dissatisfied as a result of feeling that they have no avenue for changing the situation positively. Opening up some portion of the review process to direct reports would help to create a leadership structure that is open, communicative, and RESPONSIVE to team members at every level.”

While a social recognition program isn’t the place to capture negative or constructive feedback, a well-designed, strategic program will encourage recognition from anyone to anyone, which includes recognition from employees to superiors. This gives an additional avenue for upward recognition is happening, for what reasons and if not, why not.

Andries Fourie also commented:

“To me, this is why a meaningful career development discussion is such a powerful tool for a manager/leader. If we can assist an employee to: 1) Set great goals for personal and work growth, 2) Get rid of beliefs, rules and values that are holding him/her back, 3) Find what he/she is passionate about, to find his/her purpose 4) Understand the importance of his/her role in the team’s overall performance and how the above will affect that, then we will have engaged employees.”

The Over-worked Employee

I’ll admit, my SHRM presentation started out with 10 types of fatigued employees, which I had to reduce to 5 for time constraints. Bob Korzeniowski, MBA, CPA, PMP calls to mind one of those types:

“Your article misses this: The over-worked employee. You know, the one who works a lot of overtime and does this for long stretches of time. They need time off to rest and recharge, so give them more vacation time.”

Overworked employees might be the most difficult to diagnose for intervention. Keep in mind the truism, “If you want something to get done, give it to a busy person.” Yet, these people are among the most important to keep an eye on because they are clearly valuable to the organization. Recognizing their efforts and engaging in detailed performance conversations are quite critical to their success.

The Last Word

I’ll give the last word to Erick Hjortsvang, who puts it so eloquently:

“Give recognition. Provide the tools to succeed. Understand that advice is not a resource. Ask the employees what they would want and, if not counter to the company or goals, then they might be reengaged.”

What about you? What kind of fatigued employees do you see in your organization? What additional advise or insight would you offer?

Video, Radio and the Importance of Expressing Gratitude and Appreciation

Recognize This! – Directly saying “thank you” in a detailed way to others not only improves your own happiness, but in a workplace environment, can also drive deep, positive, long-lasting change.

Today I want to point you to three resources I’m quite proud of or was deeply touched by in the past week.

HR HAPPY HOUR: Eric Mosley on The Crowdsourced Performance Review

First, Steve Boese and Trish McFarlane (both bloggers I regularly follow at Steve’s HR Technology blog and Trish’s HR Ringleader blog and both influential in creating the always excellent HRevolution conference) invited Globoforce CEO Eric Mosley to share his ideas on The Crowdsourced Performance Review on their latest “HR Happy Hour” blog radio show. Just one of the important points Eric made in the show was:

“Visibility – that’s an incredible asset companies gain when they run social recognition programs that have a high cadence of frequency of recognition. They’re life-logging the culture of the organization. Lots of little wins get recorded that would have just slipped through the cracks of time. In social recognition, they get recorded. Over time, there’s a portfolio of these little instances of goodwill between people. The company as a resource now has life-logged a lot of the achievements, wins and high performance in the company. This gives a number of different insights. Most important is the insight into high performers they never knew they had in the past. When I talk to our customers who are department heads they are able to quickly see through the graphical interface who on their teams is being recognized. There is nearly always a surprise one or two employees on the team who are helping so many people in the company that just flew under the radar. The crowd is now saying: ‘This person is essential and a good part of why we do great work here.’”

GLOBOFORCE BLOG: The Essential Link between Happiness & Gratitude (terrific video)

I would be remiss if I did not share this very touching video testing out this point: “Psychologists have scientifically proven that the greatest overall contributing factor to overall happiness in your life is the amount of gratitude you show.”

Please, go to the link above and watch the video. The research tested showed a much larger jump in happiness for people who took the time and made the effort to personally and directly express their gratitude to another person. And the person that experienced the biggest jump in happiness was the one who was the least happy at the start of the experiment.

