Mike,
Actually, the book does not endorse performance appraisals of any kind. While better than 95% of the books out there speak to problems with the implementation of Performance Appraisal Programs, very few challenge the notion that the program itself is questionable. In Tom’s words, “It has become a right of passage.” We have come to expect getting them, as well as for some of us, giving them. As with getting grade, it appears to be the only way to determine who is in need of help and who does not. But this isn’t true. Tom and Mary go at great length in the beginning of the book to challenge (dispel with) the false assumptions that we have come to believe are “facts of life.”
It is fair to say that they do endorse the continual stream of feedback, but it neither be written or scheduled. And, they are very careful in defining what feedback is, and what it isn’t. Feedback by their definition is not opinion based, which is what you generally get during a performance appraisal. Opinion based feedback is what they term ‘criticism’. There’s no place for it.
Alfie Kohn goes into great length in many of his books to dispel with the myth that we do things as a result of things just being ‘human nature’. It is his contention, as is mine, that this phrase is overused and oversimplifies many situations. It is much easier to term something as ‘human nature’ than to truly challenge the very assumptions we use to make sense of our world. By dubbing things as “human nature”, Alfie Kohn says that when folks use this term it “spares them from having to truly rationalize things. What is true of this time and place may not have been true of a time and place past, nor a time and place future. As a matter of convenience and as avoidance to actually having to deal with a problem, people place this label on it an forget about it.” Since hearing this, I have been extremely careful about using the phrase “human nature” to avoid a pit fall.
You are right that we tend to compare ourselves to others and are judgmental about many factors used for comparison. I still do it despite believing the contrary. It goes to show that this Cultural Paradigm is strong and influential. I do my best to break free from it, but it happens, most of the time automatically. I would hesitate to call it ‘human nature’ though, as I truly believe that most of it is attributable to cultural influences. Our culture is deeply rooted in competition and consequences. With these influences, it is easy to see why we elect to rate people at work and at school. You raised the example about a baseball team and the performance of players. It’s a terrific example.
You got it read pretty well. I would use statistics to determine who might be in need of help (some time off or extra practice) or who is demonstrating above average performance (Start Off position in the batting order, pitching, or fielding). Don’t confuse these statistics with the ‘baseball stats’ that are normally enumerative and non-analytical. The “Book” baseball managers use to determine how to play the game is in all likelihood, tainted by decades of how they ‘think (thought)’ the game is/was supposed to be played. That’s because they mostly use ‘gut feel’ with a pinch of experience to govern their decision making, and, as we know, gut feel is often wrong. Being a Red Sox fan, the pain of doing things by the ‘Book’ gives me regular doses of nausea. Speed and power can be measured to a large degree, but determining contribution of an individual separate from a System is next to impossible. This is one of the false assumption Tom and Mary raise in their book. Take the batters average. He bats .275 but only plays against right-handed pitchers. Tell me, what were the conditions on day one, two,…99? Who pitched and what were their conditions, healthy or unhealthy, pitching in the rain, sun, snow, with runners on or not? What color back drops were there to the pitcher? Is this batters .275 average better or worse than another with a .300 average things not being equal, as I have shown? Who could tell? So I ask, what is the worth of this relative ranking to one another? Now move that to the business place. Who is better than the other, all things not being equal there either? How about the Pygmalion Effect? Does this play a significant role in the outcome of a ranking or vote? I’ll bet it does, more so than the conditions at play, equal or not.
Dr. Deming endorsed the use of statistics to determine those who are extra special or in need of help (the oultliers on a chart). He also mentioned that it was quite common to know who might get an A at the end of a semester based on nonscientific data. But would that be an indicator on future performance or outcomes? Rankings and ratings are done from a discrete population of data that has happened in the past and has very limited predictive powers for future results. He further expressed his concerns regarding the unknowable negative effects to the system (and people) for a limited and mostly unnecessary positive benefit that suited an individual, or small group. Is this a good trade? He didn’t think so, nor do I. He wished that people in the system be treated as equals, which is what the Japanese regarded him fondly for. In a war torn nation that lost a war, he viewed them as people, not inferior beings suited to be servants. To a large degree, this is why he was labeled as having communistic ideas. To that he said that it was obvious to him that people using this term do not understand what communism is and isn’t.
He had many theories about the social outcasts of society, how in fact we created them. They did not create themselves. It had to do with civilizations over the thousands of years developing cast systems that lowered self esteem amongst groups while promoting it amongst others. There will always be some levels of high and low self esteem, but the levels we see are man made. We have the knowledge and power to change things, if we so decide. But then again, our intervention itself has a limitation. The external forces and influences are real and do account for shaping the world we are in. What we need to remind ourselves of is that the are internal forces, often silenced by the barrage of external forces, that need to surface.
I cannot do justice in explaining all the details expressed by these folks in their many books, articles, and papers. By no means does this negate your contributions here nor is it meant to make you or anyone else following this thread feel inferior to them, or anyone else. My opinion stated here is in a dynamic state, constantly in the ebb and tide of our discussions and dialogues. It is important to me that folks here, or anywhere, understand that while we may not agree with one another, that we remain open minded to the possibility that the theory we currently operate under might be dead wrong. It is humbling to realize that this may be true for any one of us, and in fact, as paradigms are created or pass, our paradigm, whatever it is, will one day be replaced and we will end up being wrong nonetheless.
Until then, I look forward to the thoughts and informed opinions of this group.
Regards,
Kevin
