General discussion

Locked

Competency-based performance reviews

By MaryWeilage Editor ·
This week's Application Developer Management e-newsletter discusses the importance of conducting competency-based performance reviews. What's your take on competency-based performance reviews? Do the business and IT sides of your organization have conflicting ideas about performance reviews? Share your views in our discussion forum.

If you aren't subscribed to the Application Developer Management TechMail, visit our e-newsletter subcenter to subscribe to this free e-newsletter:
http://nl.com.com/MiniFormHandler?brand=builder&subs_channel=bldr_front_door&list_id=e053&;;;tag=fb

* Please delete any extra spaces that appear when you paste this link into your browser.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

2 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Reader feedback and question

by MaryWeilage Editor In reply to Competency-based performa ...

Note from the editor: We received the following feedback via e-mail from Builder.com member Greg Honeycutt.

Perfect timing. I would like to know what others are using for KPI's (Key Performance
Indicators). Our company is requiring them this year (within next week) and we have to come up with things that can be measured with a grade scale. How are others measuring and what are they measuring. Obviously I can't say I am going to write "X" lines of code daily. Can't say how many
projects I will complete since I have no idea of what projects I will work on later this year. Just curious. Any thoughts?

Collapse -

goal planning vs reactive evaluations

by jobeard In reply to Competency-based performa ...

After two decades of software development, I've seen all sides of the subject by now. Some companies are quite good a evaluations (eg: IBM), some will never be any good at it, and there's plenty of others in between. The one that is most laughable is the process of reactive evaluation. By that I mean the goals to be evaluated are written AFTER the fact, by the employee who then rates his/her own 'achievements' against the goals that they themselves just wrote minutes ago. This is so bogus and erroneous that it's hard to believe that the company management can take the approach seriously; but they do. Given the company performance over the last few years, I can only conclude Q.E.D.

Performance reviews SHOULD be closely tied to employee development. Areas of improvement should be goal items, not items like 'closes all severity X reports in Y days'. The manager and the employee should share in creating a goal list for the year and then measure the employee by those goals. Avoid knee-jerk reactions from current day-to-day problems and modifying the goal list due to a poorly executed project plan. Use the experience to create post mortem review of what was learned and recommendations to avoid the issue in the future.

The proverb applies here; 'When there is no leader, the people perish'.

Back to IT Employment Forum
2 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  

Related Discussions

Related Forums