T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
876.1 | | XANADU::FLEISCHER | without vision the people perish (381-0899 ZKO3-2/T63) | Thu Jul 27 1989 17:55 | 14 |
| re Note 876.0 by IND::MISRAHI:
> Has any one had (or heard of ) the situation where one doesn't
> like or agree to a Performance Appraisal (PA) and refused to sign it ?
I have been told that signing the performance review merely
signifies that you did indeed have a chance to read it, not
that you "approve" of it.
(I once signed a performance review, and considered it a
"done deal", only to have the boss' boss ask to have it
changed. And then I was asked to sign it again!)
Bob
|
876.2 | my thoughts | TERPIN::SUSEL | | Thu Jul 27 1989 18:04 | 8 |
| signing a performance review, to my knowledge means that you agree
and understand what was written.
I knew of someone who refused to sign it, and words were changed....
Be prepared to go to your manager, and possibly personnel if you
refuse, though.
|
876.3 | | SCARY::M_DAVIS | Eat dessert first;life is uncertain. | Thu Jul 27 1989 18:08 | 8 |
| A performance appraisal is simply the writing down of a conversation
between you and your manager. It formalizes the dialog. When you sign
it, you acknowledge that the dialog happened, and that this is
what was said. In many cases, the employee is asked to write part of
the performance appraisal.
in my experience,
Marge
|
876.4 | | HOCUS::KOZAKIEWICZ | Shoes for industry | Thu Jul 27 1989 18:39 | 5 |
| Marge is correct. Refusal to sign doesn't stop the appraisal from
going into your personnel file as part of your permanent record.
Al
|
876.5 | | DLOACT::RESENDEP | Live each day as if it were Friday | Thu Jul 27 1989 19:37 | 24 |
| The signature indicates that you have seen the appraisal; nothing more.
It protects Digital from having someone come back later and say that
documents were put into their Personnel folder that they never saw. It
protects the employee from managers who might do something like that.
I once had an employee not only refuse to sign the appraisal; the
person also refused to read it or to listen to me when I read it to
him/her. There was a severe performance problem, and the employee knew
it; I had discussed it with him/her at length on many occasions. I
think refusing to have any contact whatsoever with the appraisal was a
desperate, last-ditch effort to avoid what was inevitable.
I got Personnel into the picture immediately, not because I needed the
employee's signature (I didn't) but because the employee had refused to
read the appraisal. I didn't feel it would be right to put a document
in someone's personnel folder when the person had no idea what was in
it. A Personnel person sat with me and insisted that the employee
listen while I read the appraisal. We then discussed it, item by item,
and the employee was unable to refute anything other than a couple of
little nits. He/she still refused to sign, but it went into his/her
file anyway, with a note by me stating briefly what had happened, and
initialed by the Personnel person.
Pat
|
876.6 | Pertinent part of review form we use: | CSSE32::RHINE | Jack Rhine - DTN: 381-2439 | Thu Jul 27 1989 23:33 | 19 |
|
Employee's Comments (if any) __________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
*Signature of Employee __________________________ Date _______________
*This signature merely verifies that this evaluation has been discussed
with the employee and does not express approval or disapproval with its
contents.
|
876.7 | It's called a mess | SVBEV::VECRUMBA | Infinitely deep bag of tricks | Fri Jul 28 1989 00:06 | 17 |
|
re .0
It has happenned. Officially, your signature acknowledges that you
have read the appraisal and understand its contents, not that you
agree/approve. You may write a rebuttal, documented as much as possible,
to support your case, and also have that filed with personnel at the
same time.
If you believe that you are being treated unprofessionally and/or
incompetently, for example, your manager refuses to solicit positive
information, then you should consider going to personnel.
I wish whomever it is luck.
/Peters
|
876.8 | Hey, Lets talk this over.. | LIOVAX::CRAPAROTTA | Physical T5-Virtual T7 | Fri Jul 28 1989 08:44 | 10 |
| I myself have on one instance refused to sign an appraisal. It did
contain some things that I felt it shouldn't have. After talking
it over with our manager and it was settled to both of our satisfaction.
Any manager that would put something in your personel file WITHOUT
discussing it with you first, should be fired.. I have never heard
of a manager at Digital doing this, and doubt that I will (I hope)..
Joe
|
876.9 | | BEING::POSTPISCHIL | Always mount a scratch monkey. | Fri Jul 28 1989 09:18 | 11 |
| Some people in this topic have said the signature only indicates that
you have read the document. That's not true. Judging by text entered
here and on my own review, it seems the phrasing varies from place to
place. The ones used around here indicate that the signer is satisfied
their views have been incorporated into the body of the review.
I would expect supervisors to permit the signer to change it to
indicate only that the person has read it.
-- edp
|
876.10 | It happens | MDVAX3::SLATTERY | | Fri Jul 28 1989 09:46 | 9 |
| re .8
> Any manager that would put something in your personel file WITHOUT
> discussing it with you first, should be fired.. I have never heard
> of a manager at Digital doing this, and doubt that I will (I hope)..
At least one manager has done this. You learn to look at your check stub
very closely around review time to see if you got a raise or promoted.
|
876.11 | thankx | BMT::MISRAHI | This page intentionally left Blank | Fri Jul 28 1989 10:14 | 3 |
| Interesting comments - thank you.
/Jeff
|
876.12 | Watch out | ARGUS::HARVEY | Lobstrocities | Mon Jul 31 1989 10:28 | 9 |
|
If it comes from management or personel be a sceptic, neither
are in business to protect you. They move and shift like a
dancer to fit the mood of the day. be careful.