COMPENSTION CAFÉ: A Legal Perspective on the Pitfalls of Employee of the Month Programs

Last week I shared insight from the U.S. National Law Review on how employee of the month programs can do far more damage than employee disengagement and demotivation to actually cause potential discrimination lawsuits or other pejorative actions. I also share ideas on how to fix these often troubled programs and derive much greater business benefit from your employee recognition efforts.

Performance Reviews: Where We Went Wrong and How to Get Back on Track

Recognize This! – The failures of the traditional annual review process can be solved through the crowdsourced performance review.

During the last decade, the clamour to end the traditional approach to the performance review has risen to deafening levels. There are many reasons for this, not least of which is Gen Y employees demanding better. Thanks to them, employees of all generations can benefit.

I like particularly how succinctly Eric Mosley, the CEO of Globoforce, makes the argument in his new McGraw-Hill book, The Crowdsourced Performance Review. The traditional, paper-based, annual approach as the sole means of providing detailed feedback to employees served a purpose decades ago. Indeed, it still does serve a valid purpose today. But the many failures of the traditional performance review must be solved through the input of crowdsourced reviews.

Just a few of the failings of the traditional appraisal process and the solutions of the crowdsourced review are:

Failing: The opinion of one person drives the annual review.

Solution: Supplement manager feedback and observation with the wisdom of the crowd – recognition received throughout the year from other employees, peers and colleagues.

Failing: Because the review is given annually, it is too infrequent and pegged to one point in time.

Solution: Give informal, regular ongoing feedback throughout the year that’s referenced during the annual review process. This timely feedback from multiple sources is far more effective at reinforcing desired behaviors and actions so that employees are encouraged to repeat actions and behaviors that  you need again and again.

Failing: Most traditional, annual reviews give feedback on goals achieved, with little focus on behaviors demonstrated.

Solution: Incorporate how results were achieved, based on your core values, as part of the review. To truly crowdsource the review, encourage all employees to recognize each other throughout the year when they see someone living your values in their daily work.

The cumulative effect of this information gathered throughout the year from multiple sources balances out the single source of more goal-based information from the manager at the annual review.

I’ve only scratched the surface of the failings of the annual performance review. I encourage you to check out The Crowdsourced Performance Review  for more.

What’s your typical experience with the performance review process in your workplace.

The Importance of Behavior-Based Recognition and Reward – A Goldman Sachs Illustration

Recognize This! – Deeply embedding your core values in how employees are rewarded is critical to overcome too much emphasis on results achievement to the detriment of company reputation.

A foundational tenet of strategic employee recognition is recognizing the “how” as well as the “what” – in other words, acknowledging and praising the manner in which results are achieved as much as recognizing the results themselves. This is a critical point as simply recognizing the “what” (the results) without recognizing the “how” (the values demonstrated in achieving the results) can quickly lead a company down the Enron path. After all, one of Enron’s core values was “integrity” but that surely wasn’t apparent in how their employees were encouraged to achieve end results.

Another company in the news during the recession for too much focus on the “what” was Goldman Sachs. Now, I’m pleased to see the investment bank in the news for promoting a new reward approach based on demonstrating “cultural” behaviors in line with their company mission and reputational goals. From their Business Standards Committee Impact Report:

“We also changed our annual employee performance review and rewards processes to include an assessment of reputational excellence, linking “cultural” behavior to how our people are recognized and rewarded…

“Now, as part of the review questionnaire for all professionals, reviewers are asked to rate the reviewee with regard to their focus on trust, transparency and long-term orientation in connection with client relationships. These changes have reinforced four key messages to all of our employees regarding (1) the importance of serving our clients, (2) the importance of protecting the firm’s reputation and upholding our culture and values, (3) the link between  ‘cultural’ behavior and how people are recognized and  rewarded  in our organization and (4) individual and collective accountability…

“These changes have impacted our decisions about compensation and who we reward. Moreover, our review and reward processes more powerfully communicate and reinforce to our professionals the need to focus on our clients and our reputation and to always act in accordance with the highest standards of the firm.”

