It happens all of the time,
or at least way too often.
I talk to a manager and they tell me about someone who is struggling at their "job". The proverbial conversation comes up about feedback, improvement plan, resolution or termination.
And then I speak with them, or already have a sense of them, and I see amazing potential.
Perhaps the BIGGEST mistake that I see managers make when evaluating people - that ultimately hurts them, the company and the individual being evaluated is that too often they are asking the wrong questions, or at least not enough of the right questions.
Almost always the questions managers try to answer regarding an employees performance are along the lines of:
"How is this person fulfilling the needs of the role?"
"Is he/she doing well relative to our expectations of the role?"
"What does he/she need to do different to meet the expectations of the role?"
Then they spend the majority of the time getting more and more granular on where they are NOT delivering on the expectations of the role and start to work on coaching to resolve those. When progress is not forthcoming, or not coming quickly enough, then managers do some version of getting angry with them, disengaging with them, or starting to work them out of the company.
Do you notice anything about that approach? Does it sound familiar?
I believe leaders think and view their teammates differently. The questions they ask are different...
"How much does this person like the company? How engaged are they?"
"What is this person most passionate about? What do they love to do and do well?"
"What holds this person back? What could we do to resolve it and unleash them on the organization? Where could they add the most value?"
It's night and day... ALL OF IT...
the questions leaders ask... the answers they get... the way the entire conversation goes... and, ultimately the long term success of that person and of the company...
PLEASE KNOW that I am not suggesting that evaluating an individual against the expectations of the role is not relevant or productive. Ultimately, you have to do that and include that in your thought process as you consider coaching for development and feedback... but, in my opinion it is most often the LEAST important part of the conversation...
IF people don't like where they are working or who they are working for... THAT IS OF GREAT IMPORTANCE - BOTH FOR THEM AND FOR US.
Are we creating the kind of company and environment we want to be creating? Are we leading in a way that unleashes the best in people? Isn't OUR responsibility to create that condition so that they and we may be successful?
Do we expect people to succeed long term in their role, or stay in the company - if they are not enjoying it? Do we expect them to be engaged if they are not enjoying it?
IF people aren't working in something that intrigues them on some level - that speaks to their passion and ambition are they likely to be great at it? Are they likely to be giving us their best?
And, oh by the way, if we were able to put that person in a role, or very often in the same role, but GIVE them more or different responsibilities, priorities or focus in that role to INCLUDE the things they are most passionate about... won't that change the reality of their contribution, their level of engagement, and their contribution?
IF there is something holding that person back, something they need to learn, some process we need to change, some technology or tool we can give them to unleash them... can we help give them that?
Because if we could give them that piece of the puzzle, whatever it is, or better, help them to get whatever it is - are they not likely to then "be" more of the "employee" we want them to "be"? Or "do" more of what we hope they "do"?
DO YOU FEEL HOW DIFFERENT THESE TWO EXERCISES ARE?
the way you "evaluate" people ultimately reflects the way that you "think" about people...
So often, I find managers wanting to give employees ultimatums, concluding their abilities or "fit" within the company based on the individuals ability to "FIT THE MOLD" or at least "FIT THE EXPECATION THAT HAS BEEN SET"?
So often, I find managers wanting to decide on people are they a "1" or a "0"... Do they stay or do they go?
The whole concept of "giving an employee feedback" is flawed. It's a RELATIONSHIP that managers and "companies" have with their PEOPLE. I even cringe at the word "EMPLOYEE".
I don't want people to my "employees"... I want them to be my "partners"... (of course I get that is a bit idealistic in many regards... but I find that creating RELATIONSHIPS where they feel in many ways like partners is not unrealistic - specially if you realize its not a "0" and "1" game.
I don't want my "employees" to be the focus of all of the feedback, I'd rather have the "managers" be more of the focus... in fact, I want the "executives" to be more of the focus... ultimately, I want to be the focus of what doesn't work... and what I need to do to make it better.
WHY?
Because I have the most ability to see the bigger picture, to set priorities and to improve the company.
