A while back the New York Times revealed that every one of the
Department of Veterans Affairs’ 470 senior executives had been rated
“outstanding” or “fully successful” at least once in the last four years, and
most of them got one of these top two ratings in multiple years.
In a one-year period almost
80% of the VA’s senior execs were rated “outstanding” or “fully successful.”
About two-thirds of them got bonuses.
Over four years, none of
the senior VA honchos received either of the lowest two performance ratings—not
one of them, not once.
It's a miracle. Seems every
one of them is above average....
This report says as much
about a big organization like the VA as it says about the egregious failure of
darn near everyone everywhere to implement a performance evaluation system that
actually evaluates widely varying performance, instead of simply forcing
supervisors to complete the hated chore of doing a once-a-year gloss of their
subordinates' work performance that disguises the identity of all the poor
performers.
This report also is another
stupefying example of top executives being allowed to claim that "bonuses
are vital to hiring and retention" without having to prove it. Of course,
that claim can't be proved, because it's not true.
No bonus plan has ever been
shown to materially improve discriminating selection of "the best
candidates" or "retention of the high performers."
You know,
it's the old "every Little Leaguer gets a trophy" mindset....
Copyright © Richard Carl
Subber 2016 All rights reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment