Employee Reviews Are Such A Waste Of Time

[Stuxnet]

We're conducting employee reviews over the next few weeks, and it's such a waste of time. This year, supervisors and managers must first run all of our reviews by our corresponding Vice President. Why? So they can make sure we don't say anything that can be construed as negative.

Come again Mae West?

That's right, folks. You can no longer ascertain your superior's view of you by the number and contents of positive and negative remarks on your review. No. Instead, you determine his/her satisfaction with you by merely comparing how many positive comments you received relative to your coworkers.

J-tap-dancing-C.

We're literally being told to spin any negative comments into something positive.

For instance:

Original Doesn't collaborate well with others; doesn't take constructive criticism in a positive manner.
Dilbertification Is very passionate about his/her ideas.

How is that helpful? How does that teach Joe Cockblow to stop being a dickhead and play nice? If anything, it reinforces his behavior!

Original Routinely misses project milestones and deadlines and often fails to see the big picture.
Dilbertification Extremely detail-oriented.

Original Isn't adequately keeping up with changes in technologies and methodologies.
Dilbertification Pro-actively supporting legacy systems.

Yes folks, these are ACTUAL line items and their associated "recommendations" from the executive staff. One of them is from a review I'm giving to a very counterproductive member of my team. I need him to "get the message" so he stops acting like such a roadblock. Unfortunately, he's going to walk away from his review feeling as if his performance is not only adequate, but that it's highly appreciated!

 

[MmmSkyscraper]

WTF, time for some Terry Tate action!

 

[mugs]

I hate the phrase "the pussification of America," especially when it doesn't apply. Can't we call it "the pussification of jbourne77's company" instead? I think that's a more accurate description.

 

[pontifex]

haha, thats ridiculous

"you're doing a bad job, but you're not."

so does that mean no one can get fired?

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: mugs
I hate the phrase "the pussification of America," especially when it doesn't apply. Can't we call it "the pussification of jbourne77's company" instead? I think that's a more accurate description.

I disagree. I think the PoA is all around us in this country. It started with our children (specifically, in the public school system), and now we're beginning to find that even grown adults cannot handle the rigors of every day life.

This is akin to that whole debacle over whether or not teachers should use red ink to grade papers because it's seen as a "negative" color.

Apparently adults can't handle a little red ink, either.

Pussies.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: mugs
I hate the phrase "the pussification of America," especially when it doesn't apply. Can't we call it "the pussification of jbourne77's company" instead? I think that's a more accurate description.

I disagree. I think the PoA is all around us in this country. It started with our children (specifically, in the public school system), and now we're beginning to find that even grown adults cannot handle the rigors of every day life.

This is akin to that whole debacle over whether or not teachers should use red ink to grade papers because it's seen as a "negative" color.

Apparently adults can't handle a little red ink, either.

Pussies.

Yet another thing we can blame on the baby boomer generation?

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: pontifex
haha, thats ridiculous

"you're doing a bad job, but you're not."

so does that mean no one can get fired?

Not necessarily. Our company has been struggling financially for a few years and it's not uncommon to see a layoff or two every couple of months. However, who gets laid off is strictly determined by your functions outlined in your job title, rather than your ability to perform those functions.

For instance, if your job description reads "Responsible for managing 90% of customer accounts" but you really only just refill the toilet paper in the bathrooms once in awhile, then you're safe. However, if you're job description reads "Responsible for refilling toilet paper in bathrooms" but you actually manage 90% of customer accounts, then you should probably pay a visit to HotJobs.

It's a strange place, to be honest.

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: mugs
I hate the phrase "the pussification of America," especially when it doesn't apply. Can't we call it "the pussification of jbourne77's company" instead? I think that's a more accurate description.

I disagree. I think the PoA is all around us in this country. It started with our children (specifically, in the public school system), and now we're beginning to find that even grown adults cannot handle the rigors of every day life.

This is akin to that whole debacle over whether or not teachers should use red ink to grade papers because it's seen as a "negative" color.

Apparently adults can't handle a little red ink, either.

Pussies.

Yet another thing we can blame on the baby boomer generation?

Coincidentally, they're the ones making these decisions .

 

[Exterous]

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: mugs
I hate the phrase "the pussification of America," especially when it doesn't apply. Can't we call it "the pussification of jbourne77's company" instead? I think that's a more accurate description.

I disagree. I think the PoA is all around us in this country. It started with our children (specifically, in the public school system), and now we're beginning to find that even grown adults cannot handle the rigors of every day life.

This is akin to that whole debacle over whether or not teachers should use red ink to grade papers because it's seen as a "negative" color.

