3
I ’ve always been skeptical of the “performance review” style of evaluating. I believe in a strengths-based method of casting – placing people in roles that take best advantage of each person’s unique mix of talents. Preparing for and then delivering (or receiving) a performance review seems about as pleasant as having a root canal. A fresh look at employee evaluations Architectural colleague shares new scale for assessing employees’ impact on the firm, community, world in areas of attitude, capability, performance. O P I N I O N
Ed Friedrichs
I’ve been spending a great deal of time with Don Clark, who runs the Reno-based architectural firm Cathexes . The name of the firm is the plural of cathexis, which is an investment of mental or emotional energy in a person, object, or idea. And Don does exactly that in everything he undertakes and with everyone with whom he works. As we were talking the other day about people management, Don shared his employee evaluation form with me. My first response was skepticism, until he began to explain it. Don uses three general areas of review; each has a few subcategories along with examples of how successful performance is to be evaluated. His categories are very much an inventory of culture and values. They are not granular, nor are they work-assignment specific. Since I’ve covered many of these issues, I’ve added short-hand descriptors from some of my previous columns in italics. Attitude ❚ ❚ Assumes responsibility – set it and forget it; no need to check back ❚ ❚ Work relationships – plays well with others; courte- ous, friendly, sincere ❚ ❚ Professional outlook – takes responsibility to grow in the firm and profession ❚ ❚ Attendance – shows up and works with focus ❚ ❚ Image – maintains an orderly work area and projects a professional image and appearance Capability ❚ ❚ Analytical ability – is a self-starter in research, concise subcategories along with examples of how successful performance is to be evaluated.” “Don uses three general areas of review; each has a few
and thorough with recommendations ❚ ❚ Initiative – takes responsibility, recommends systemic improvements ❚ ❚ Mental alertness – listens carefully, responds well to changes ❚ ❚ Ability to represent firm – respectful toward clients, “lives” the firm culture, inspires confidence in the firm and team ❚ ❚ Supervisory ability – inspires team, develops team members, obtains measurable results ❚ ❚ Stability – projects calm in crisis, is consistent in per- formance, adapts to change ❚ ❚ Overall competence – possesses technical/design skills, adds to the skill base of the firm, is an “expert” in something valuable to others in the firm Performance ❚ ❚ Dependability – completes assignments thoroughly without being monitored ❚ ❚ Quantity of work – is consistent with skills and proj- ect needs ❚ ❚ Quality of work – is consistently organized, coordi- nated, and accurate ❚ ❚ Resourcefulness – seeks out best solutions, overcomes adversity ❚ ❚ Communication – speaks, listens, writes, and re- sponds clearly and thoroughly in a professional style You can imagine that everyone at Cathexes has a clear idea of what the culture of the firm is. When this is the case, it fosters consistent and predictable behavior and attitude. But here’s where Don adds a unique twist that is both humorous and serious. Using a point system from 0 to 10, each person is rated in each category as follows: 0) You died 1) You’re fired 2) Poor; need to relearn this concept
See ED FRIEDRICHS, page 4
THE ZWEIG LETTER AUGUST 24, 2015, ISSUE 1117
Made with FlippingBook Annual report