Manager's Appraisal

Today the normal procedure is that managers perform an appraisal procedure for their subordinates at least once a year. Promotions, demotions and salary updates are normally based on the results of this appraisal. My question is who performs appraisal for managers? An obvious answer is their manager up to CEO, who is accountable to the board of directors. The problem with this answer is here their manager will perform their appraisal as subordinates. And my question is who will assess their work as managers? In other words who decides whether they are good managers or not? So call 180 degree appraisal in my experience seldom works: who will take a risk to say something really serious to their managers?

Before we can reason about who decides whether the manager is good or bad there is simpler question to be addressed: what does it mean to be a good manager and for whom? Good for whom? Presumably for the business organization (the Company). In other words those managers are good who contribute to fulfilling the Company mission proportionally to their compensation. What is the Company mission? Too many people still believe that it's to maximize the shareholder value. In other words to protect private and public funds invested in the company. In reality it's not that simple. As P. Drucker claims to be profitable and at large is merely a price to stay in the business on the long haul. If so that what is the long term mission of the Company? The most leading experts follow the P. Drucker premise that the Company mission is to ensure long term wealth generation and personal growth for their local communities. How is it related to the current globalization trend is a separate story (perhaps another blog).

Here is a short list of what the Manager has to do in order to contribute to the Company long term mission:

1. To ensure that employees the Manager is responsible for have ALL necessary conditions for productive work (salary, desk, chair and computer are only part of it, see A. Maslow needs hierarchy)

2. To ensure steady extending of the company market share and development of new products and services

3. To set high quality and productivity standards, which will keep the Company above competition

4. To get rid employees, who by this way or another violate #1, #2, #3

The common belief is that the Manager has to keep his subordinate accountable. That's true, but without ensuring right conditions that would turn into permanent intimidation, micro-management, and the worst - the loss of the best people, who will just decide to try their luck elsewhere.

Today perspectives of personal growth constitute a lion share of employee work conditions package. Times when manual workers performed dirty job they hated for some money to put food on their tables are over. At least at the high tech industry. Now in order to survive the Company needs the best people it can attract. But the best people normally want to be better, they want to grow. They just spend too much time at office to afford otherwise.

To be able to grow we have to work with right people. Practical experience constitutes about 90% of the personal growth and we normally learn from each other. For that reason #4 is so important: we have to get rid of "wrong" people not just because they do not justify their salary, but because they deprive the "right" people from normal working conditions.

Who are the right people? Who can decide? Managers, for sure, who by themselves should be the right people. Sounds like a egg and chicken problem. In a sense it is, but here are three basic traits I would suggest to consider:

1. Mental health. Korzybsky and Maslow give some very good insights. Too much needs to be said here (another blog, sigh). In short, too knowledgeable engineer, who has serious communication and cooperation problems, might be not the best choice (We need geeks, who are socially responsible - Kent Beck).

2. Ability and willingness to learn fast technical and non-technical stuff. Every company has enough technology and corporate politics specifics, which everyone just needs to know. The faster the better.

3. Good, preferably wide, engineering and general (art, music, science) education. People coming for outside could very often enrich the Company technology and process portfolio by just bringing another perspective.

Who should perform this appraisal I still do not know, but at least there is an initial check list to start with. Good managers might be able to do it for themselves.