Apparently adults can't handle a little red ink, either.

Pussies.

Yet another thing we can blame on the baby boomer generation?

Yes - now pelase remove the color red from your avatar - I find it negative and its like yelling at me for doing something wrong.


And will someone please tell the stoplights to stop yelling at me!

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: jbourne77
Not necessarily. Our company has been struggling financially for a few years and it's not uncommon to see a layoff or two every couple of months. However, who gets laid off is strictly determined by your functions outlined in your job title, rather than your ability to perform those functions.

For instance, if your job description reads "Responsible for managing 90% of customer accounts" but you really only just refill the toilet paper in the bathrooms once in awhile, then you're safe. However, if you're job description reads "Responsible for refilling toilet paper in bathrooms" but you actually manage 90% of customer accounts, then you should probably pay a visit to HotJobs.

It's a strange place, to be honest.

This is probally why the company is struggling.

 

[Spacehead]

At first that was funny, but after you think about it, it's just sad. I'm assuming you work for a large company/corporation?

 

[Chaotic42]

I tell my bosses that I will be completely straight with them and I expect exactly the same in return. I make that very clear throughout the interview and during my first days of employment.

I want to know *exactly* what they think of my performance.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: mugs
I hate the phrase "the pussification of America," especially when it doesn't apply. Can't we call it "the pussification of jbourne77's company" instead? I think that's a more accurate description.

I disagree. I think the PoA is all around us in this country. It started with our children (specifically, in the public school system), and now we're beginning to find that even grown adults cannot handle the rigors of every day life.

This is akin to that whole debacle over whether or not teachers should use red ink to grade papers because it's seen as a "negative" color.

Apparently adults can't handle a little red ink, either.

Pussies.

Yes well none of the companies I've worked for had a problem with telling someone what they were doing wrong, so I stand by my previous post.

 

[skace]

I'd be pissed, but employee reviews on a whole are complete wastes of time.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: mugs
I hate the phrase "the pussification of America," especially when it doesn't apply. Can't we call it "the pussification of jbourne77's company" instead? I think that's a more accurate description.

I disagree. I think the PoA is all around us in this country. It started with our children (specifically, in the public school system), and now we're beginning to find that even grown adults cannot handle the rigors of every day life.

This is akin to that whole debacle over whether or not teachers should use red ink to grade papers because it's seen as a "negative" color.

Apparently adults can't handle a little red ink, either.

Pussies.

Yes well none of the companies I've worked for had a problem with telling someone what they were doing wrong, so I stand by my previous post.

Wow. Two whole companies? Statistically, I couldn't possibly argue with that!

/ troll

 

[Garet Jax]

Originally posted by: jbourne77
We're conducting employee reviews over the next few weeks, and it's such a waste of time. This year, supervisors and managers must first run all of our reviews by our corresponding Vice President. Why? So they can make sure we don't say anything that can be construed as negative.

Come again Mae West?

That's right, folks. You can no longer ascertain your superior's view of you by the number and contents of positive and negative remarks on your review. No. Instead, you determine his/her satisfaction with you by merely comparing how many positive comments you received relative to your coworkers.

J-tap-dancing-C.

We're literally being told to spin any negative comments into something positive.

For instance:

Original Doesn't collaborate well with others; doesn't take constructive criticism in a positive manner.
Dilbertification Is very passionate about his/her ideas.

How is that helpful? How does that teach Joe Cockblow to stop being a dickhead and play nice? If anything, it reinforces his behavior!

Original Routinely misses project milestones and deadlines and often fails to see the big picture.
Dilbertification Extremely detail-oriented.

Original Isn't adequately keeping up with changes in technologies and methodologies.
Dilbertification Pro-actively supporting legacy systems.

Yes folks, these are ACTUAL line items and their associated "recommendations" from the executive staff. One of them is from a review I'm giving to a very counterproductive member of my team. I need him to "get the message" so he stops acting like such a roadblock. Unfortunately, he's going to walk away from his review feeling as if his performance is not only adequate, but that it's highly appreciated!

Your company will have a very hard time showing a paper trail as jusitification for a firing.

You had better recommend that you never fire a pregnant woman or any other protected class.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: MmmSkyscraper
WTF, time for some Terry Tate action!

Hell's yes, /thread

 

[Armitage]

Air Force OPRs, at least for non-operational folks, have been a travesty for years. Very similar to what you describe. If you ever see anything negative on one, it's essentially the kiss of death. I've seen glowing reviews of complete fvck ups. Actually, you don't have to say anything negative for it to be the kiss of death - merely saying somebody did a "good" job, instead of saying they did an extraordinarily supercalifragilistic job would do it. They are so hyperinflated as to be useless.

One of the big reasons is that organizations and commanders are judged at some level on how well they get their people promoted. So giving honest evals while everybody elses are firewalled is essentially shooting yourself in the foot. And giving honest evals of good people would hurt them relative to the firewalled evals of fvck ups from other organizations.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: skace
I'd be pissed, but employee reviews on a whole are complete wastes of time.

Yep, but that's also because of the companies' unwillingness to put their necks out for fear of getting sued. Merit increases have left the building and have been replaced by across-the-board standard of living increases (1.5% - 3% in most places).

I know of one lawsuit (which is still pending, so I don't know the outcome) at my last company where one individual received a 2% raise while her coworker received a 4% raise.

She sued for sexual discrimination. She had been there for about 4 months and, frankly, was lucky as hell that she even got the 2%.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: jbourne77
We're conducting employee reviews over the next few weeks, and it's such a waste of time. This year, supervisors and managers must first run all of our reviews by our corresponding Vice President. Why? So they can make sure we don't say anything that can be construed as negative.

Come again Mae West?

That's right, folks. You can no longer ascertain your superior's view of you by the number and contents of positive and negative remarks on your review. No. Instead, you determine his/her satisfaction with you by merely comparing how many positive comments you received relative to your coworkers.

J-tap-dancing-C.

We're literally being told to spin any negative comments into something positive.

For instance:

Original Doesn't collaborate well with others; doesn't take constructive criticism in a positive manner.
Dilbertification Is very passionate about his/her ideas.

How is that helpful? How does that teach Joe Cockblow to stop being a dickhead and play nice? If anything, it reinforces his behavior!

Original Routinely misses project milestones and deadlines and often fails to see the big picture.
Dilbertification Extremely detail-oriented.

Original Isn't adequately keeping up with changes in technologies and methodologies.
Dilbertification Pro-actively supporting legacy systems.

Yes folks, these are ACTUAL line items and their associated "recommendations" from the executive staff. One of them is from a review I'm giving to a very counterproductive member of my team. I need him to "get the message" so he stops acting like such a roadblock. Unfortunately, he's going to walk away from his review feeling as if his performance is not only adequate, but that it's highly appreciated!

Your company will have a very hard time showing a paper trail as jusitification for a firing.

You had better recommend that you never fire a pregnant woman or any other protected class.

Firing != Laying off

 

[homestarmy]

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: jbourne77
We're conducting employee reviews over the next few weeks, and it's such a waste of time. This year, supervisors and managers must first run all of our reviews by our corresponding Vice President. Why? So they can make sure we don't say anything that can be construed as negative.

Come again Mae West?

That's right, folks. You can no longer ascertain your superior's view of you by the number and contents of positive and negative remarks on your review. No. Instead, you determine his/her satisfaction with you by merely comparing how many positive comments you received relative to your coworkers.

J-tap-dancing-C.

We're literally being told to spin any negative comments into something positive.

For instance:

Original Doesn't collaborate well with others; doesn't take constructive criticism in a positive manner.
Dilbertification Is very passionate about his/her ideas.

How is that helpful? How does that teach Joe Cockblow to stop being a dickhead and play nice? If anything, it reinforces his behavior!

Original Routinely misses project milestones and deadlines and often fails to see the big picture.
Dilbertification Extremely detail-oriented.

Original Isn't adequately keeping up with changes in technologies and methodologies.
Dilbertification Pro-actively supporting legacy systems.

Yes folks, these are ACTUAL line items and their associated "recommendations" from the executive staff. One of them is from a review I'm giving to a very counterproductive member of my team. I need him to "get the message" so he stops acting like such a roadblock. Unfortunately, he's going to walk away from his review feeling as if his performance is not only adequate, but that it's highly appreciated!

Your company will have a very hard time showing a paper trail as jusitification for a firing.

You had better recommend that you never fire a pregnant woman or any other protected class.

Yes, make sure to only fire WHITE MEN!

They are defenseless! Take em down!!!!

 

[Garet Jax]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: jbourne77
We're conducting employee reviews over the next few weeks, and it's such a waste of time. This year, supervisors and managers must first run all of our reviews by our corresponding Vice President. Why? So they can make sure we don't say anything that can be construed as negative.

Come again Mae West?

That's right, folks. You can no longer ascertain your superior's view of you by the number and contents of positive and negative remarks on your review. No. Instead, you determine his/her satisfaction with you by merely comparing how many positive comments you received relative to your coworkers.

J-tap-dancing-C.