My $.02
Luck to you
DH
|
876.13 | Please don't generalize | EXIT26::STRATTON | I (heart) my wife | Mon Jul 31 1989 21:24 | 15 |
| re .12 and
> If it comes from management or personel be a sceptic, neither
> are in business to protect you. They move and shift like a
> dancer to fit the mood of the day. be careful.
I disagree.
I'm a manager. I will be measured (in part) on the
performance of the people who report to me. They will
perform better if I help "protect" them (as you phrased
it).
Jim Stratton
|
876.14 | So be it (A-MEN) | ARGUS::HARVEY | | Tue Aug 01 1989 09:00 | 10 |
|
It's no surprise that you disagree. So i'm wrong. As we all know
management NEVER makes errors...
So let's just say that we agree to disagree. I really don't want
to go down a rat hole about this.
So if you'd like to continue this we can do so by mail.
.12 author
|
876.15 | Personal experience aside | AGENT::LYKENS | The Tellurians are coming... | Tue Aug 01 1989 09:23 | 16 |
|
re .12 and .14
I too am a manager. I am also human. I do make mistakes and
errors. Individual contributors are also human. They make
mistakes and errors. I am tired of being lumped together as
one of "them." I do not make statements like beware of individual
contributors, they're shiftless and will do anything to avoid
work. I do not make these types of generalizations because they
simply are not true in most cases. Even if in my personal
experience it were the case, I believe it still would not be
fair to make such a statement. Please .12, don't fall into the
us and them mentality. WE are human. WE work for Digital. WE
make mistakes.
Terry Lykens
|
876.16 | | LESLIE::LESLIE | Andy ����� Leslie, CSSE/VMS | Tue Aug 01 1989 09:29 | 4 |
| As to .14, Jim didn't claim that NO managers make the errors you
describe, he asked you not to generalise - which is vastly different.
- ���
|
876.17 | Personnel is OK | WECARE::BAILEY | Corporate Sleuth | Tue Aug 01 1989 10:16 | 22 |
| Personnel people are also here as much to protect you, the employee,
as they are to serve Digital -- That's HOW they serve Digital. There
are always poor examples to be found, but lumping them together
is another unfair generalization.
Obviously you should look out for yourself, and if you suspect a
problem beneath the surface, use whatever diplomatic skills and
resources you have to investigate -- assume nothing. But, for the
most part, I think managers and personnel folk can be trusted to
be reasonable and helpful if YOU are. If you have an antagonistic
attitude, human beings will react to that, and then, of COURSE, you
can expect trouble. You literally ask for it. But everyone (including
managers and personnel folk) has their rules and guidelines, mostly
quite clear and public, and they are also appraised against them.
If they are off base they will suffer the same ramifications you
would. If you are confronted with one of the "bad apples", use
the Open Door to discuss it (rationally and calmly) with THEIR manager.
Boy, one wonders what experiences *someone* had to be so bitter,
yes?!
Sherry
|
876.18 | | LESLIE::LESLIE | Andy ����� Leslie, CSSE/VMS | Tue Aug 01 1989 10:59 | 4 |
| Oh I dunno, to be fair, any length of time in DEC and you'll see good
and bad examples of all sorts of DEC employees...
- ���
|
876.19 | You can find all types somewhere | REGENT::GETTYS | Bob Gettys N1BRM 235-8285 | Tue Aug 01 1989 16:03 | 16 |
| As a 16 year employee who is not a manager (nor has ever
been), I will say that the good managers that I have had DO
protect you from disturbances so that you can do your job
better.
My two experiences with personell have been very
different. My first, when I was hired, was very lucky and
positive. (He found my resume cleaning out his predecessors
desk!) My second at a job change time was very bad and I got NO
help at all from personell at that time (other than what they
were forced to do by my hiring cost center).
I would guess, based on my experience, that the deeper
the @#%$ you're in, the less you can expect out of personell.
/s/ Bob
|
876.20 | Indeed! | FISCUS::HARVEY | | Tue Aug 01 1989 17:13 | 15 |
|
re .17...
Oh forgive me, a lowely EMPLOYEE, for having an opinion opposed
to yours. I said I would not go down a rat hole, and I will
not, however I find your tone,ie" ...to protect you, the
employee", indeed, condecending and patronizing.
As far as the "Open Door Policy" there's a concept!! Try using
it once yourself, then we'll talk OFF-LINE.
Author .12,.14 & now .19
Be well
DH
|
876.21 | Nothings perfect - but | REGENT::GETTYS | Bob Gettys N1BRM 235-8285 | Tue Aug 01 1989 17:44 | 5 |
| I should have added that I have used the ODP (once) and
it work as it was supposed to. As far as I'm concerned it can
and does work.
/s/ Bob
|
876.22 | | DLOACT::RESENDEP | Live each day as if it were Friday | Tue Aug 01 1989 18:20 | 17 |
| An excellent manager once told me that the secret to success for any
manager in Digital is to treat the people who report to you in such a
way as to earn their loyalty. If you do that, they will "walk over hot
coals" for you and make you a hero. Although it's getting less and
less common in this company, I still believe the truly good managers
(and there *are* some) manage according to that philosophy.
RE: <<< Note 876.19 by REGENT::GETTYS "Bob Gettys N1BRM 235-8285" >>>
> I would guess, based on my experience, that the deeper the @#%$ you're
> in, the less you can expect out of personell.
That has certainly been my experience, in every dealing I've ever had
with them, both as a manager and as an individual contributor over the
11+ years I've been with the company.
Pat
|
876.23 | | SALSA::MOELLER | Mean, with a large deviation | Tue Aug 01 1989 19:11 | 7 |
| < Note 876.19 by REGENT::GETTYS "Bob Gettys N1BRM 235-8285" >
>I would guess, based on my experience, that the deeper
>the @#%$ you're in, the less you can expect out of personell.
