Talent and Performance Development
2.1K views | +2 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.
Rescooped by Deb Nystrom, REVELN from Business Brainpower with the Human Touch
Scoop.it!

Board Members and the Trouble With Stock Compensation & Social Responsibility

Board Members and the Trouble With Stock Compensation & Social Responsibility | Talent and Performance Development | Scoop.it

"Could board pay be contributing to corporate actions that brought about BP’s Gulf of Mexico oil spill and the 2008 financial crisis?"


Paying outside board members with equity grants is becoming increasingly popular. Unfortunately, new research suggests that it leads to companies with less socially responsible behavior. This investigation comes at a time of public outcry over business actions that have had a negative impact on societal and environmental interests, including BP’s oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 and the 2008 financial crisis.


_____________________
 
"...director stock compensation in a given year exhibited higher financial performance in later years [and] lower levels of responsibility to communities"...

_____________________

   

Research into social performance ratings and director compensation data for more than 1,100 U.S. public companies between 1998 and 2006 showed that while companies with high levels of outside director stock compensation in a given year exhibited higher financial performance in later years, “they also showed lower levels of responsibility to communities as measured by their charitable giving, relations with indigenous peoples, community employment and economic development, and support for basic public services,” write Yuval Deutsch and Mike Valente (both of Schulich School of Business, York University). 

  
A similar effect was evident with environmental performance and with human rights measures.

   

The findings suggest that paying outside directors with stock incentivizes them to ignore other stakeholders.


Via The Learning Factor
Deb Nystrom, REVELN's insight:

Problems with compensation create a whole range of unintended consequences, even disasters.  This view of executive and board leadership pay is worth a look from an ethical, values based perspective as well as a monetary one.  ~  Deb

more...
The Learning Factor's curator insight, August 13, 2013 6:30 PM

Does paying outside board members with equity grants lead to less socially responsible behavior?

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.
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!

Kohn, Herzberg and Pay: Challenging Behaviorist Dogma

Kohn, Herzberg and Pay:  Challenging Behaviorist Dogma | Talent and Performance Development | Scoop.it

Alfie Kohn's contribution to performance management, Pay-for-Performance and performance based organizations is well said in this short paragraph featuring the classic work of Frederick Herzberg, author of, The Motivation to Work.


Excerpt:


_________________________

The jazziest, most expensive and elaborate comp system ever devised can never do anything other than ...take you only to the baseline, the zero point.
 

_________________________


Frederick Herzberg's career was devoted to proving the following revolutionary principle: just because paying people inadequately can be demotivating doesn't imply that paying people better (or more skillfully) will be motivating.


The jazziest, most expensive and elaborate comp system ever devised can never do anything other than prevent some problems.


It can take you only to the baseline, the zero point. And if you become preoccupied with the topic, it can distract you from attending to what can move an organization forward -- projects such as meeting people's needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competence

From:  articles by alfie kohn


Photo:  by 401(K) 2013 Flickr


Related articles by Deb:

    


 

Deb Nystrom, REVELN's insight:

I have been convinced about Kohn's approach through my experience of seeing what makes the difference in large, complex organizations.  

Setting the "stars" or "community" question aside, based on hire-fire values, what really creates motivation is never, ever, ever going to be first about the pay for most people in the long view.  


Unless you happen to not mind, or prefer turnover and churn in the ranks, this point of view is worth a serious look in research as well as performance and talent development decision making.  ~  D

more...
No comment yet.