Because the executives and the managers have a bigger ability than the rest of our team to see the bigger picture, to set priorities and to improve the company.
Most often, we hold the people with the least amount of individual authority in the company responsible for what is wrong and what needs to improve in the company... We hire people, create imperfect processes, try to run through the processes without enough up front training or support, and then we evaluate people on whether they meet the "set" expectations.
It boils my blood.
Think about the difference in the questions above, in the focus, in the tone, in the conclusion...
Managers measure people against a pre-defined objective and look for a binary conclusion.
Leaders work to understand, engage and unleash people to contribute at their highest level.
"Nobody is perfect"... We've all heard that, and rationally believe that, but emotionally we still all want to measure people against "perfection" in some "expectation" we create for roles (and often don't fully share.
To me my compelling thought is not "Nobody is perfect!"... To me the compelling thought is, "Everyone is imperfect and amazing" or "Everyone WANTS to contribute greatly!"... Those are the thoughts and the truth that guides me as I think about people.
At the end of the traditional set of questions - the BEST you can usually get is a reasonable list of things the person needs to do next to close the gap with your expectations of the role in order to continue in their "job"...
In the leader's set of questions - the BEST you can usually get is greater engagement, greater buy in, great understanding of not what the individual needs to do, but what WE need to do to better support them and many others like them to become a better company.
One measures the individual against a known and often very average bar of performance... the other works to unleash the individual and the company to heights we never knew we could achieve.
So often, people who aren't performing are having meaningful personal issues, have failed to be engaged meaningfully with the company, haven't received the tools they need to succeed... or most sadly, haven't been made to believe that they can!
Measuring someone's "fit" versus "expectations of the role" to me is very often a RESULT of the company's ability to lead them and support them, NOT of the individual themselves.
SURE, some people ultimately aren't a good fit for the company and they will find a greater opportunity outside of it - but even then think about the path to get there and the health of the relationship when that conclusion is reached, if you've approached it as a leader and not a manager... as someone who believed in them all the way along and not someone who judged them, and criticized them all the way along.
When people leave our company based on "performance" to me it speaks as much about us as it does about them... and if we truly approach it as I describe, then I sincerely believe that we have helped them better understand what their passions and strengths are so that they may go contribute at a high level somewhere that better FITS them... that better overlaps with their passions.
When we evaluate others - we should first and foremost use that as an opportunity to evaluate OURSELVES...
And, once we start evaluating them, we should first and foremost be UNDERSTANDING THEM... to uncover how we can best deploy their greatness.
Questioning what we think is their "competence" by evaluating their fit against our imperfect processes misses a tremendous opportunity to figure out where they can best contribute.
So often, I have found people who were "struggling" in their role - contribute GREATLY for years and years to our company.
Truth is - with respect to ANYONE - you can run the traditional process and paint a picture of how they don't fit... where they need to improve. In fact, with most people I think you can, if you really want, mount a fairly accurate and compelling case about why they shouldn't be in the role they are in...
AND, TRUTH IS, with respect to ANYONE - you can ask yourself the more compelling questions and have the better conversation and paint a picture of how they fit perfectly... and where they can contribute best. In fact, with most people I think you can, if you really want, mount a fairly accurate and compelling case about why they bring amazing value to the company and should absolutely be on the team for many years to come...
Which do you prefer as an individual working for the company?
The biggest mistake managers make when evaluating people is that they ask the wrong questions... or at least, not enough of the right ones...
This process is fairly easy if you stop thinking about yourself as the "manager" and consider yourself the "employee"? When you ask yourself "how is it going?" What would I need to get better? Where does your head go? Ask THOSE questions... The difference is that you are ALREADY assuming that you want to do great things - so you very quickly go to the environment around you, to those around you.
What assumptions are you making before you start the evaluation of an individual? Are they the right ones? Are they based on how to unleash their greatness, or are they based on how you think they are holding your greatness back?
Do you see the vast difference between these two worlds?
Can you CREATE the one that assists people - one by one - to reach for their best?
... because everything is possible when you do!
UNLEASH the greatness of those around you...
So that you in some small way start to know your own...
in harmony,
Nestor