Incorporating your core values into the formal performance review process directly is certainly one way of effectively driving home the importance of the “how.” Doing so more informally and frequently through timely, specific recognition throughout the year is also necessary to make living these “cultural behaviors” become second nature in how the work gets done every day.

How does your organization reinforce your core values in how employees are measured, recognized and rewarded?

Latest Globoforce/SHRM Report: Driving Stronger Performance through Employee Recognition

Recognize This! – Recognition can impact and even fix many aspects of HR.

As regular readers can imagine, I’m a fan of research. Research from multiple angles and sources can lead us to better decisions and applications. In addition to the external research I make a practice to seek out (from the usual suspects of Towers Watson, Hay Group, Mercer, Deloitte, etc.), I also greatly enjoy the semi-annual research Globoforce conducts with SHRM on the employer/management take on the current state of employee engagement, retention, performance, organization culture and the like.

Our most recent survey just came out. The Spring 2013 Report, Driving Stronger Performance through Employee Recognition, uncovered several interesting findings as featured in the press release about the report:

Crowdsourced feedback and recognition can address the limitations of traditional performance reviews.

Of the companies surveyed, 77 percent conduct performance reviews once a year. Still, employees overwhelmingly feel more frequent reviews by multiple sources would provide more accurate input and create a more effective recognition program. Key findings include:

  • 85 percent of companies are currently using or would considering using social recognition (a system that empowers employees to recognize each other for great work).
  • 78 percent say crowdsourced recognition would be helpful data to incorporate into performance reviews.
  • 74 percent currently use or would consider mapping recognition awards against performance rankings/ratings.

Investment in recognition programs lowers workforce frustration and boosts employee productivity.

Data from the survey shows a connection between employee productivity and satisfaction and a company’s recognition program spend. According to respondents, higher budget allocations result in less frustrated and more productive employees. Employees at companies that invest more than one percent of payroll in a recognition program are:

  • Nearly twice as likely to report increased employee productivity at their company (versus companies that spend less than one percent of payroll on recognition).
  • Nearly 50 percent less likely to say they are often or very frustrated with their work environment (compared to employees at companies that spend less than one percent of payroll on recognition).

Praise coupled with prize is the most powerful motivator.

Praise is a powerful motivator for employees. When that praise is coupled with a prize, employees’ performance is driven even further. SHRM/Globoforce survey findings include:

  • 83 percent say employees are further motivated by recognition that includes a reward than recognition with no associated reward (i.e. “free” recognition).
  • 94 percent of respondents say positive feedback has a greater impact on performance (versus just six percent who say negative feedback is the better motivator)

I encourage you to check out the full report for more details.

Case Study: Culture Fixes a Troubled Company

Recognize This! – A powerful, positive, appreciative culture is critical to a company’s recover.

Earlier this week, the Wall Street Journal published a quite interesting article case study of Dynegy, Inc., in the article “Can a New Culture Fix Troubled Companies?” As the article points out:

“Increasingly, leaders of troubled businesses try to fix the company’s culture along with its bottom line. Since the financial crisis struck in 2008, CEOs have sought to improve collaboration and decision making, recognizing that a strong culture is ‘a critical component of their long-term success,’ says Nick Neuhausel, a partner at consulting firm Senn Delaney, which advised Dynegy.”

Throughout the article, using Dynegy as the example, I see three key components of how to change your culture while keeping a focus on strategy guidance.

1) Rebuild Trust through Honest Conversations (and start at the top)

Dynegy CEO Bob Flexon began his culture overhaul by rebuilding trust within and among his senior leadership team:

“In June, the company’s 37 highest-ranking executives participated in a two-day offsite meeting led by Senn Delaney, which included trust-building exercises. In one drill, a pair of managers spent one minute expressing appreciation for each other’s work, then spent the next giving constructive criticism.”

Think about how you receive information such as this from others. Do you tend to push off praise or do you accept the positive feedback as emphasis of what you do well and where you excel? With constructive criticism, do you accept it in the spirit it is given or do you see it as an attack? Both versions of feedback are critical to honest conversations and healthy rebuilding of a company culture built on trust and recognition.

2) Base Performance Reviews on Your Cultural Hallmarks (Core Values)

Dynegy first focused their energy around specific core values and then looked for ways to bring those values to life for employees:

“Then, executives tried to carry out their pledges. Employees got performance reviews for the first time in two years, with bosses judging their subordinates in part on whether they embraced the core values.”

Building your core values into the performance review process is a key step in carrying your values throughout the work. However, an opportunity remains for Dynegy to do better in this area by not limiting this feedback to once a year from one person, but expanding the opportunity for all to contribute positive feedback on everyone else who lives the values throughout the year. (This is the essence of the crowdsourced performance review.)

3) Establish Culture Champions

Let me be clear. Every employee owns your company culture. All are equally responsible for contributing to the culture. That said, establishing culture champions is a smart move. Empower these champions to reinforce your culture and your goals. Here’s an example from  Dynegy:

“Meanwhile, 15 specially trained ‘culture champions’ are attempting to reinforce the message. At meetings, one such champion, Chief Administrative Officer Carolyn J. Burke, says she sometimes chastens a colleague for tapping on his BlackBerry by declaring, ‘Hey Joe, be here now.’”

Has your organization undergone a culture revolution? What steps were taken and how was the new culture implemented?

Don’t Want to Do an Annual Performance Review? Do This Instead!

Recognize This! – Crowdsourced performance reviews year-round drive much more effective performance while creating powerful, positive cultures of recognition and engagement.

Performance appraisals are top of mind for me lately as we are all eagerly awaiting the release of my CEO’s latest book – The Crowdsourced Performance Review: How Social Recognition Transforms Performance Management.

Let’s face it. Nearly everyone admits the traditional approach for performance appraisals (in place for decades now) doesn’t work for many reasons and from everyone’s perspective. But what should you do about it?

Blessing White recently published an article in Fast Company with this perspective:

“Although performance appraisals appropriately focus on maximum contribution the organization’s side of the engagement model), the greatest performance improvement results when an individual’s personal motivators, interests, and talents are taken into account. Yet rarely do performance appraisals address those elements. … So rather than trying to reengineer your performance appraisal discussion to tap into personal engagement drivers of employees, we suggest that you make sure

  • Your appraisal process drives clarity of priorities and expectations and provides fair and useful performance feedback.
  • Your managers understand that performance feedback should be immediate and year-round (even though they’re being monitored just once a year).
  • You hold your managers accountable for addressing performance problems with clear action steps like performance improvement plans.
  • Encourage and train your managers to talk with their teams the rest of the year–in career coaching conversations, onboarding discussions, and engagement reviews.”

This is precisely the approach that Eric Mosley offers in The Crowdsourced Performance Review. Indeed, this connection is what Jessica Miller-Merrill highlighted as most valuable about the book in her review on her Blogging 4 Jobs site:

“That’s precisely what Eric Mosley, CEO and Co-founder of Globoforce discusses in his new book The Crowd Sourced Performance Review.  The book discusses the current disconnect with the old employee performance review model still being used by managers in the new collaborative and engagement-focused workplace.  What I like most about the book is that Eric provides real-world scenarios and dialogue that happens between employee and manager.  For business leaders and managers who are uncomfortable or unfamiliar with implementing a new process or shift in how we rate and view employee performance more from a collaborative standpoint, I find the dialogue extremely helpful.  Managers can test drive real world scenarios and think through verbiage, conversations, and possible questions from their employees before the sit down and more formal performance review and evaluation meeting.  We know there is almost nothing worse as an employee to have a sit down with your boss and find out they don’t have any insights or answers because they haven’t done the homework upfront.”

The Crowdsourced Performance Review is being released next week and Eric is leading a webinar himself on the book and the key arguments he makes in it. Wednesday, November 14th at 1:00 pm Eastern (10:00 am, Pacific; 18:00 GMT), join him for “How Social Recognition Transforms Traditional Performance Management.”

If you’d like a free copy of the eBook, leave me a comment on this post and I’ll be sure you get it when the book is released next week.