In other words, the more you need them, the worse they do ?
karl
|
876.24 | Let's be polite and rational | EXIT26::STRATTON | I (heart) my wife | Tue Aug 01 1989 22:45 | 11 |
| Can we refrain from "Personnel-bashing", please? If you
have had a negative experience with Personnel, and want
to describe it, please try to avoid generalizations and
vagueness as much as possible.
In other words, "my personnel rep was unable to answer
the questions I had about the RSOP" is much preferable
to "no one in Personnel knows anything".
Jim Stratton (co-moderator)
|
876.25 | Limited power and cause of problems. | ULTRA::BUTCHART | | Wed Aug 02 1989 09:21 | 21 |
| Having had mostly good, and no really bad experiences with personnel,
I'd say they do ok. Like most organizations in DEC, their ability
to MAKE something happen is very limited. The personnel people in
larger sites/organizations seem to have more "clout" than in the
smaller, more isolated sites/organizations.
Personnel can't "solve" a bad manager - and it never could. Nor, from
stories of friends, are many other companies' personnel organizations
any better at that. The only short term solution for a bad manager
(IMHO) is to leave, as soon as possible. Cold comfort if you're in a
small organization or site and can't easily hunt for a new position,
but ...
Of course, I have also seen a LOT of my fellow employees blaming
management and personnel, when they were at least part, if not a
majority, of the problem. Not unlike the times I have had people
tell me what a horrible time they had in a restaurant that I rather
enjoyed. After watching how they act and treat others, I can often
understand - and my sympathies go out to the restaurant.
/Dave
|
876.26 | Back to the original topic ... | IND::WELLIS | Hey babe, time for a new transition ... | Wed Aug 02 1989 13:51 | 20 |
|
The appraisal forms in my district have two places to
sign; a line with a label disclaiming that your signature
signifies agreement, and also the front page (with no disclaimer).
I would personally advise along these lines: most disagreements
should be negotiated through with your manager or manager's manager,
possibly using Human Resources as a facilitator (my experience is
that most managers will try to be reasonable and flexible if
approached reasonably and strategically).
However, in those rare cases (that happen in every company)
when a manager displays unprofessional, malicious, and even
bizarre behavior in any significant portion of the performance of
his or her duties, you are wise to SIGN NOTHING on the appraisal
form before contacting an attorney specializing in employee
rights issues (in order to see if a signature could compromise
future grievance or legal action).
William Ellis
|
876.27 | More explanation of my "trial" | REGENT::GETTYS | Bob Gettys N1BRM 235-8285 | Wed Aug 02 1989 23:12 | 24 |
| Since I suspect that rep .24 was directed at me (and if
I'm wrong - I hereby appologize!), let me say a bit more about
the situation (I'm still going to leave out details).
My then manager and I had a severe disagreement on my
performance and his opinion was not born out by my peers in the
group. However, I did not see the "handwriting on the wall" soon
enough and he set up termination proceedings for me. I got zero!
support from my personnel rep (he supported my manager 110%). He
even stood in his office and screamed at me (I do mean
screamed!) more than once in the process of my finding another
job in DEC. Another fact that bears here is that my previous
review with the manager this guy replaced was very good
including an adjustment in range. Luckily, the ODP worked here
as his boss allowed me (encouraged me, in fact) to get another
job in DEC even though the personnel rep and my manager was
adamantly against it. BTW - I didn't even try to hide the
conflict from my interviewers on any job interview I went on. As
a closing - my next review with my new manager (obviously I was
succesful in getting around these guys) was again a very good
review with another adjustment in range! And I had multiple job
offers to select from.
/s/ Bob
|
876.28 | bad experiences SHOULD be the exception, are they? | SELL::MAYANK | I am working on - am I ? | Thu Aug 03 1989 00:44 | 40 |
| re .27
Bob, I am not sure from your explanation what the personnel rep
actually 'did' to stop you from applying elsewhere, but yes, he did do
everything to act like someone in his position should not. And what a
match there is of your case to my wife's case. She had been troubled
by her manager, and kept silent until he came out and openly yelled at
her for poor performance. She verified from her supervisor that she
had done a good job (she had received a "2" rating after her first year
with DEC and had worked hard before and immediately after her maternity
leave in the second year). After verifying, she went and complained to
her personnel rep.
Guess what: she received "sympathy" but no action. The manager was
setting her up for a bad review inspite of excellent performance, and
she was told that "he must have had a bad day". Mind you, i am not
doing "personnel bashing", but when you have a severely negative
experience (Bob's case also sounds like that), you tend to think "does
digital need such people ?"
Mind you, she used ODP after that when another 'major' incident
happened (you can read note #15 for that) and the resolution was left
to the same personnel rep!! who again did 'nothing' to help...
And it is so frustrating for me to feel powerless from not being able
to do anything about this (even frustrating for 'my' management people,
who are excellent and cannot understand why this has to go on!)
And yes, I agree with DH (Harvey?) when he/she scorns at the statement
"to protect the employee".. hey, aren't we all born equal ? but have
you ever heard of "protecting the manager" ? may be its because that is
automatic in the system..
BTW, what does IMHO mean ?
I am dejected when someone says "you can't do anything about a 'bad'
manager." Do you think Ken Olsen or Jack Smith or John Sims think that
way ? (yes, that's how far up we have thought of going).
- mayank
|
876.29 | | STAR::MFOLEY | Rebel without a Clue | Thu Aug 03 1989 01:04 | 26 |
|
IMHO = In My Honest Opinion
RE: ODP and walking away from a problem. I've found it best to
seek and find another job if the current job isn't working out.
