I was engrossed in reviewing / correcting an important document today. It took couple of hours and once I finished it I felt overwhelmed that I did a good job. But I felt a vacuum in my heart. There wasn't any one to appreciate my good work. Since the document contained details, which cannot be a shared to all, no one was aware of my good work so obviously I couldn't get any pats on the back - I tried with my own hands but in vain.
I grew up in a culture where I get to receive emails appreciating a good work or announcement in a room with my peers, or words in person when I meet the right person (my superior) during a coffee break and if all these don't happen, a hope in my heart that my good work is stored somewhere deep in my superior's brain's database, which could be retrieved if I 'execute a correct query' to my superior in case she had forgotten it or behave as if he/she forgotten it. As a matter of fact, what you learn (or should learn) as time pass by - is to 'design' the correct query! If you don't understand previous line, I'am sorry, you missed to learn an efficacious lesson in corporate ladder.
What do you think about recently popularised - exposing one's own work after retirement, like from World Bank, IMF heads to ex financial ministers? Many have started doing this work vigorously - more 'vigorously working' than when they were in payroll. I could see only one reason for this - they get more money by ridiculing their own work with only one restriction in mind, i.e. don't do it when you are in payroll.
In case if you think I'am going to ridicule my own work of past i.e. when I was in payroll, don't strain. It was always ridiculed - directly by my supervisor, by my peer fellows (except a few). I assume my subordinates don't hate me very much because I saw them as my 'friends'. ('Friends', do you believe that?) I always believed people who complete work need to be treated well. Because, ultimately, computers don't do anything by themselves. They need human intervention - either to create or destroy work. Those humans were more important than any computer machine.
Funny part is entire system believe ridiculing regularly is essential to survive. If you feel 'ridicule' is not an appropriate word it can be replaced with much harsher words like criticising.
Companies do allocate a special session, that too in billed hours, for ridiculing..sorry...criticising it's own recruited employee's work. It is a session where everyone has a different mindset, at end all want to see a win/win situation even after knowing 'one win' can never happen. They call it as appraisal. By now you would have understood who always lose. We can't entirely blame superiors, because they have their own problems.
Appraisal. To your utter disappointment, I'am not going to give any incidents, stories or expose anything (later? I wish I can). As long as 'comparative' work is there, appraisal will be required in the system. But in this write up's context, I'am only fascinated by one word that is tactically used during appraisals. That word is 'proactive'.
When they sit together both have a list - criticisms in one side and praises in opposite side. It is like hearing same news from two different news channels, funded by two different political parties or like watching Kamal Hasan's 'Virumandi' movie. Same incidents but from two opposite angles. Creativity will be at it's best sometimes.
I personally always support an employee because my superior is also an employee (see, how I dodged). Sadly a superior must ridicule his subordinate (at least one point) regardless of how good that sub ordinate was in that year.
There a word comes as a rescue. 'Proactive'. If a manager couldn't find any major mistakes he can always criticise his subordinate by stating that he/she was not proactive. Surprising to both, neither knows what it actually means except that it is a well aimed criticism.
As a matter of fact, if entire team is proactive, appraisals are not needed at all. Is it possible to form a team like that? Can this question be asked looking upwards?
There ends an appraisal.
**********************************************
R.Bharathram
11 Feb 2019
In case if you think I'am going to ridicule my own work of past i.e. when I was in payroll, don't strain. It was always ridiculed - directly by my supervisor, by my peer fellows (except a few). I assume my subordinates don't hate me very much because I saw them as my 'friends'. ('Friends', do you believe that?) I always believed people who complete work need to be treated well. Because, ultimately, computers don't do anything by themselves. They need human intervention - either to create or destroy work. Those humans were more important than any computer machine.
Funny part is entire system believe ridiculing regularly is essential to survive. If you feel 'ridicule' is not an appropriate word it can be replaced with much harsher words like criticising.
Companies do allocate a special session, that too in billed hours, for ridiculing..sorry...criticising it's own recruited employee's work. It is a session where everyone has a different mindset, at end all want to see a win/win situation even after knowing 'one win' can never happen. They call it as appraisal. By now you would have understood who always lose. We can't entirely blame superiors, because they have their own problems.
Appraisal. To your utter disappointment, I'am not going to give any incidents, stories or expose anything (later? I wish I can). As long as 'comparative' work is there, appraisal will be required in the system. But in this write up's context, I'am only fascinated by one word that is tactically used during appraisals. That word is 'proactive'.
When they sit together both have a list - criticisms in one side and praises in opposite side. It is like hearing same news from two different news channels, funded by two different political parties or like watching Kamal Hasan's 'Virumandi' movie. Same incidents but from two opposite angles. Creativity will be at it's best sometimes.
I personally always support an employee because my superior is also an employee (see, how I dodged). Sadly a superior must ridicule his subordinate (at least one point) regardless of how good that sub ordinate was in that year.
There a word comes as a rescue. 'Proactive'. If a manager couldn't find any major mistakes he can always criticise his subordinate by stating that he/she was not proactive. Surprising to both, neither knows what it actually means except that it is a well aimed criticism.
As a matter of fact, if entire team is proactive, appraisals are not needed at all. Is it possible to form a team like that? Can this question be asked looking upwards?
There ends an appraisal.
**********************************************
R.Bharathram
11 Feb 2019
Nice take on appraisals. BTW, What document were you reviewing?
ReplyDeleteAppraisals are as you said to criticize. But I always wondered isn't my appraisal also and reflection on my so called superiors 🤔 isn't my success or failure theirs?
ReplyDelete