Self assessments

The ridiculous thing about this whole self-assessment thing is that I already have had my review with my boss and got a raise but they now want me to go back and do this just to complete the paperwork.

stuart in mn wrote: "Where do you want to be in five years?" Retired.

4yrs and 8 mo into my retirement

stuart in mn wrote: "Where do you want to be in five years?" Retired.

I wonder how they would react to "dead"?

mad_machine wrote:

stuart in mn wrote: "Where do you want to be in five years?" Retired.

I wonder how they would react to "dead"?

I wonder how they would react to 'my name on your office door?'

I've seen this one from both sides of the fence, as I was a manager for a few years. As an employee, I benefited from filling out my self review, because it basically turned into my review. My boss' would add a few positives and negatives, but in general I came out of the reviews where I expected to be.

As a manager, if someone doesn't take the time to fill out their self-review or does a poor job doing it, that's their loss. This is an employee's best opportunity to toot their own horn, and remind management of all the wonderful things they did in the past year that management has already forgotten.

Some employees were too lazy to fill out their self-assessment or didn't do themselves justice. In most cases, it was really a shame. They worked hard all year, but didn't take advantage of their opportunity that the self-review provided. The other case I saw was the employee who really didn't have a handle on their own abilities, especially when compared to their peers. Those were the tougher reviews, as they were always disappointed with where they ended up.

Self-reviews are a pain in the butt to fill out (mine's due in a few weeks), but it can help to put some effort into them.

Curmudgeon wrote:

mad_machine wrote:

stuart in mn wrote: "Where do you want to be in five years?" Retired.

I wonder how they would react to "dead"?

I wonder how they would react to 'my name on your office door?'

I wonder how they would react to "me and your wife on your office floor?"

93EXCivic wrote: The ridiculous thing about this whole self-assessment thing is that I already have had my review with my boss and got a raise but they now want me to go back and do this just to complete the paperwork.

Our company passed on raises again. "Tough economy".

No raises in 5 years. And they wonder why younger people bail?

Datsun310Guy wrote:

93EXCivic wrote: The ridiculous thing about this whole self-assessment thing is that I already have had my review with my boss and got a raise but they now want me to go back and do this just to complete the paperwork.

Our company passed on raises again. "Tough economy". No raises in 5 years. And they wonder why younger people bail?

Ouch I have never understood the general attitude in business. They generally don't give good enough raise compared to what you can get if you move to another company. Why wouldn't you keep your pay competitive to try to keep the people you have trained at your company rather then having to retrain some one after that person leaves for better pay?

Basil Exposition wrote:

93EXCivic wrote:

Basil Exposition wrote: They are stupid, and they are a cop-out on management's part. They play to most people's propensity to want to appear honest and to be their own harshest critics.

Really? I figured people would give themselves a glowing review. Maybe that is just me.

You'd be surprised. Actually, the way it works in practice is that your highest performers tend to be most self-critical (though women much, much more than men) and your worst performers are either entirely clueless about how bad they are or lie their asses off. I don't know what that says about you. Point is, the process sucks because it forces the employee and the boss into a confrontation about it (rather than a coaching role) and it becomes a negotiation rather than a performance tool. The boss will be relieved if he doesn't have to knock anybody down so he is hoping most folks will acknowledge their poor or mediocre performance so he doesn't have to tell you that you aren't all that golden and that he doesn't have to worry about you asking for a raise. Or on the flipside, he gets to tell you that you are better than you think you are. It's a game. It isn't in your self-interest to rate yourself anything but stellar. Make the boss tell you where you stand. Best case, he accepts "stellar", worst case, you're "above average."

Thats interesting and I didnt really think of it that way. Our annual review system is not really ideal, basically theres 1 form and I have to fill one out, and my boss has to fill the same one out, then we go over both of them in the review and set goals for the next year.

My review is always the more critical one, The whole time I am going through the form I feel like I need to come up with at least SOMETHING that I could be improving upon.

Next year maybe I need to sell my positives a bit more haha.

My strategy is to give all of my positives, pick a few things to work on to show I'm not crazy, and then let my boss figure it out from there.

I just get a review like grades in school. Get a B every time and positive comments.