It's best in the long run. Poor management is almost, but not
quite, impossible to climb over. It's whether you choose to fight
the battle and the stress for a job you believe it good. Myself,
it was always easier to smile and get another job so that not
to burn bridges. It's a lesson I learned very quickly when I joined
DEC 9 years ago and have stuck by it. For my last position, after
returning from 2� months at DECworld, there were just too many
fundamental differences in the way I wanted and believed things
should be done and the way my management wanted and believed it
should be done. So I left. I got another job and I'll tell you, it
was the best thing cuz I feel at home now. My views and beliefs of
how things should be done mesh nearly perfectly with my current
managements..
Bottom line: If you can avoid it, do so. Poor management will be
found out eventually and with the way I believe DEC is going,
people who make it unnecessarily difficult for those of us trying
to do a job will find themselves out of a job.
mike
|
876.30 | FYI | ULTRA::BUTCHART | | Thu Aug 03 1989 08:57 | 10 |
| re .29:
Or, for the more modest (and less trustworthy)
IMHO = In My Humble Opinion
But I'm an engineer, so maybe Humble isn't it. -)
/Dave
|
876.31 | Do a good job for Digital... | KYOA::KOCH | Yes, Ed Koch is my brother... | Thu Aug 03 1989 10:01 | 18 |
| RE: last few replies
I underwent the same problem. I left Software, to go into F&A. My
manager was from outside the company. My reviews were one-sided and I
received some of my lowest ratings, even though I and the people I provided
services for said I was doing a great job. My problem was that I tried to
accomplish too much and could not prioritize them. I wound up getting rated
on trying to do everything instead of being rated on the important items. It
was partially my fault, but I had done the same thing in Software and always
got rewarded for trying to do too much. After 2 years, I moved back into
Software and again started receiving high ratings in my next review.
Even though I disagreed with my ratings, I did not give up on
Digital. I have been back in software for over 2 years now and am doing very
well. The key is not to let a person stand in your way of doing a good job
for Digital. You may not be able to do a good job for them no matter how
hard you try. If you want to do a good job for Digital, as the Marines would
say, "we are always looking for a few good people (literary license taken)".
|
876.32 | To sign or not to sign! | ALBANY::LOMASNEY | | Thu Aug 03 1989 11:44 | 5 |
| I once had a verbal PA. Two years later, I discovered it, (in written
form), in my personnel file. To my suprise, the manager at that
time had a secretary sign my name. Does it make a difference if
you sign it? I think not. Its' worth is only as valuable as the
exsisting relationship that you have with your boss.
|
876.33 | | POCUS::KOZAKIEWICZ | Shoes for industry | Thu Aug 03 1989 11:50 | 30 |
| I've said this before, but it bears repeating: Personnel are management
consultants, not employee advocates.
Corrective action is a business decision, insofar as the necessity
of living with the business consequences are the responsibility of
line management. Personnel does not have P&L responsibility, nor are
they measured by business performance metrics. It would be
unreasonable to expect that they be given the power to arbitrarily
intervene in situations (other than where their charter is clear) as
a result. Personnel is there simply to ensure that the corrective
action policy is followed properly.
Remember, corrective action starts long before the first verbal
warning. As some point the employee should have had a problem solving
session with his or her manager. During that session, the nature
of the problem and the responsibilities of the employee should be
made clear. The same process gets repeated (but with more formality)
at the verbal warning and subsequent stages. The employee is supposed
to understand unambiguously what is expected of him.
Personnel will not pass judgment on whether the responsibilities
of the employee as mapped out by management are reasonable; like
I said above, how management uses its employees is a business
decision, and Personnel doesn't have direct responsibility for
that. For the unfortunate employee who finds himself in a situation
where his or her manager is being legitimately unreasonable, the ODP
is the proper way to resolve this.
Al
|
876.34 | I still don't understand !!! | SELL::MAYANK | I am working on - am I ? | Thu Aug 03 1989 12:13 | 23 |
| Al,
As I said, my wife has tried to use the ODP since the management is
trying 'very hard' to be legitimately unreasonable (since she has
complained about them). For all others, she is actively looking for
another position but it is hard during these times.
The ODP process has not worked for her - she just repeatedly gets told
"go back and work with these same people and do exactly as they say"
- and mind you, we are talking about personal harassment, rude and
offensive behavior, unreasonable deadlines, etc. so ODP IS JUST NOT
WORKING.
And I really am not able to understand those who keep saying "do a good
job for Digital, don't care how your management is - if they trouble
you, get out from that group." Yes, get out sure, but what about all
the disrespect, mental agony, harassment that you have faced - WITHOUT
ANY PROTECTION ?
Please, doesn't anyone here know what I am talking about ? or has my
wife met a real unusual mgmt in DEC - in that case it does not belong
in DEC at all....
|
876.35 | a view from the UK | CHEFS::BUXTON | | Thu Aug 03 1989 13:20 | 44 |
| I feel so sad about .12 and the view that managers and personnel
conspire against the workers. Not because the author holds that
view but because her/his experiences have caused that view to be
held. It smacks of some poor management somewhere along the line.
A manager is no more than an employee who has more responsibilities
than he/she can handle alone. To achieve their tasks/role/goals
they need help from other employees who report to them. Management
therefore has an extra burden of responsibility attached to it over
and above the tasks/goals. The responsibility for the welfare of
the people helping. It's a two way relationship. The manager depends
on the support of the employee just as much as the employee on the
manager.
Personnel are in place to help managers manage. Just as there are
poor employees there are poor managers and poor personnel people.
Even good ones somtimes screw-up now and again; except me ;-) of
course.
