Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

djberg96 (2603)

djberg96
  (email not shown publicly)

Journal of djberg96 (2603)

Monday December 09, 2002
11:33 AM

Performance reviews

[ #9342 ]
Looks like we're going to be doing performance reviews again. Like most, this one will have a ranking system from "outstanding" to "poor".

The problem with all performance review systems, as I saw in the military, is that they quickly become inflated. By that I mean "outstanding" becomes average, "average" becomes poor, and "poor" means you're about to be fired.

In the military it was worse, as your performance rating gave you points towards promotion and getting anything less than the max could screw you out of a stripe (and thus a pay grade). Fortunately, that never happened to me, but I knew one or two guys who *did* have that happen.

I think one-on-one meetings your immediate boss are generally sufficient. Of course, I've never been a manager, so what do I know?

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • It's a little different in a small company, but when I worked for a large company, my day-to-day goal was to get my boss to mention me to her boss at least once a week. That way, when it came to review time it was much easier for my boss to recommend a raise, because her boss knew who I was. I also tried to keep a nice little log of what I did. This helped at review time because you had to put down your 5 biggest accomplishments in the "self evaluation" and I did so much stuff I could never remember.