We're literally being told to spin any negative comments into something positive.

For instance:

Original Doesn't collaborate well with others; doesn't take constructive criticism in a positive manner.
Dilbertification Is very passionate about his/her ideas.

How is that helpful? How does that teach Joe Cockblow to stop being a dickhead and play nice? If anything, it reinforces his behavior!

Original Routinely misses project milestones and deadlines and often fails to see the big picture.
Dilbertification Extremely detail-oriented.

Original Isn't adequately keeping up with changes in technologies and methodologies.
Dilbertification Pro-actively supporting legacy systems.

Yes folks, these are ACTUAL line items and their associated "recommendations" from the executive staff. One of them is from a review I'm giving to a very counterproductive member of my team. I need him to "get the message" so he stops acting like such a roadblock. Unfortunately, he's going to walk away from his review feeling as if his performance is not only adequate, but that it's highly appreciated!

Your company will have a very hard time showing a paper trail as jusitification for a firing.

You had better recommend that you never fire a pregnant woman or any other protected class.

Firing != Laying off

I understand the difference.

Performance reviews are among the primary sources of the paper trail needed to justify a firing. The reviews you are giving will never allow a firing to occur especially against a protected class of worker.

 

[cKGunslinger]

So, have you considered talking to someone with authority in the company about this perceived absurdity?

I mean, "Yes! I, too, am upset about your company's internal policies! Rabble, rabble, rabble!"

 

[nsafreak]

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: jbourne77
We're conducting employee reviews over the next few weeks, and it's such a waste of time. This year, supervisors and managers must first run all of our reviews by our corresponding Vice President. Why? So they can make sure we don't say anything that can be construed as negative.

Come again Mae West?

That's right, folks. You can no longer ascertain your superior's view of you by the number and contents of positive and negative remarks on your review. No. Instead, you determine his/her satisfaction with you by merely comparing how many positive comments you received relative to your coworkers.

J-tap-dancing-C.

We're literally being told to spin any negative comments into something positive.

For instance:

Original Doesn't collaborate well with others; doesn't take constructive criticism in a positive manner.
Dilbertification Is very passionate about his/her ideas.

How is that helpful? How does that teach Joe Cockblow to stop being a dickhead and play nice? If anything, it reinforces his behavior!

Original Routinely misses project milestones and deadlines and often fails to see the big picture.
Dilbertification Extremely detail-oriented.

Original Isn't adequately keeping up with changes in technologies and methodologies.
Dilbertification Pro-actively supporting legacy systems.

Yes folks, these are ACTUAL line items and their associated "recommendations" from the executive staff. One of them is from a review I'm giving to a very counterproductive member of my team. I need him to "get the message" so he stops acting like such a roadblock. Unfortunately, he's going to walk away from his review feeling as if his performance is not only adequate, but that it's highly appreciated!

Your company will have a very hard time showing a paper trail as jusitification for a firing.

You had better recommend that you never fire a pregnant woman or any other protected class.

Hell not just protected classes, firing anybody will be problematic now if you ask me. In this lawsuit happy country that we live in I can easily see lawsuits stemming from this. "Well your honor I had no idea that I was not doing the job that was asked of me. Year after year I received these glowing reviews and no indication that I was underperforming. Had I been made aware of such issues I would have taken steps so that I would be performing at the expected level. Instead I get terminated without any cause. "

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Garet Jax
I understand the difference.

Performance reviews are among the primary sources of the paper trail needed to justify a firing. The reviews you are giving will never allow a firing to occur especially against a protected class of worker.

I don't think you do . I don't work in HR so I don't have all of the details, but you don't need the same kind of justifications during layoffs that you do for a standard firing. I'm not saying companies can just go and lay someone off whenever they really just want to fire them, but the two are not quite the same. In an over-simplified nutshell, the only justification you need for laying someone off is that you need to cut costs. You don't need cause.

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
So, have you considered talking to someone with authority in the company about this perceived absurdity?

I mean, "Yes! I, too, am upset about your company's internal policies! Rabble, rabble, rabble!"

It's very common dialog between middle- and upper management, so yes... but thank you for knowing your place.

 

[WildHorse]

Effective Phrases for Performance Appraisals: A Guide to Successful Evaluations
by James E. Neal, Jr.

Neal Publications Inc
127 W Indiana Ave
Perrysburg, OH , 43551-1578
Phone: 419-874-4787

My copy has ISBN 1-882423-07-0 which I have typed most slowly and carefully and triple-checked, but that ISBN mysteriously doesn't come up in Ask.com or Google.

Edit: oh here's another ISBN: 1882423097