I have managed people with an 'us and them' syndrome and have found
that it is relatively easy to convert them to the 'we' style. That
sounds sooooo patronising but it's not meant to be. Remember that
managers have managers too. My view is that Ken Olsen reports to
his wife who reports in turn to her mother! :-) Shareholders are
in the loop there somewhere too.
With respect to the question of signing performance reviews; I believe
it goes beyond courtesy to allow an employee to review the review
and to incorporate their views. In an ideal world there never should
be a disagreement. Irrespective of what my manager may or may not
write about me he still decides the size of my review.
I guess I've been lucky as in seven or eight years of man management
in Digital this has never arisen. Of the few times it has happened
to me where I havn't had the chance to sign, the 'error' has been
so insignificant that its not been worth the bother to get things
changed. Generally these things are not hung around peoples heads
like mill stones but are quickly forgotten.
I believe that .12 DH needs to find a manager with whom mutual trust
can be shared; but that's just a humble opinion.
Bucko...
|
876.36 | we hope the sun shines everywhere, Bucko | SELL::MAYANK | I am working on - am I ? | Thu Aug 03 1989 18:43 | 30 |
| Re .35
well said - you have a 'humanistic' approach and anyone would love to
work 'with' you - even if there were severe deadlines and time
presssures.
Talking about PA, do you think an employee, no matter how hard he/she
works for the sake of Digital, can expect a good review from a supervisor
who says (direct quote):
"You also do not have the professional maturity (or responsibility) to
tell me what a reasonable assignment is, or is not.
Your job is to complete the assignments I give you, by the deadlines I
determine. That is it. And I ask you not to give me your excuses
for failure to meet deadlines, I ask you only for results."
And mind you, this is after "2" ratings for two consecutive years, and
months of trying to resolve problems through the ODP. And guess what:
the employee is told that this very same supervisor is to write her
review this year (last year it was a different person).
Now tell me whether the employee should sign the PA or not (if it is
highly unfair and untrue) ? (any guess whether it will be ?)
- mayank
PS: I do sympathize with DH after this horrible experience my wife has
had. Sure, my management is excellent, like Bucko describes, but 'bad'
experiences damage you permanently, as it has done to DH.
|
876.37 | | POCUS::KOZAKIEWICZ | Shoes for industry | Thu Aug 03 1989 21:35 | 32 |
| re: .36
It's unfair to ask an opinion about a specific situation, especially
one in which there is a personal involvement, when anyone who could
reply in here has absolutely no way of obtaining an objective
viewpoint.
I would like to address some points you bring up, though in a very
general sense. I don't know the specifics of your wife's situation,
and these comments aren't meant to apply to her.
First of all, one needs to define what is meant about the ODP
"working". The ODP does not guarantee that an employee will be
met with acquiescence; only that they will be heard. Personnel is
there to ensure that the process is made available to the employee,
though not, as I have stated before, to advocate the employees
viewpoint. If someone goes all the way to the top and does not
receive a satisfactory resolution, then one of two things is true:
Either the entire management chain is bone-headed, or the employee
is just "wrong". There is no other possibility that I can think of.
Second, good performance appraisals are not necessarily a sign of
a good manager; neither is a change from good to bad ratings when
the manager changes necessarily an indicator that the new manager
is no good. Delivering bad news to an employee is one of the most
difficult jobs a manager faces. Some managers can't do it - they
give poor or marginal performers acceptable or even good ratings
because it's easier than confronting the problem. Such are not
uncommon; these managers are simply not good at managing people.
Al
|
876.38 | Hang in there and draw strength from friends and co-workers | SVBEV::VECRUMBA | Infinitely deep bag of tricks | Fri Aug 04 1989 01:39 | 38 |
|
re .34
> And I really am not able to understand those who keep saying "do a good
> job for Digital, don't care how your management is - if they trouble
> you, get out from that group." Yes, get out sure, but what about all
> the disrespect, mental agony, harassment that you have faced - WITHOUT
> ANY PROTECTION ?
> Please, doesn't anyone here know what I am talking about ? or has my
> wife met a real unusual mgmt in DEC - in that case it does not belong
> in DEC at all....
I am in the middle of resolving a bad situation with a new manager.
(They inherited the situation.) I've worked both sides of the fence at
DEC (manager and senior technical), and there are, unfortunately, people
who do know what you are talking about. For me, my first problem was
waiting for my manager's manager to realize that the situation was not
one "I could fix" with my manager -- basically sending them mail saying:
"here, this is how I am being a professional about this situation and I
believe my manager is not."
Fortunately, I hope I've gotten a new lease, after over half a year of
misery. Situations like this are particularly difficult it you're
competent, work hard, have been a superior performer in the past, and
things are not working right.
I'm not surprised that the first reaction up the ODP chain would be
"work it out with your manager." What you have to do is document the
situation with specific examples, and leave your emotions behind as
much as possible. (They'll come out anyway.) Without that, no matter
how justified you feel, you'll only be a squeeky wheel as you go up
the chain. And remember, if the manager you work for isn't working out
and they were put in that position by _their_ manager, one level of
ODP may not be enough.
DEC culture, ODP and all else aside, your job is only as good as the
manager you work for.
|
876.39 | Might help to have independent personnel? | PARITY::JOSHI | Jagdish Joshi,518-276-2941,RPI,CIM | Fri Aug 04 1989 16:03 | 38 |
| Hello Fellow noters,
Let me add my two cents worth. The personnel, if I understand
correctly, are paid out of your cost center and hence they might not
be a nuetral body in situation of conflict even if they want to be.
