Discussion
A colleague is doing filling in an appraisal form for a fairly junior guy who has been working on a client site. Client thinks he junior is great, considering the length of time the junior has been getting decent feedback from this client a good appraisal means he would probably get 'promoted'. IE change of title, bit more money, a bit more responsibility.
However, my colleague is convinced this guy is a prat and incapable of taking any more responsibility so wants to ensure he isn't promoted.
Rather unfairly IMHO though I can see his point, the junior in question has an unfortunate manner sometimes and comes across as much younger than he actually is (26 or so).
The options are:
A) Decide to give him a poor grade and contrive ways of making the individual categories add up to this. EG Pick something he's done wrong once and make it sound like a pattern of behaviour.
B) Do the appraisal objectively and put a comment in saying why he isn't regarded as promotable.
C) Do the appraisal on the basis of what he's done during the relevant period (which is good) and if he gets promoted, say 'so be it'.
A is usual in this situation of course, which defeats the object of appraisals. B would be my preferred option.
But there is an argument that if you don't do C, there is no point in attempting to have objective appraisals.
Are there any other options?
However, my colleague is convinced this guy is a prat and incapable of taking any more responsibility so wants to ensure he isn't promoted.
Rather unfairly IMHO though I can see his point, the junior in question has an unfortunate manner sometimes and comes across as much younger than he actually is (26 or so).
The options are:
A) Decide to give him a poor grade and contrive ways of making the individual categories add up to this. EG Pick something he's done wrong once and make it sound like a pattern of behaviour.
B) Do the appraisal objectively and put a comment in saying why he isn't regarded as promotable.
C) Do the appraisal on the basis of what he's done during the relevant period (which is good) and if he gets promoted, say 'so be it'.
A is usual in this situation of course, which defeats the object of appraisals. B would be my preferred option.
But there is an argument that if you don't do C, there is no point in attempting to have objective appraisals.
Are there any other options?
FFS - Do it fairly.
Be constructive. Clearly someone thinks he is good and has done well. However, it's probably wise to suggest there are some training needs prior to promotion.
Who is the guy's line manager? Do these people not get a weighting, or indeed show an interest in developing people?
Be constructive. Clearly someone thinks he is good and has done well. However, it's probably wise to suggest there are some training needs prior to promotion.
Who is the guy's line manager? Do these people not get a weighting, or indeed show an interest in developing people?
The answer to this is so straightforward. If only people could be the same way.
BE. HONEST.
Your colleague needs to tell the guy where he is doing well, based on feedback recieved, and where he isn't doing so well. The need to be told that their weak points are considered sufficient to put a hold on any potential promotion for the time being. They also need to have the percieved weak points carefully explained to them, and a plan of action to improve these areas agreed. That way the person has a clear outcome to work towards and a goal at the end of the process (the promotion).
All any other approach is going to achieve is negativity: a disillusioned employee, probable reduction in they employee's commitment to his job as well as a worsening relationship with management.
Get it out in the open and work towards a solution collaboratively.
BE. HONEST.
Your colleague needs to tell the guy where he is doing well, based on feedback recieved, and where he isn't doing so well. The need to be told that their weak points are considered sufficient to put a hold on any potential promotion for the time being. They also need to have the percieved weak points carefully explained to them, and a plan of action to improve these areas agreed. That way the person has a clear outcome to work towards and a goal at the end of the process (the promotion).
All any other approach is going to achieve is negativity: a disillusioned employee, probable reduction in they employee's commitment to his job as well as a worsening relationship with management.
Get it out in the open and work towards a solution collaboratively.
Your colleague is looking at it wrong. His first and only consideration in everything he does should be profit, is his junior looking out for the interests of the company while also keeping the customer happily pay the bills and returning with more work?
Perhaps your colleague should take more time to provide support and guidance to his junior member of staff and point him in the right direction.
Perhaps your colleague should take more time to provide support and guidance to his junior member of staff and point him in the right direction.
The fact your colleague thinks he is a 'prat' says more about your colleague than it does about his 'junior'. It is an entirely subjective criticism, if your colleague thinks the juniors behaviour is unacceptable it is his responsibility to coach/mentor the junior in appropriate behaviour. The fact the customer considers the junior is great, suggests he is able to manage the junior effectively which re-enforces my view that the problem is your colleague not the junior.
The whole point of an Appraisal system is to removing subjective bias. It should be approached as objectively as possible, to do otherwise is unprofessional.
There should be a list of responsibilities for his current role and an enhanced list of responsibilities for the promoted role.
I would assess against both, then depending on the results either left in role, given an in-grade pay increment or the full promoted.
Marchutch said:
The answer to this is so straightforward. If only people could be the same way.
BE. HONEST.
Your colleague needs to tell the guy where he is doing well, based on feedback recieved, and where he isn't doing so well. The need to be told that their weak points are considered sufficient to put a hold on any potential promotion for the time being. They also need to have the percieved weak points carefully explained to them, and a plan of action to improve these areas agreed. That way the person has a clear outcome to work towards and a goal at the end of the process (the promotion).
All any other approach is going to achieve is negativity: a disillusioned employee, probable reduction in they employee's commitment to his job as well as a worsening relationship with management.
Get it out in the open and work towards a solution collaboratively.
AgreeBE. HONEST.
Your colleague needs to tell the guy where he is doing well, based on feedback recieved, and where he isn't doing so well. The need to be told that their weak points are considered sufficient to put a hold on any potential promotion for the time being. They also need to have the percieved weak points carefully explained to them, and a plan of action to improve these areas agreed. That way the person has a clear outcome to work towards and a goal at the end of the process (the promotion).
All any other approach is going to achieve is negativity: a disillusioned employee, probable reduction in they employee's commitment to his job as well as a worsening relationship with management.
Get it out in the open and work towards a solution collaboratively.
I have come across this before where the client is highly impressed, often because it serves their needs. The appraising manager needs to take a rounded and objective view. If you only took customers' feedback into account then many businesses would go bust, or deliver suboptimal profits, through over-servicing (which could be the case here) and/or under-charging. Clients love it while it suits them!
MitchT said:
I'm currently still stuck in the corporate w
kfest. This BS is top of my reasons for wanting to leave it all behind somehow.
Having seen both sides you still have to work with these corporate types when you are a contractor and you may have to bit your lip even more as you have zero leverage. Grass isn't always green it's just a different set of "pros and cons" kfest. This BS is top of my reasons for wanting to leave it all behind somehow.Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff