Talent and Performance Development
2.1K views | +1 today
Follow
Talent and Performance Development
Making sense of performance and talent development systems to create & sustain high performance in organizations. For the BEST of the BEST curated news in performance, change, agile learning, innovation, motivation, social media and careers, SUBSCRIBE to Reveln.com/Tools/
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Deb Nystrom, REVELN
Scoop.it!

Adobe’s New Approach to Abolishing the Yearly Performance Appraisal: The Details

Adobe’s New Approach to Abolishing the Yearly Performance Appraisal: The Details | Talent and Performance Development | Scoop.it

Adobe is blazing a trail.  Rosemary Arriada-Keiper, Head of Rewards at Adobe reviews several of the compensation details of their new program.


1)  Has Adobe completely done away with performance appraisals (evaluating past performance)?

Rosemary: Yes, we no longer have performance appraisals.  While we still believe we need to evaluate performance, we believe this should be done on an on-going basis through regular feedback provided during “check-ins”.  These are on-going discussions between employees and managers about goals, status against them, what is working, what is not, whether goals need to be modified or reprioritized given the environment, etc.   ...These “check-ins” are not written. ...We encourage at a minimum that "check-ins" happen quarterly but we typically see monthly in practice.


2) Has Adobe completely stopped giving performance ratings?
 

Rosemary:  Correct, we no longer provide a rating.  ... because of  “check-ins” both managers and employees should have a very good sense of performance by the time managers need to make compensation recommendations.

4)   You mention there are rewards for key talent.  How are key/high performers selected...? 


Rosemary:  We have a separate process for that whereby discussions about key talent happen with leadership in the respective organizations.  We do identify who they are and they are “tagged” in the system as Key Talent (yes/no) but no rating per se. 

Key talent receives stock although occasionally they get cash.  Both managers and individual contributors are eligible.  The total pool is no more than 2% of the employee population.
 

5)  What has been the response from both managers and employees about this change in program?

 

Rosemary: Very positive. There’s lots of relief around not having to write annual performance reviews and label employees a certain way.  That said, the conversations managers have with their employee has had to shift from “these are the guidelines given to me by HR [to} push[ing}  managers to own their decisions and be able to articulate them (and defend if challenged). 


Related tools & posts by Deb:

      

  • Stay in touch with Best of the Best news, taken from Deb's  NINE multi-gold award winning curation streamsfrom @Deb Nystrom, REVELN delivered once a month via email, available for free here, via REVELN Tools.

         

              


Deb Nystrom, REVELN's insight:

Adobe made a huge jump away from their reviled stack ranking system, a move that even raised their stock prices.  

These are four (4) highlights from a longer article by Compensation Café shows how the revamped review, now called "check-in" without documentation, and the compensation system is now handled at Adobe.   Gone are the rankings, the yearly appraisal and ratings.

According to the head of "Rewards" at Adobe, it's been received quite positively.   It's certainly a step in the right direction.  It isn't really all that new.  The APOP or "Annual Piece of Paper" process described by an article in Fast Company in 1998 is very similar.  Here's the link.   I'll have more to say about it in my next blog post on REVELN.com.

~  Deb

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Deb Nystrom, REVELN
Scoop.it!

Peer Performance Reviews - Reviewed

Peer Performance Reviews - Reviewed | Talent and Performance Development | Scoop.it
Some companies are doing away with traditional top-down, manager-led performance reviews and relying on the rank-and-file for employee evaluations.


The system provides more valuable information about each worker's performance than a review by just one person would, Mr. Garrity says. That's particularly true at Hearsay Social, because it has very few formal managers, most employees work across multiple teams, and leadership changes from project to project.


___________________

"We are decentralizing as much decision making as we can, so we also need to decentralize reviews..." 

___________________


"We are decentralizing as much decision making as we can, so we also need to decentralize reviews," says Steve Garrity, the chief technology officer.  at Hearsay Social Inc., a San Francisco-based social-media software company with some 90 employees.


But the process, which the firm plans to do twice a year, is also time-consuming and complicated, he says, and it may not work as the employee count grows. 


___________________


...crowdsourced feedback may not provide better data....feedback may gravitate toward positive and negative extremes...

___________________



...Crowdsourced evaluations go a step beyond traditional 360-degree reviews, which are generally more structured and often involve lengthy surveys.   


___________________


 "...Another potential downside is "rating fatigue" and lower quality information..."

___________________


But critics argue that crowdsourced feedback may not provide better data. Like online restaurant or product reviews, feedback may gravitate toward positive and negative extremes, says Tracy Maylett, chief executive of DecisionWise.   ...Another potential downside is "rating fatigue" and lower quality information, he adds.

