Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: How does your company do performance reviews?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 100 posts

Re: Ask HN: How does your company do performance reviews?

#61

Post by subway »

tboyd47 wrote: post #43
rorykoehler wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is time online big (assuming more means better)? I do remote too and I would never consider that to be important as long as the work gets done.

If you're employed full-time, the expectation is that you're giving your employer roughly 40 hours a week. Nobody can code continuously for 8 hours a day and be productive, but just being available is the bare minimum you can do to be considered "working." I've never heard anyone get cool points at our company for being online more than 8 hours a day, but being online less than that (without reason) is definitely fro…

Seems like a great way to motivate employees to keep slack open while remaining totally unengaged...

Re: Ask HN: How does your company do performance reviews?

#62

Post by debacle »

Twice a year we do reviews. I have some KPIs I collect for my team, but most managers don't. We also have the standard HR matrix of 1-5 scaling, but I think it's actually quite effective at providing a framework.

Employees do self-assessments, then managers do assessments, then you meet for your review. The review is more about being on the same page + communicating future expectations.

Re: Ask HN: How does your company do performance reviews?

#63

Post by softawre »

humanrebar wrote: post #50
cnp wrote: post #38

We do a 1-5 point based system bi-yearly, but I'm actually wondering how people respond to under performing coworkers. I feel weighed down a bit because a review is coming up and I can't imagine giving said person more than a 2, but he is also a nice guy and tries very hard while simultaneously making a mess of most things. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated. We're typically asked to discuss negative feedback…

If a person is congenial and dependable there's usually a suitable niche in any large enough org. The sweet spot is where things are stable and include domain knowledge but aren't automatable yet. Good team players that will get along with people and keep things running are very worthwhile in my opinion. Not everyone need to be able to invent their own crypto currency from scratch. If the problem is more severe, like…

Well said. I have found such positions for people like this twice now in my career.

Re: Ask HN: How does your company do performance reviews?

#65

Post by czep »

tboyd47 wrote: post #45
porter wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you measure time online?

We use Slack

How do you use Slack to document online status? Does someone maintain a record of status timestamps? That sounds terribly degrading not to mention a bureaucratic nightmare. And it's very easily gamed. But most importantly, you should challenge the notion that time online is a good performance metric.

Re: Ask HN: How does your company do performance reviews?

#66

Post by sage76 »

throwaway9ac8 wrote: post #20

Oh don't get me started. Fairly big (>1000 devs) company. Performance reviews are twice a year. In theory: before each cycle, an employee and a manager meet to discuss manager's expectations. If an employee "exceeds expectations" he or she gets a good rating. The rating is then approved and bonus and compensation is determined. In practice: the rating is kind of determined by how employee's work contributed towards "…

Wow, this almost exactly like where I worked, except peer reviews were also there. People would put in little stuff like "he once made xyz mistake in coding" (on local machine mind you, not on staging and not at all on production). That would lead to the manager complaining about it 4 months after it happened and telling you your coding was not upto par.

Result : does not meet expectations

Promotions happened entirely on the visibility of your project. One team reported directly to the VP, so EVERYONE in the team got a raise/promotion. Among the rest, around 5 people were promoted. That team, for reference sake, had 7 people if I remember correctly.

Re: Ask HN: How does your company do performance reviews?

#67

Post by zhte415 »

Fortune 500s...

Rating 1 - 5 (1 best, 5 worst).

Management required to restrict to rating quotas. These kick-in at a span-of-control level of around FTE>50, and below that at the span-of-control manager to manage. For some departments there's increased flexibility. Some managers who really don't see the reason for filling their quota of 'good' (3) sometimes trade with other managers. 1: ~3-5% 2: ~23-25% 3: ~50-60% 4-5: rest.

Formal performance reviews done annually, with interim (6 month) review. Now is 6 month stage.

1-1s on a bi-weekly basis, always documented.

Formal performance review an opportunity to highlight and push to one's manager what they may have forgotten or fell from their consciousness.

Re: Ask HN: How does your company do performance reviews?

#69

Post by nullundefined »

badlucklottery wrote: post #17

Large company, performance is based almost entirely on feedback from peers and those you report to with check-ins every 6 months. Overall score from 1-5 with a 3 being "meets expectations" and the most common rating by far. The problem is that the feedback from superiors seems to be weighted much higher so the peer feedback is almost useless so don't bother mentoring or helping someone get back in front of their task…

Oh, so you work at Google.

Re: Ask HN: How does your company do performance reviews?

#70

Post by kohnke »

Hey I’m Bas Kohnke, YC S14 alum and CEO of Impraise (https://impraise.com), a feedback based performance management solution. Having worked with different types of companies to revamp their performance management processes, I’d be happy to share some of our thoughts and experiences.

Internally, we run quarterly 360 degree reviews based on 3 questions: what should this person, continue, stop, and start doing. Each person comes up with their own goals and projects which they’re evaluated on. In between reviews we share real-time feedback so that people always know where they stand and what they can do to improve - in this way review results are never a surprise. Team leads also hold regular 1-on-1s and check-ins with each team member (at least twice a month).

A few things we’ve learned:

- Simply prompting people to share more feedback isn’t enough. Education on how to formulate actionable feedback and how to take and internalize received feedback is essential for it to actually be effective

- Strengths based feedback[1] is highly motivating

- Reviews should always be followed up with 1-on-1 conversations during which a development plan is formed

- Continuous feedback throughout the year is essential to keep everyone on track and ensure that people aren’t blindsided during reviews

- Continuous and 360 degree feedback can help combat bias[2] in performance reviews

- If reviews are results based, goal-setting should always include equal input from the individual and their team lead

There’s not a one size fits all approach to performance management, yet so many companies try to fit their organization into a standard model. Many companies are now customizing their own processes, picking and choosing the elements that work best for their size, industry, culture and the specific pains they want to solve. For example:

- Ratings vs ratingless reviews

- Anonymity vs non-anonymous reviews

- Reviews linked to compensation decisions vs reviews focused solely on development

- Companies allowing people to choose their own reviewers

- Results vs competency based reviews

For advice on the different performance management trends we’ve seen working, feel free to reach out to us.

[1] https://blog.impraise.com/360-feedback/constructive-feedback...

[2] https://blog.impraise.com/360-feedback/4-factors-hurting-you...

Post reply on HN