It's time to reinvent management. You can help.

Humanocracy

Learning and feedback

greg-stevenson's picture

The nature of traditional performance management is to assume that everyone is equal and that time doesn't exist. It is what pops out of neo-classical economics.This means that two employees given the same goal are judged on their results. Carrot and stick mechanisms are implemented at various levels of sophistication...

By Greg Stevenson on September 26, 2012
micha-roon's picture

Performance is all about value. Value to the company and to the team. Lets just measure the perceived value of people and stop trying to measure their performance.

The people who know you best are those you work with every day. I hear countless stories about "that lazy guy in...

By Micha Roon on September 26, 2012
mike-caracalas's picture
Traditional performance management offers companies a mechanism of control-- control over compensation and bonus budgets primarily, but also control over how people are evaluated.  This need for control is driven by fear on the part of the company (fear of being taken advantage of, fear of losing control over
...
By Mike Caracalas on September 25, 2012
david-physick's picture

"The trouble with most performance management systems is that they have forgotten the people."  This or something very close to that statement was uttered by McDonalds Chief People Officer in an interview Autumn 2011.  What we want to see evolve in organisations is an environment in which people want to...

By David Physick on September 24, 2012
john-roger-grimshaw's picture

Focus on the customer perspective - the only worthwhile metric is a happy client. Develop a shared language for those soft skills around Vision and Values - done by initiating discussion on the relevant topics (if needs be do some Process Mapping to look for areas of potential disagreement -...

By John Roger Grimshaw on September 23, 2012
bard-c-papegaaij's picture

The conventional model of Performance Management puts too much emphasis on the performance indicators and not enough on the performer. It also assumes that performance is simply a matter of doing the right things: follow the formula and you will get the desired results. What it fails to acknowledge is...

By Bard C. Papegaaij on September 22, 2012
cheryl-doig's picture

This model is divided into three parts. The first is professional expectations - a conversation between leadership and  individual about their strengths and areas for development based on their job role and the company ethos. The second is personal personal performance - the individual being supported to develop goals that...

By Cheryl Doig on September 22, 2012
uwe-niehaus's picture

First of all, the performance discussion requires to be a dialogue between who produces the outcome and his coordinator/boss/superior. An exchange on what we wanted to reach, what we did reach & what are the main causes; input bottom-up and top-down, creating a joint understanding.

Secondly, in the same conversation...

By Uwe Niehaus on September 22, 2012
isaiah-mcpeak's picture

Continuous Learning as a model looks at every part of your company, from end-to-end, upside down, inside out—and it does it all the time. The only way to accomplish this task is with software, which must therefore be intuitive if not fun. Here's a specific picture:

  • A company takes People's
  • ...
By Isaiah McPeak on September 21, 2012
rob-bartlett's picture

My model is not a radical change. the organization would continue to set goals that can be traced back to strategic plan and tied to the balance sheet. I would eliminate the formal performance review. In it's place at least 66% of at risk compensation would be ties to the...

By Rob Bartlett on September 21, 2012