This has been addressed in some other companies by having personnel
as a seperate function at corporate level and their own budget. In this
situation, there might be a nuetral position offered by personnel. Also,
under this circumstances they might be able to act.
Hopefully, we need to put an infrastructure in place to handle
such situation.
Well, In my limited experience, I had opportunity to deal with
both favourable and unfavourable situation. I had refused to sign the
review as I realized the information was not correctly portraying what
I had accomplished. Hence, I went to the internal customer and obtained
their letters objectively evaluating my work. Still, that feedback did
not help to resolve the deadlock. Finally, I decided to change job
as I could not see myself continuing there. The root cause of the problem,
in retrospect, was that I was working for committee whose objectives
were different from my groups. The metrics used for evaluation by my
ex-supervisor were not reflecting my achievement as perceived by
the committee. By the way, our group had very high attrition rate.(In
fact we use to joke with our boss that there should not be going away
party but party for those who are staying back.)
One lesson I learnt was that to let it go. Then make a new beginning
as there are so many positive people and all you need is to find one
and to have faith. Also, bring out your earlier experience to them,
not bitterly, but to make the new person realize that how the previous
person has impacted you in financial manner, in recognition, in
careerwise, and selfesteemwise. So then your new manager will hopefully take
corrective action if he believes in you. Eventhough my first experience
was not positive one, yet meeting other positive people helped me to
keep things in proper perspective. I am glad to be here in DEC.
|
876.40 | | IRT::MENDES | AI is better than no I at all | Tue Aug 08 1989 17:22 | 59 |
| Regarding the original question:
Seems to depend on the form. A "properly" designed form provides a
place to sign and date it, stating that the employee has received the
appraisal and had the opportunity to review it. That doesn't
necessarily imply agreement, and in fact, the employee should be able
to fill in a space or attach a document stating his or her point of
view. NOBODY else should be empowered to sign this for the employee; to
do so is fraudulent, and probably grounds for termination (which isn't
absolutely ruling out the possibility that it happens)!
An improperly designed form would not provide a place for the employee
to express disagreement. In that case, I would be disinclined to sign
the appraisal unless it came reasonably close to my views.
Does Personnel tend to support management over individuals? Probably!
Management and personnel are "administration", and represent "the
company". That doesn't mean it will always work out that way, but
Personnel will _tend_ to deal with a problem situation by advising
a manager how to achieve his or her goal without risk to the company.
In other words, if a manager says you are an incompetent boob who
should be terminated, Personnel will advise the manager what steps to
take to document your failures properly.
If you feel you're being treated unfairly, go to Personnel, use the
Open Door Policy, or even contact your lawyer (who has _your_ interests
at heart!). The advice given in several replies to get out of the
situation, if necessary by leaving the company, is probably the best
thing to do.
Sometimes, the problem is one of communication. You think you're doing
a great job ... but you haven't found out what your manager's
objectives are, and may be missing the target. The fact that you don't
entirely agree on objectives doesn't make either one of you right or
wrong. The manager probably has the greater responsibility for
establishing clear communications, but that doesn't help if the
communications aren't there. Take the example before, where someone was
working on too many things, but doing the best he or she could, and
churning out a lot of work. The individual thinks he or she is doing a
great job, certainly the best job possible under the circumstances. But
the manager may look at it as disorganized effort which fails to take
priorities into account. Both sides have a point.
When all is said and done, life isn't always fair. I've felt it
necessary to write a dissenting view on an appraisal (NOT at Digital),
and I once went so far as to provide a letter to an employee who once
reported to me for her to attach to an appraisal that was clearly
intended to set her up for an undeserved termination (likewise, NOT at
Digital). Didn't do much good for either of us, as I recall ...
From what I've seen, Digital may be less than perfect, but probably
tries as hard as any company to provide a favorable environment for the
individual to development. Given a bad situation, there should be some
understanding and support in moving into a different position and
giving it another try.
Guess that's why they invented feet - so you can get up and leave!
- Richard
|
876.41 | Empower Yourself | GIGI::SHERMAN | Barnacle 1 | Tue Aug 08 1989 17:59 | 15 |
|
My experince, for what it's worth --
I was in a very bad situation several years ago. New manager took-over
group: irrational, bullying, sarcastic, mean, etc., etc. My PR came
due several months after new manager arrived. New manager tried to
give me a "5" and get me fired. I did not sign the review; I *did*
elevate to personnel, then corporate personnel. PR was finally made
a "3," and I attached to it *a review of new manager,* so anyone reading
it would get both sides.
Never signed the review, just my rebuttal.
KBS
|
876.42 | Us Versus Them | LEAF::JONG | Steve Jong/NaC Pubs | Wed Aug 09 1989 11:39 | 21 |
| [Re:] several previous replies alluding to whose side Personnel is on:
I had occasion once, in this company, to report BOTH a manager and one
of his direct reports to their Personnel rep. I felt I was caught in
the middle of a personal dispute between the two of them, and I wanted
to see it stopped. I didn't try to side with either of them; I just
said they were fighting, and that it was spilling over into the
performance of their jobs.
I called the Personnel rep a few days later to follow up, and spoke
with the rep's manager. He said to me, "Yes, we're aware of the
situation with Bob and his employee. It will be dealt with." It
wasn't much, but the reference to "Bob" and to "his employee" was
chilling. I was tempted to reply, "Bob's employee has a name, too; do
you know what it is?" It was clear whose side Personnel was on.
Lest you say that I read too much into the remark, I can tell you that
the dispute was resolved by an apology by the employee, but not by the
manager. It takes two to fight, but I thought the resolution was
completely one-sided, and the manager got off, at least so far as I
know, unscathed.
|
876.44 | A really NIFTY idea! | DLOACT::RESENDE | We never criticize the competition directly. | Wed Aug 09 1989 20:27 | 10 |
| Re .41
> a "3," and I attached to it *a review of new manager,* so anyone reading
> it would get both sides.
