Forums
Performance Appraisals for Partners
General Forum
Performance Appraisals for Partners
Discuss workforce management, performance management, retention, communication, motivation, contributing to business results and other topics.
Currently, we have a performance appraisal based solely on numbers - how much they produced vs. how much was expected. But now, the company wants to created a simple form which holds them accountable
1
Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId53
Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId53Discussion:DiscussionId29760
Forums » Topic Forums » General Forum » Performance Appraisals for Partners
|
Performance Appraisals for Partners
posted at 8/9/2005 2:43 AM EDT
|
Posts: 1
First: 8/9/2005 Last: 8/9/2005 |
Performance management is one of the most strategic systems in any organization. It starts with the development of competencies for positions in an organization and the identification of position-specific "value-added results". Competencies and results are then incorporated in tools that reflect: (1) key result areas (KRA)--both technicial and behavioral competencies, and value-added results or job descripton; and (2)rating scales that facilitate the evaluation of KRAs or performance appraisal. Once tools have been created, tools are used to recruit and hire new staff for a technical and behavioral "fit". The same tools are used to evaluate staff or provide timely feedback on performance. I agree with earlier comments posted that additional processes (exit interviews, employee opinion surveys, satisfaction surveys, salary and benefit analysis, etc.) may be of benefit to any organization in addressing turnover, employee satisfaction, and customer satisfaction. |
|
|
Performance Appraisals for Partners
posted at 8/9/2005 4:15 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 40
First: 6/28/2005 Last: 2/26/2008 |
Research has shown that the accounting profession's tendency is strongly toward introversion/ concreteness/ rational decisions/ closure instead of exploration & imagination. This is shorthanded to ISTJ, for those familiar with the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Since you measure only concrete productivity now, it would probably be a cultural gear-grind to add very "soft," artsy dimensions to measure management performance. One or two dimensions that can be reliably quantitative (voluntary turnover, as suggested earlier) would be a good next step. You can amend in later cycles--it's unlikely to be perfect first try. You could choose a high-performing subset of the group, and have them answer the question, "What are the most important aspects of work performance that our current system *doesn't* measure?" The most frequent suggestions would be, by definition, a culturally- acceptable list, since it would originate with the people in the culture. |
|
|
Performance Appraisals for Partners
posted at 8/9/2005 5:15 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 2
First: 10/5/2004 Last: 8/9/2005 |
I have become convinced that for salaried professionals, pay is for meeting expectations in accordance with a clearly defined Job Effectiveness Description. [The latter associates results expected in addition to accountability and responsibility]. Above and beyond must be rewarded in some other "one-time" manner.
Performance appraisals that result in embedding permanent salary increases, and that compound these increases for the life of the person in the job result in an entitlement attitude. Staff surveys that result in bonuses or salary increases for management, if not executed properly and without a trusting environment to start with, result in management manipulation and staff cynicism. If one is performing his or her job to a pre-defined standard; no more, no less then feedback should be formative and natural - not periodic and formal. Having said that, managerial/supervisory accountability must be ongoing staff recognition and turnover in the context of the expectation to stay within budget. Charging recruitment costs directly to the accountable source and basing standard performance on meeting budget is probably THE way to get focused on the issue - especially in an accounting firm. We should not be rewarding for that. It's what their salary is for. If it doesn't happen, then consequences should be far greater than missing a salary increase. |
|
|
Performance Appraisals for Partners
posted at 8/9/2005 5:26 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 1
First: 8/9/2005 Last: 8/9/2005 |
If this were a radio program I would feel obligated to preface my comments with "first time contributor...long time reader..."
My two cents worth on the whole subject asks yet another question about using performance appraisals to encapsulate, reflect, or (GASP) measure care of employees. While I recognize the need to have employees engaged, supported, and contributing to organizational mission, where did the idea emerge to link performance to a measure of care? My reading of the question in the first post of this chain suggests that there are more significant questions still left to be asked: What is our collective view of people in the first place? Are they resources - like computers or shovels? Are they animals and therefore will work in exchange for the cheapest carrots we provide? Or are they something more? Because if we discover that there are somethings inherently unique about human beings (as opposed to human doings), then perhaps our corporations can begin to authentically support and nurture these qualities rather than find ways to generate a form or process that uses the language of concern or care without having a strong understanding of why it is that this all matters. D. |
|
|
Performance Appraisals for Partners
posted at 8/9/2005 10:42 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 1
First: 8/9/2005 Last: 8/9/2005 |
Accounting firms that want to show they care about their staff and address their poor retention rates have a very simple solution available but one that few are willing to take...The primary reason for poor retention in the accounting profession relates to the long hours that are expected to be worked. If you want to cut your turnover, cut back the number of average hours worked per week!