Deb Nystrom, REVELN's insight:

Assessing the "why" of these processes are key.  For example, the goals of peer review may fit the type of work that happens in  team oriented cultures of a certain size.  360 feedback is also best for newer to mid-level managers, open to development.  ~  D

more...
David Hain's curator insight, July 16, 2013 4:11 AM

Fascinating experiment - hope it works!

Scooped by Deb Nystrom, REVELN
Scoop.it!

Pay-for-Performance, A trade-off for Trust & Commitment

Pay-for-Performance, A trade-off for Trust & Commitment | Talent and Performance Development | Scoop.it
Paying your employees more for hitting specific targets may backfire, according to HBS professor Michael Beer .


..."I think there is an implicit negotiation going on between what management wants and expects, and what employees want and expect," observed Beer in his talk to HBS faculty. This implicit negotiation is "embedded" in the context of pay-for-performance, but often goes undiscussed and unacknowledged, he suggested. Misunderstandings about goals are the result. Pay-for-performance may also have a natural life cycle that managers are unaware of, he said.


Financial rewards in a fast-changing business environment could undermine a company's ability to build trust and commitment unless management and employees have an honest discussion of their mutual expectations, they added. This is "very difficult to do."


Related posts by Deb:

A History of Performance Appraisals: Letting Go to Power New Culture


Choices for High Performance Teams, Groups and Psuedo-Teams: Achievement Is How You Say It!

Deb Nystrom, REVELN's insight:

In my experience, pay continues as a satisfier, never a motivator. This HBR working knowledge article classic illustrates the nuances as well as the nusances of attempting to reconcile the hierarchy barriers of expectations in pay-for-performance.  Compensate fairly, motivate systemically & holistically. ~  Deb

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Deb Nystrom, REVELN
Scoop.it!

Flawed Performance Management and Hospital Consultants Don't Mix > Insights to Change

Flawed Performance Management and Hospital Consultants Don't Mix > Insights to Change | Talent and Performance Development | Scoop.it

"...improvements envisaged by the Department were achieved but that’s because its objectives were absurdly unambitious."  


Does this sound like a hobbled performance management system to you?  From "An open blog enabling commentators from across secondary care to share their opinions."


Excerpts:


“A new contract which increased consultants’ pay by between 24% and 28% failed to halt a continuing decline in productivity. Many of the improvements envisaged by the Department were achieved but that’s because its objectives were absurdly unambitious.


____________________

The use and quality of annual appraisals in trusts are patchy.

___________________


“The contract allows consultants to refuse to work during evenings and weekends. As a result, hospitals struggle to provide the appropriate level of consultant-led care for patients. Some trusts even pay up to £200 an hour for additional work which is done at weekends.


“The use and quality of annual appraisals in trusts are patchy. Seventeen per cent of consultants have not had an appraisal in the last year. It is also startling to hear that nearly half of trusts do not assess whether consultants have met the objectives in their job plans.


____________________.


..half of trusts do not assess whether consultants have met the objectives in their job plans.

____________________



“Pay progression for consultants is linked to years in the job rather than how well they are performing. And Clinical Excellence Awards, costing £500 million a year and aimed at rewarding consultants whose performance is over and above what is normally expected, are held by 60% of consultants.


____________________

...This nonsense highlights how badly consultants’ performance is being managed.

____________________


“This nonsense highlights how badly consultants’ performance is being managed. A proper culture of performance management for consultants and other NHS staff must be implemented if we are to avoid incidents of poor performance.


“Despite the increased pay, there is still a shortage of consultants in some parts of the country, in hospitals in deprived areas and in specialities such as geriatric medicine. This makes some trusts reliant on locum consultants, who provide less continuity of care for patients as well as being more expensive for the NHS.


Excerpts:  By Mike Broad - 3rd July 2013


Related posts by Deb:

   
   


photo credit: - born1945 Tom Brandt Flickr cc

Deb Nystrom, REVELN's insight:
  • This open blog window into healthcare consulting shows problem in implementation with performance management in healthcare.  The flaws mentioned or implied include:  
  • fragmented ownership of the system;
  
  • lack of clarity IF there is a performance system;
  
  • performance indicators are opaque, unclear;
 
  • performance appraisal is seen as a non-implemented solution to determining consultant performance pay;
  • contracting (deliverables) with consultants is flawed 
   
  • including the hours consultants can be contacted for help;
   
  • the way decisions were made is unclear, including whether or not the consultants fully support the hours they are available to help those they serve;
   

...and more.


This makes for a handy, current case-study-in-progress (like open source) for performance management systems, the 2013 and international version.  ~  Deb

more...
No comment yet.