>
> Never signed the review, just my rebuttal.
What a *GREAT* idea! Have to remember that one, JUST IN CASE!
Steve
|
876.45 | another kind of attachh | CLOSET::T_PARMENTER | No brain no pain | Thu Aug 10 1989 12:47 | 13 |
| Back when I was an RSX writer, I was pretty involved in DCL design and
compatibility as well as doing the DCL documentation. My boss, that
fine gentleman, Larry Sweeney, was a little baffled as to how I was
spending my time, since only half of it went into the actual writing of
manuals, i.e., my job as he saw it.
Larry's creative solution was to get the two engineers I worked most
closely with on these other issues to write reviews of what I was doing
with them, which he attached to his review of my writing prowess.
When I review people, I normally sit down with a draft of their review
and edit it with them. That way, we smooth out any differences before
they get out in public.
|
876.46 | there's no smoke without a fire !! | SELL::MAYANK | I am working on - am I ? | Mon Aug 14 1989 02:53 | 16 |
| Re .45:
> When I review people, I normally sit down with a draft of their review
> and edit it with them. That way, we smooth out any differences before
> they get out in public.
In our group, the mgmt does the same thing - it shows a very healthy
concern for the employee, which in turn translates into high morale and
willingness to go the extra mile.
Regarding PA forms, the one used in our group does have the space for
employee's attachment (or rebuttal). But IMHO, if the situation is so
bad that the employee feels distressed enough to not sign the PA and
has to attach a rebuttal, it is a clear _failure_ on the part of
MANAGEMENT, not the employee.
- mayank
|
876.47 | Reviews should never be a surprise | SVBEV::VECRUMBA | Infinitely deep bag of tricks | Mon Aug 14 1989 16:27 | 25 |
|
re .46
>> When I review people, I normally sit down with a draft of their review
>> and edit it with them. That way, we smooth out any differences before
>> they get out in public.
>
> In our group, the mgmt does the same thing - it shows a very healthy
> concern for the employee, which in turn translates into high morale and
> willingness to go the extra mile.
>
> Regarding PA forms, the one used in our group does have the space for
> employee's attachment (or rebuttal). But IMHO, if the situation is so
> bad that the employee feels distressed enough to not sign the PA and
> has to attach a rebuttal, it is a clear _failure_ on the part of
>
> MANAGEMENT, not the employee.
Managers who use reviews to "punish" employees -- especially when
it's a surprise to the employee -- are the #1 cause of employee morale
and productivity problems, and should not continue to be managers.
A review should _never_ be a surprise.
/peters
|
876.48 | BOY, DO I AGREE!!!!!!!1 | NCPROG::PEREZ | Out Dancing with Bears! | Mon Aug 14 1989 20:42 | 22 |
| re -.2
> Regarding PA forms, the one used in our group does have the space for
> employee's attachment (or rebuttal). But IMHO, if the situation is so
> bad that the employee feels distressed enough to not sign the PA and
> has to attach a rebuttal, it is a clear _failure_ on the part of
> MANAGEMENT, not the employee.
re -.1:
> it's a surprise to the employee -- are the #1 cause of employee morale
> and productivity problems, and should not continue to be managers.
> A review should _never_ be a surprise.
I've had managers that worked very hard to provide feedback during the
period between reviews so the review WASN'T a surprise. It sure makes
the review process less traumatic and demotivating.
I wish the information in this note had been around at the time of my
last review. Instead of signing the review I would have added a
rebuttal.
|
876.49 | Wazzat? | VAX4::BEELER | Foat Wurth, eye luv yew | Tue Aug 22 1989 02:05 | 8 |
| "Performace Appraisal"?????
I have not had one...much less been asked to sign one...for *at
least* 4 years...maybe 5...can't really remember when the last one
was......any further questions as to why I left my prior organization
that I had been with for 11 years????
Jerry
|
876.50 | good surprise is fine, Punishment is NOT | SELL::MAYANK | I am working on - am I ? | Tue Aug 22 1989 18:42 | 36 |
| Re: many previous replies.
> Managers who use reviews to "punish" employees -- especially when
> it's a surprise to the employee -- are the #1 cause of employee morale
> and productivity problems, and should not continue to be managers.
>
> A review should _never_ be a surprise.
Trying to *punish* and be *vengeful* is exactly what is happening in a
case I have referred to in postings earlier in this notesfile.
Review time has come for this employee, and this year's review is
negative, destructive, and completely contradictory to last year's
review (see below). Besides, it is a total *surprise* in its content,
since in March and May, there were meetings on this topic and the
employee was told that everything is *on track* and "no problems".
Last year's review: "2" rating (only overall rating given), great
growth potential, good interpersonal skills, independent work and good
technical abilities.
This year's review: individual ratings - "4" in IP skills (horrible
description), "4" in growth potential, "3" in tech abilities, and on
and on and on...
And all this because the employee has complained to "personnel" about
harassment at work !! Strange thing is, a higher up in personnel agreed
that incidents of harassment/intimidation have occurred, and yet this
same individual has seen and approved this PA !!!