But how you ask? How can you do that and remain competitive? That is a different problem but one that firms within the profession need to face up to. While ever you have no source of sustainable competitive advantage, you will rely on overworked personnel to keep you profitable. |
|
|
Performance Appraisals for Partners
posted at 8/9/2005 5:29 PM EDT
|
|
Posts: 1
First: 8/9/2005 Last: 8/9/2005 |
I read with interest the disucssion about the performance appraisal process in an accounting firm and wonder if anyone from an accounting partnership or law firm partnership can share any wisdom around how to get partners and associates to honestly rate their support staff (secretaries) in a performance questionnaire. In my brief experience in a partnership, the evaluations all come out as 'exceptional' and clearly they are not all top performers. Has anyone had any success in getting the partnership to agree to certain competencies and expectations? If so, please share. |
|
|
Performance Appraisals for Partners
posted at 8/11/2005 1:48 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 5
First: 6/28/2005 Last: 10/18/2005 |
We can land the space shuttle, do heart transplants and for the last 50 years managers have been discussing, "How do we get employess to care about each other and work together effectively?" How do you tell a supervisor or any employee, "You're producing good numbers (very productive), but your people skills suck and no one wants to work for you". Then, you're going to send them away for training and expect them to return, "a nice person", who everyone wants to work for.
No one wants to spend the time and money to use one-on-one executive coaching (counseling)for supervisors who have marginal people skills. These one or two day training sessions and new forms aren't going to make any difference. |
|
|
Performance Appraisals for Partners
posted at 8/11/2005 6:01 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 1
First: 8/11/2005 Last: 8/11/2005 |
[quote]
On 2005-07-21 08:04, burchettj2 wrote: Currently, we have a performance appraisal based solely on numbers - how much they produced vs. how much was expected. But now, the company wants to created a simple form which holds them accountable for actually caring for their staff (we're in an accounting firm with high turnover). Any suggestions? [/quote] The concept of employees feeling cared about and cared for is another way of referring to the level of TRUST that exists in the firm, and this is impacted by a variety of factors that exist on both an individual relationship level (e.g., do I feel cared about by and trust my manager?) and a group/organization level (e.g., do I feel cared about by and trust my co-workers, and/or the partners of the firm?) The question of whether employees feel cared about has become important to many organizations because research continues to show a direct link between the degree to which employees feel cared about by their manager and their organization (and have relatively high levels of trust toward their manager and their organization) and the level of those employees' engagement, commitment, performance, and retention. (The higher the employees'levels of trust and caring, the higher their levels of satisfaction, engagement, performance, retention tend to be.) These days roughly half of the U.S. workforce feels either somewhat or very dissatisfied and disengaged (i.e., not sufficiently cared about) at work so this is a serious condition and worthy of attention. To meaningfully assess the degree to which employees feel cared about you would need to FIRST obtain employees' feedback regarding their expectations in regard to what would make them feel more cared about and able to trust their manager, co-workers, partners in the firm (separate criteria for manager, vs. coworkers, partners). Employees' PERCEPTIONS are the yardstick by which they measure. If you don't start by asking employees for their input on this, you may as well not even bother with designing a performance evaluation to determine whether or not they feel cared about, because NOT ASKING them for their input will be interpreted as a 'signal' to them that it wasn't felt to be worth the time, effort, or importance level to listen to their ideas and concerns -- and that 'action' (or lack of action) will 'speak louder' to employees about the 'caring' culture of the organization than any redesigned performance appraisal, mission statement, town hall meeting, etc. Their expectations of how they would like to be treated will provide the basis for the criteria/metrics to utilize in a performance appraisal for evaluating managers' success in meeting employees' expectations (achieving employee satisfaction, etc.) Also, since you said your performance appraisal has historically been very numerically and production oriented -- keep in mind that if the reward and accountability structures/systems in the firm do not adequately 'support'or provide incentive for eliciting the desired behaviors needed to be demonstrated by managers to achieve employee satisfaction, managers will not be likely to focus on those behaviors. Generally, they will focus on the doing the things they feel they will be most highly rewarded for doing (typically that means "making the numbers"). If the firm is not prepared to reward managers similarly for achieving (or hold them similarly accountable for NOT achieving) employee satisfaction as for making the numbers (or not making the numbers)in other areas, then there's no point in embarking on this initiative, as employees will be likely to perceive it merely as 'window dressing'. It's either 'real' or it isn't -- and ultimately employees will be the ONLY ONES to decide that. (If you care to discuss further, email me: PerformanceConsultant@PeopleAreKey.com) |
|
|
Performance Appraisals for Partners
posted at 8/12/2005 7:47 AM EDT
|
|
Posts: 464
First: 6/30/2004 Last: 11/22/2010 |
I would add to Shari's post.
Back in the day, accounting firms (especially the then Big had a motto for staff. Move up or move out. There was tremendous pressure to progress through the ranks. Each semester, the big firms would recruit anywhere from a handful to a couple of dozen fresh undergras and graduate degreed folks. Guess what, it was a traditional pyramid. Out of each group, it was rare for more than one to make Partner, and that took 8 to 12 years. Since so few made partner, turnover was mandatory. Out of each recruited class of junior accountants, a couple would fall out before making the next level and even more would fall out before making senior. Lots were found wanting and were fired, lots were recruited by clients and headhunters because the money was always better in the various industries than at the CPA firm, until one made the manager levels. Then the inequities in pay began to turn around. That said, retention may not be the right measuring standard - perhaps employee professional development would be better, client relations would be high on the scale and perhaps most important of all, professional proficiency and ethics. Did management really want staff speaking up at Enron or Worldcom, etc? When you look at these big firms - the same pyramid and consequent pressure exists. Caring about staff is expected, but the built in turnover makes it difficult to get attached - they are always leaving. As you might be able to tell - I have had personal experience. |
Forums » Topic Forums » General Forum » Performance Appraisals for Partners
