[Ailist] Appreciative Valuations of Staff

[Roger Davies]

Hi Cheri,

I think you hit he nail on the head. It should be a way of working together.
Valuing someone once a year is the same as reporting accidents once a year
or only disciplining poor performance once a year. The purpose and mechanism
of the whole process should be questioned. What need does an employee
appraisal process satisfy? how can that be done more effectively? 

The point of playing football isn't to win the super bowl. The point is to
play football. Actually, since it's a business, the point is to get more
people to pay to watch you play. If you want to achieve that you have to
perform to the best of the team's abilities every time you play: A feat that
cannot be achieved by once or twice a year appraisals. The crowd, coach and
team mates appraise every part you play in the game. Success is an outcome
of how you play the game. It's core is not revealed by rushing yards, passes
or touchdowns, it's revealed in the way team members talk to each other and
support each other.

Roger

-----Original Message-----
From: Cheri Torres [mailto:cheri at mobileteamchallenge.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 9:56 AM
To: 'Michael Holdstock'; 'Roger Davies'; 'Anne Radford'; 'Kenneth Gergen';
'Bill Scott'
Cc: ailist at lists.business.utah.edu
Subject: RE: [Ailist] Appreciative Valuations of Staff


Michael et al,

Your post suggests that perhaps the whole notion of valuation/evaluation
might be questioned at the core. As part of my understanding of the meaning
of these words they are assessments (of one degree or another) at a point in
time.  Thus, looking at the past (of an individual separate from the
relational dynamics) and creating a static marker for the future (of the
individual as separate from relational dynamics).

To your point about "job chats" and Ken's comments regarding relationships,
I wonder whether the whole paradigm around this practice might be shifted
towards a continuing process approach--that valuing become a way of being in
an organization and iterative reflection & action between supervisor/
employee (or however the roles are labeled) likewise become a way of
working. Such a way of being would be relational at its core, generative,
iterative, and allow for all sorts of emergent possibilities.  In addition,
at any given point in time, both employee and supervisor would have an
appreciation for where they stood in relationship to their own development,
their relationships, and to the work that is expected of them.

What do you think? Does this make sense?  

I guess the bottom line question begging to be asked is (which Roger did):
what is the purpose or goal here? Cheri

-----Original Message-----
From: ailist-bounces at lists.business.utah.edu
[mailto:ailist-bounces at lists.business.utah.edu] On Behalf Of Michael
Holdstock
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 6:06 AM
To: Roger Davies; 'Anne Radford'; 'Kenneth Gergen'; Bill Scott
Cc: ailist at lists.business.utah.edu
Subject: Re: [Ailist] Appreciative Valuations of Staff

I haven't followed the whole of this thread, but my ten öre's worth: I am
finding it increasingly meaningful to break this staff development and
support process up into the following bits:

the development dialogue - with agreed long and short term professional and
personal developmental goals (where do you want to get to?) (D1,2,3)

measures of development effectiveness related to agreed goals (how do we
check up on your progress towards your goal and help you stay on
track?) (D 3-4)

the reward negotiation.
(what financial and other compensations are we agreed on?)

There is no water-tight compartmentalisation since all three relate to one
another. They can all be handled appreciatively/supportively and retain
their meaningfulness and bite.

Dealing with them as separate but related issues, I have found, makes the
whole situation easier to handle. Maintaining a dialogue throughout the year
related to the first two means that an ongoing interest and awareness of
development becomes a natural part of the leadership function. To facilitate
this continuum one organisation that I have collaborated with instituted the
idea of "job chats" - at least quarterly, as part of the follow-up process
to the more formal development dialogue.


Mike
Karlstad, Sweden






_______________________________________________
The Appreciative Inquiry Discussion List is hosted by the David Eccles
School of Business at the University of Utah. Jack Brittain is the list
administrator. For subscription information, go to:
http://mailman.business.utah.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/ailist