Obvious choice is to not sign this PA, attach a rebuttal and wash your
hands off that group.. But is this in the spirit of complaint
resolution ??? any other suggestions ? As .45 said (above), such
people (who *destroy* employees) should not be allowed to continue as
managers in Digital !!!
|
876.51 | put their heads in an RA60 and spinup. | ZPOAC5::HWCHOY | This mind intentionally left blank. | Wed Aug 23 1989 01:20 | 6 |
|
� people (who *destroy* employees) should not be allowed to continue as
� managers in Digital !!!
such people should not be allowed to continue as employees of
Digital. This is an insult to KO's (and many of us) moral values.
|
876.52 | Yes, but will settle for "not a manager" | BROKE::MAYANK | I am working on - am I ? | Wed Aug 23 1989 02:39 | 10 |
| Re: .51
>> such people should not be allowed to continue as employees of
>> Digital. This is an insult to KO's (and many of us) moral values.
Well yes, that was my implication; but if not completely out of the
company, atleast not allowed to continue as a _manager_ where they have
positional power and can do extreme harm to other employees (such as
through PAs, as we have read in this topic).
|
876.53 | | SALSA::MOELLER | Nested assumption calls | Wed Aug 23 1989 18:48 | 6 |
| Mayank, I work in the field. You and your spousal unit have
some legitimate complaints. This is not the place for them. I'm
tired of seeing your lengthy replies, and have begun to 'next unseen'
right past them. Thought you'd like to know.
karl moeller SWS TUO
|
876.54 | Great, but how do you DO something about it??? | RIPPLE::FARLEE_KE | Insufficient Virtual...um...er... | Wed Aug 23 1989 18:56 | 16 |
| Re: .51
>> such people should not be allowed to continue as employees of
>> Digital. This is an insult to KO's (and many of us) moral values.
Ahh, but you see that's the whole rub, isn't it: If you are working
FOR someone like this, how do you convince *Digital* that your boss
should not be allowed to continue as an employee of Digital?
To put it bluntly, If you walk the ODP chain trying to get your
boss fired, who is more likely to be believed, you or your boss?
(or from the other side, who would you believe; your direct report
or one of his employees?), and as always, what is the cost of trying
to get your boss fired, and failing?
Kevin
|
876.55 | how about a .45 Magnum :?) | ZPOAC6::HWCHOY | This mind intentionally left blank. | Wed Aug 23 1989 22:56 | 4 |
| re: .-1
Thus somebody's advise : "CUT and RUN!"
|
876.56 | | STAR::MFOLEY | Rebel without a Clue | Thu Aug 24 1989 00:03 | 11 |
| RE: .55
Exactly.. Cut and run, and wait till your old boss gets a boss
that will burn his/her butt for gross negligence in doing their
job.. Then sit back and enjoy because you're the one who hasn't
burnt any bridges and still have something left of your wits and
a semi-normal blood pressure..
Works for me,
mike
|
876.57 | Mayank, I find your comments WORTHWHILE | LDP::LANDAU | Dick: W1IBN - Its Been Nice | Thu Aug 24 1989 11:55 | 12 |
| re .53:
>> Mayank, I work in the field. You and your spousal unit have
>> some legitimate complaints. This is not the place for them. I'm
>> tired of seeing your lengthy replies, and have begun to 'next unseen'
>> right past them. Thought you'd like to know.
For what it's worth, Mayank, I enjoy reading what you have to say. You
usually have an interesting perspective on things.
...Dick
|
876.58 | ok with me.. | TALLIS::ZANZERKIA | | Thu Aug 24 1989 13:10 | 7 |
| .53
You may be boared with Mayank's replies but they indeed are valid
points. His points are applicable to other DECee's too so this is
the place to discuss it. However you are right that discussions here
will not improve his wife's situation.
Robert
|
876.59 | Karl, learn to get the "real" message.. | SELL::MAYANK | I am working on - am I ? | Thu Aug 24 1989 19:36 | 27 |
| Re: .53
> ... This is not the place for them.
Karl, if you read carefully, my notes are not intended to complain
about a specific *person* in public, but to show the downside about the
process of problem resolution and management/employee conflicts
in Digital and how it works (effectively or not effectively, as the case
may be). To back up my claim about this process and its failure, I
sometimes use "live" data. I believe this is valid material for this
notesfile, since the "process" (ODP, review, etc.) affects all Deccies.
I especially think it's useful to bring out this downside since there
are lots of people who claim that "all" of Digital is sooo good, and
that if you have a "valid" complaint, then it will get resolved by the
corporation upholding the P&P. Sorry, this is not the grim reality
everywhere in Digital (though I will reiterate what I said before: that
my experience with *my* management is excellent. I am not saying this
to CMA. ;-) )
> I'm tired of seeing your lengthy replies, and have begun to 'next unseen'
> right past them. Thought you'd like to know.
That's certainly your option, and you are entitled to it. However,
there are others who may think otherwise and may benefit from them.
(BTW, you do not KNOW what a "lengthy" reply is.)
|
876.60 | Is there a moderator in the house? | SCAM::GRADY | tim grady | Thu Aug 24 1989 20:32 | 16 |
| > <<< Note 876.53 by SALSA::MOELLER "Nested assumption calls" >>>
>
> Mayank, I work in the field. You and your spousal unit have
> some legitimate complaints. This is not the place for them. I'm
> tired of seeing your lengthy replies, and have begun to 'next unseen'
> right past them. Thought you'd like to know.
>
>karl moeller SWS TUO
Congratulations for working in the field. Do you talk to customers
like that?
I truly think this one was uncalled for.
tim
|
876.61 | Please discuss the topic, not each other | EXIT26::STRATTON | I (heart) my wife | Thu Aug 24 1989 22:35 | 12 |
| The purpose of this conference is to discuss the way we
work at Digital. The purpose of this conference is not
to discuss each other.
If you'd like to make a comment about another noter, please
send him or her MAIL.
Subsequent notes that talk about other noters rather than
the topic will be returned to the authors and then deleted.
Jim Stratton (co-moderator)
|