Month: December 2016

The College just hosted a conversation about what performance evaluations might look like in the future. I for one am glad we had this conversation because it really does benefit everyone. If we’re all exceptional, then no one is exceptional. I believe that some people do have banner years and they should be rewarded for that extra effort. Everyone I know works hard and getting a “successful” rating is perfectly fine with me.

I had some concerns that this calibration effort might be out-of-step with what is being done elsewhere at the University, but frankly, I’m not part of the University-wide HR team and it’s beyond my purview. I’ve chosen to work here and can only hope that my hard work is recognized as being “successful.”

Rita had a good point about some folks would appreciate a little more structure, but I’m glad the College isn’t coming out of the gate with that structure – even though I’m one of those that would do better with it. One of the truths of the matter is that we’re not all apples. It’ll be difficult for the supervisors to work through the calibration meetings, but I appreciate their effort. We have very different responsibilities and they are not all easily comparable and therefore the language to describe achievement will not always be “from the same dictionary.” I like that those involved understand that there may be more art-than-science in the process and I’m confident from what I heard today that they will take the time to attempt to calibrate evaluations across the College.

It was a great show of leadership from the Dean down to the supervisors. I’m looking forward for the upcoming review process.