93EXCivic wrote: Ouch I have never understood the general attitude in business. They generally don't give good enough raise compared to what you can get if you move to another company. Why wouldn't you keep your pay competitive to try to keep the people you have trained at your company rather then having to retrain some one after that person leaves for better pay?

Because think about it form a practical standpoint, not a theoretical one: how many people actually change jobs just for a raise? Not many. If the pay and the environment are acceptable , very few people are going to change jobs just to get a little more money. Inertia keeps them where they are.

In reply to Basil Exposition:

You wrote about a boss being in a coaching role. I've worked for three companies since graduation from college (the second time) in what I'd consider real 'career roles' and not just McJobs and I've yet to have a supervisor do anything resembling coaching. First/current (first job out of school, was laid off, was offered a shot at coming back after a year working other places) I've got nothing like that, second was a bizarre situation with culture gaps out the wazoo, third was at an operation that could very fairly be called a "E36 M3 Show" and actually was by a third party recruiter that had worked with the company in the past. So instead of dealing with people and growing / improving talent, the various management types just tried their hardest to keep a train wreck rolling along.

So basically, I've heard about this boss-as-coach thing, but have never seen it. Where I'm at now it seems that attention getters get ahead well before most others and they're the noisiest and usually hardest to work with folks here. We have a performance review process where I get average marks; when I pressed multiple times for ways to improve I was told to "spend less time on the Internet" and that's all I was told. Went in with a list of questions, that's the one real response. Hard to stay motivated...

The layoff / return situation doesn't help either.

My thinking is to take control of the circumstances as much as possible. Keep a running log of accomplishments and use the self-assessment/review as a presentation of why you rock. If everyone else is apathetic or clueless, guess who looks like a star (or wildly delusional)?

friedgreencorrado wrote:

stuart in mn wrote: "Where do you want to be in five years?"

I hate this question because it seems to reward ambition more than ability or enthusiasm. What do I want to be doing in five years? The job I applied for, but be the best in the building at it. Perhaps ambition is the only kind of enthusiasm "the suits" understand?

I've just started answering that with "I'd like to be the CEO in 5 years." Or retired with billions of dollars.

Not my problem if they worded the question badly.

My boss at my last gig was a zee-ro. He'd always preface the conversation where we compared my self-evaluation with his version with a story about this great management class he had in school where he learned there's "No such thing as a 10 or exceptional".

So at about 3 years in, working with precisely zero guidance or oversight, in fact, hindered at nearly every turn, I'd invented, prototyped, evolved, tested, beta tested, documented, and released to manufacture and product roll-out, a commercial scale solar panel mounting system that resulted in direct savings (materials alone) of better that $375,000 per megawatt of installed panels. That year they used it for about 20 mW of projects, so a direct cash savings of $7.5M.

Under iniative and job skills I rated myself exceptional, and he started with "there's no such..." when I interjected "BullE36 M3! - name someone - ANYONE in the company at any level - janitor to CEO - who either made or saved this place seven and a half million dollars this year"

"Well? I'm waiting"

"Anyone?"

He sort of stammered that no matter what we do, there's always room for improvement.

I left there to a contract gig that pays the same but in 27 hours a week - one of the best moves I ever made.

oldtin wrote: My thinking is to take control of the circumstances as much as possible. Keep a running log of accomplishments and use the self-assessment/review as a presentation of why you rock. If everyone else is apathetic or clueless, guess who looks like a star (or wildly delusional)?

I have to agree with this. Management doesn't remember what you did last week, let alone 6 months ago. Don't undersell yourself. In the end, it really comes down to whether management likes you or not.

the self evaluation process is a total waste IMHO. It's a 'new style' management thing that can really confuse older workers. You've worked a job competently for 30 yrs inside firm guidelines, now someone gives you a self eval form and a bunch of buzzwords that mean nothing? You might as well be speaking greek. It's a great way to waste the time of very good and experienced employees.

Never take a job hoping for a raise. I always assume my starting pay will never change unless stated otherwise by the boss.

Ive got to evaluate my purchasing guy some time in the next week or so. We are gonna go to lunch, discuss whats going right and what could use improvement, fill out the required form together, and I will give it to my boss to complete the circle. Then I will fight to get him the largest raise I can, every year. Good employees need to be kept. Do I care that he shows up late and takes long lunches, not in the least. The guy can grind it out, do the required work, and does it in a professional way so I never have to check or second guess it.