You decide that after reading this post.
There’s enough written about managers. I’ve written about it myself here, here & here. But this post is completely devoted to a much avoided/evaded part of a manager’s role: Giving Feedback
So here’s a suggestion I have: Why don’t we make giving feedback a part of a manager’s performance review? Make it objective and quantifiable.
Why should we go with this approach to management? Here’s why:
- It will make managers give feedback. Simple. Right? Yes, sometimes a basic request for feedback isn’t met. At times it’s completely avoided too.
- Feedback can be tracked and reviewed along with other parameters as part of the manager’s performance review. It would help identify areas in which the manager might need help, when it comes to giving feedback.
- Takes away the opportunity to just give hints and get away with it. The recipient knows exactly what’s been said.
- Avoids arguments. When the feedback is clear and precise it doesn’t give room for arguments, debates or worse, assumptions!
- When you make it quantifiable, the manager’s focus will be on giving feedback with enough data.
- Makes it a direct interaction between the manager and his direct report. Often, feedback is passed through other leads/employees. An approach that always backfires.
- It helps set-up a clear communication channel between managers and direct reports. Performance parameters can be set openly and discussed without any discomfort.
- Expectations can be set, managed and communicated effectively.
- It takes away the assumption that giving feedback is a one-time effort.
- Once the feedback is in place, it would help with formulating measures for improving the direct report’s performance. Follow-up can be well planned, tracked and executed easily.
- PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) will make more sense than before. Since feedback is captured on a regular basis and hence helps avoid surprising the recipient.
Thinks to watch out for:
- Managers need to be trained before implementing this move.
- Feedback is to be given only about work. Shouldn’t be a personal judgment of the manager.
There could be many more instances to look out for. That’s exactly why a training session would be helpful. Is this a bold move? Maybe not. It’s a matter of companies implementing and manager’s accepting it. Yes, Change is Strange!
Do you think your organization is ready for this? Are you ready for this? Do you manage people? Are you a leader? Do you report to a manager who gives feedback? Do you report to a manager who hates giving feedback? Would love to hear your thoughts. I’m open to receive feedback!
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
OMG u have no idea how relevant this post was for me. After years of great managers, I am now saddled with someone from the CYA School of Managament. As a result, all he is focussed on is "results". There is no feedback, no context, no training, no mentoring, no reassurance. You get tasks, you do them, you either meet or fail your goals at Quarter end. Surprise!!!
What you suggest is really difficult, but so SO necessary.
Great post. Clearly bthere is a lot to be gained from open dialogue - enagement, loyalty, improved productivity, happier teams, people prepared to go that extra mile, people who talk positively about your organisation.
However, many organisations are top down in structure and a part of the DNA is to control messages. Managers work within these cultures by controlling messages at team and individual level. Start by having a more open organisation and then you have the foundation for feedback - at all levels. maybe employers fear social networking so much because of the tension between controlled dialogue within the organisation and open dialogue outside.
Good post. Many people struggle with this. I'd be interested in a follow-up, your recommended "how-to." How often, in what form and format, etc.
Great Post
I've just revised an performance review framework for an organisation. As part of that I introduced a simple, one-pager "Quality Evaluation Form" where staff score their managers on how well their performance review went.
Because we often monitor the number of performance reviews that have been undertaken - but how often do we monitor the quality of them (and feedback is part of that process)?
I completely agree..
In our company, managers are expected to undergo a training to give appraisal feedback.. They are further segregated to deal with their local team and a remote team..
I don know how much it helps, but its comforting to know, that they have to work at being managers, its not given to them!
You're on my blogroll now!
@Vidooshak - Thanks for your comment. Glad this post came at a relevant time for you. Agreed, it's difficult. Changing norms was never easy. The real challenge is in highlighting the benefits of this move; one step at a time. Yes, I hope eventually it will get accepted and managers will be made accountable for giving feedback.
@Martin - Thanks for stopping by and leaving your thoughts. Much appreciated.
I would still say its possible even in a top down management structure. How? Often the top down approach works like a safety-shield for bad managers, for the very reasons you indicate. This is one time I would love managers taking a risk and setting a precedent!
Read your take on it in your post too. Make this a core competency? Definitely!
@Krista - Thanks! As you indicate, the struggle is due to the lack of understanding and direction in using this approach. You've got me thinking! Let me put more thought into this and also it's an idea for a fresh post. Thanks.
@Karen - Thanks, Karen. Excellent initiative! Is it in sync with 360 deg feedback? What pecentage of the score is given to reviewing feedback given to the staff by their manager(s)?
@Dee - Thanks for your comment. Training is mandatory. But the costs involved are a big deterrent for many companies. Appreciate the fact that your company did take extra effort in training managers.
@Laurie - Awesome! Thanks for coming here and leaving a note.
Officially introduced at the 2010 Baselworld watch industry event, this Breitling Watches is undeniably geared towards power and originality on the wrist -- exactly the kind of features that will likely appeal more strongly than ever to pilots and travelers, in addition to divers. The Breitling Aeromarine comes equipped with a moderately-proportioned 41.3 mm stainless steel case and a stainless steel bezel adorned with raised numerals and hour markers highlighted by the contrast between polished and satin-brushed surfaces.
The exclusive new, integrated rubber strap on this Breitling Windrider fits seamlessly into the case while accentuating its sleek lines; it is fitted with a pushbutton-operated seamless clasp and an extension piece that is adjustable in a few seconds. For those likely to skip the diving who want a consistent, polished steel look, the watch also comes in a version with Bentley 6.75 's Professional stainless steel bracelet.
ED clothing
for Women - This has the design of a short sleeve t-shirt, but with a long sleeve coming out from under the upper sleeve to stretch to the wrist with a snug feel and look. The long sleeves have a colored sheer fabric and tattoo art to give a slight appearance of an all-over-the-arm tattoo, but of course without the tattoo. The ED Hardy Shoes
length is below the hips and hugs the upper body without having a "too tight" look. Colors available for the hardy shirt
for Women include Plum, Pink, Yellow and Black - each color has its own unique design featuring a hardy shirt
design.
Post a Comment