Staff performance: does the comparison distort your judgment?

Resume

Managing people is not rocket science. But sometimes it takes Solomon’s judgment, Job’s wisdom, the grace of a ballet dancer, and the kindness of the Labrador family. No wonder we are tempted to long for a quiet life. That’s when the comparison can distort your judgment of staff performance.

Benchmark 1

Jenny is trustworthy. She always finishes what she starts. She is thorough. She doesn’t leave any loose ends. She is always ready to help. You only have to tell them once. Makes many useful suggestions. People like working with her. She is a team player.

Benchmark 2

Sally is smart. She is always thinking about work. She comes up with really cool ideas. She has a great sense of humor. She always looks good. Customers love it. She works very hard. You always know where you stand with her. She is a very positive thinker. When you “make waves”, you have a good reason.

Benchmark 3

Harry thinks about his feet. You have a lot of initiative. He is fast on his feet. He wants to succeed. He is brilliant. He makes up for his inexperience by applying himself. You are not afraid to ask for help. Take calculated risks. It has a bright future. He is a good listener.

Give me more!

The Jenny, Sally, and Harrys are the employees most managers want the most. Nothing wrong with that. It is good to have cooperative, enthusiastic and conscientious employees. Every time you like Jenny, Sally, or Harry, you think, “I wish Jacqui, Sarah, or Johnny were more like Jenny, Sally, or Harry.” That is good too. But it can create problems.

Any notice?

The words I’ve used to describe Jenny, Sally, and Henry are clichés. And it’s about perceived behaviors. They basically describe what we “like” about a person. They describe how we feel about having the person as an employee. Unfortunately, they also describe the prism or filter through which we judge a person’s performance. They don’t say anything about Jenny, Sally or Harry’s job performance.

Man 30% over budget

“Next time you come to me, Leon, let me know,” the human resources director of a client company said by phone. “There is a problem here that I would like to discuss with you.” The problem was this. The company was struggling with a long-standing concern for a salesperson. His paperwork was sloppy. They had discussed it with him many times. He would get better for a while, then he would go back to his old ways. The hiring manager was concerned. The sales manager and regional manager wanted to “let the salesperson go.” They were fed up with their sloppy paperwork. But there was a “little problem”.

The “slight hitch”

Vendor sales have averaged 30% over budget for the past three years. In his five years with them, he has never missed the budget. No other seller could match your sales records. He moved heaven and earth to keep customers happy. They loved him. But the sales manager wanted to “let him go” because “it wouldn’t fix his paperwork problem.”

The comparison problem

Before you say, “But Leon, salespeople need to do complete and accurate paperwork,” let me assure you that I understand the value of a solid sales manager. But is the continuous and sloppy paperwork – behavior – reason enough to fire an employee whose sales record – performance – is absolutely outstanding? That is one of the main problems of the comparison. We allow behaviors to improperly influence our performance judgment.

Featured Artists Issues

Employees who perform outstandingly may not be the easiest people to work with. They are often demanding, unorthodox, outspoken, opinionated, and even occasionally disruptive. These behavioral deficiencies are usually quite obvious. Color the opinions of others.

Descriptors of Comparative Distortion

Do you find yourself using these terms? “I know you can sell, but …” “Okay, customers think it’s wonderful, but …” “Just because your team outperformed the others doesn’t mean …” “Don’t you understand She than us. Does she know that our computer system needs to be replaced and will have to wait until it is her turn? “These are the kinds of phrases that should tell you that you have a case of comparison distortion.

It’s your decision

Do you want employees who are personable, articulate, approachable, docile, and average? I won’t blame you for saying “Yes”. Handling these people is usually a pleasure. Or do you want outstanding artists who consistently get results but can be frivolous, unstable, rebellious, and frustrating? If it’s artists you really want, here’s what to do.

The antidote to comparative distortion

1. Have very clear goals and performance standards for each employee and each team.

2. Always evaluate performance before behaviors.

3. Evaluate the performance, not the performers.

4. Make sure all employees know exactly what you expect and how their performance will be measured.

5. Recruit by results, not relationships.

6. When an employee’s behavior begins to interfere with your results, speak to him immediately. Don’t be fooled into believing that “they will fix it.”

7. Put your main resources in activities that produce results, not appeasement.

8. Constantly review your systems to make sure they support results and not procedures.

9. Always ensure that staff understand the relationship between your results and overall business success.

The comparison is human

Almost everyone prefers to work with colleagues with whom they “get along.” That’s normal. That is human. It is also desirable. Workplaces are social entities. But the moment it becomes more important than achieving business results, you will be overwhelmed by the distortion of the comparison.

Hugging in the street or …

I am aware that my firm stance on this may distress or at least upset some people. If you are such a person, consider this: A small productive conflict that benefits the company when resolved is far more desirable than hugs and mutual tears when the company closes due to poor performance.

Conclution

In case you were wondering, I suggested to the HR Director that they hire someone to help their salesperson with the paperwork. The best thing for them was to have such an outstanding artist “on the road” as much as possible, keeping old customers happy and winning new ones. It is much easier to find someone else to sit at a keyboard and “become the manager”. The company closed its Australian operations about 18 months later. I was wondering at the time if they had retained or “retired” the “30% over budget.”