AttaJamou3.com

One of the main discussions at the end of the year is a classic of commercial confidentiality. Started in 1920 when Frederick Winslow Taylor, father of scientific management, reviews are used to measure the production of the manual worker. At the moment, are still used as the communication is not yet a problem in production. Typically, much of the discussion focused on the development of lower production and behavior. In addition, many question the development does not address the real problems, because:

1. Performance analysis is not expected – Traditionally, discussions, development must be carried out at the annual anniversary of the employee, or organizations, or close to completion during the year. The problem is that many managers are entrenched organizational issues, and diversion of time, complete and relevant content feedback. In one case, the bank clerk was waiting katselmukseen 20 months.

2. The assessments are not fair – the biggest problem is performance feedback that opposes the employee against the employer. Employees may be criticized for recent events, insulted by personality conflicts or completely ignored the real problems, because the director is afraid to get involved in the conflict. A manager of the latter took a sales management position that more than 5 years, all 14 employees have received rave reviews.

3. Comments are not balanced – Comments are traditionally responsible to the employee. Employees need to be part of the experience.

Monetary conditions in the fourth experiment in March – Performance evaluations are intended to communicate one thing: performance. Monetary issues have no place in a journal. These interviews should be conducted separate from the audit.

To be clear, issues of organizational productivity are prevalent in the workplace. MUS help mitigate concerns about the feedback related to organizational goals and standards. In addition, the review is to 1) improve performance by aligning responsibility with organizational objectives, 2) improve morale by giving honest feedback, and 3) the results of previous award based on feedback from inter -office staff and clients.

These issues raise the question then, is a suitable method to provide better screening and desired productivity gains by employees? The answer is yes.

Here is a simple model:

1. Create a quick return – the best reviews conducted weekly and monthly not annually. Research in the area by many universities and consulting firms shows that employees perform better when they understand in real time how they are doing. This means that managers often have to meet with staff to review the objectives, ensure clarity of roles and adjust performance to meet the annual performance objectives.

2. Encourage employees to give feedback – Once a feedback loop in which workers offer an interpretation of performance. Before the staff meeting to make a physical assessment of personal leadership, and demonstrated a personal evaluation of behavior, training, expertise, customer service, and adherence to the MBO ‘. Thomson Reuters is based on this process and is very effective and balanced approach to express the dialogue.

3. Crucial talks – Do not confront people about the performance undermined the performance of the organization. It is imperative to have no desire to have the discussion so that employees understand their strengths and limitations. The withholding of information only leads to problems in the future.

4. Money can buy happiness – For a monetary discussion during a performance review sends the wrong message. The focus of the conversation is intended to support the morale and productivity. Many people are worried about their bonuses and travel, which is determined by the board and senior management, not front-line supervisors particularly in difficult times. In addition, individuals leave bad leaders is not the poor pay. Employees who focus only on wages makes the artists will never be poor and work productively. More importantly, they do not stick to individual results, but instead focus on the next occasion.

5. The Heart of the Matter – In the heart of the performance evaluation is the effort of an employee. The first phase is a measure of how the employee carries out in relation to the position and labor standards. The effort is made by reviewing the job description, policies and procedures, organizations, and finally, individual responsibilities. Second, the objectives of the employee must be in harmony with the strategic direction of the organization. For example, if the direction of a chain hotel is excellent customer and employee objectives should reflect the desired behavior, such as check-in faster and offer friendly and welcoming greetings that are at the Four Seasons or Ritz Carlton .

6. Be person not personal – All performance feedback must be objective. While there are personal items in the interview feedback based on observed behavior, not personality problems. Pragmatism is essential for proper feedback. Search alter the issue of content based on observed behavior does not dispute the personality.

7. Decide on mutual action plans – As the process moves to the success of performance and success in the future, plans should be tailored actions. Both parties must agree on the benefits and limits. More importantly, it is the responsibility of managing the use of benchmarks to measure and communicate success. Apply key performance measures to ensure that both parties understand what to buy and when.

The myth of feedback about performance is that the process should be short term. It can not be further from the truth. Performance feedback is working every day to help create a culture that puts employees and works to ensure the effectiveness of the organization. Aligned with the moral, performance feedback is a resource that satisfaction in the relief work. When employees understand their strengths, to have appropriate relationships with employers to understand their position and know your goals, which can reach higher levels of individual achievement and productivity.