Performance Reviews
Last night, I sat in on a call to go over the executive performance reviews. I had a midterm the next day, but I figured I might as well sit in on it and see if I could help out with anything - since I usually go to the exec meetings.
At most part, I feel that the evaluation of the execs is fair, but what I don’t particularly like is giving them a score. While I do believe feedback is important, giving the execs a score is subjective - even if you try to make it as objective as possible, because there will always be some areas that you don’t know for sure and you end up either bumping up the “grade” or you end up bumping it down.
I like the feedback received from the service council members, and that really is the only thing that can be measurable - but it’s still not accurate?
I think the rubric is fine, but instead of have a “number” to everything, focusing on the areas of improvement is more effective than giving them a score - because that way they can actually know where they need to improve on instead of just focusing on bumping that “rating” up to look good. OF COURSE, I'm not saying our execs will do that - but I just don’t feel like scoring people is effective and may end up hurting them instead.
