There has been much debate about which performance management curve should be used- fixed versus flexible. Would like to get some thoughts on which strategy is more effective.
Actually, I think using the fixed performance measurement curve is just a way of admitting that you just can't manage people right.
1) The basic assumption is that you don't trust the managers measuring the performance of your employees. If you trusted your managers, you would assume that they will pick the right score when measure the performance of their employees. But, you obviously do not trust their view. You probably suspect them to pick scores that are too positive. That's why you force them to pick just a limited number of good ratings and to pick a certain number of bad ratings too.
2) Let's assume your fixed performance measurement system is actually working. You continuously get rid of those people who are underperformers. But you still have to rate down someone with the next review. You will eventually reach the point where the people you fire are better than the people you hire, IF the system was actually working.
3) It blurs your view. You always have the same numbers of top performers, underperformers and normal employees. There is no way to see whether all of your HR activities actually produce some value. And there is no way to take a deeper look into some of the results, maybe following the question WHY are there so many people underperforming in a given department (or maybe it's just the manager).
The article provided by Mr. Fox just focuses on whether the numbers are choosen in the right way, if you used a fixed system.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology