This week we discussed sections 6.5 and 6.6.
Section 6.5 — Performance Management Systems
- “A good [career] ladder allows individuals to accurately self-assess…” Geoff agreed 100% — you should be able to know where you are relatively to the positions above and below you. Houston likes the crisp boundaries and allows them to plan their path and control their own destiny. Bonus points for having a manager that helps you align with that. Jamie now works at a company where there’s clear definitions of technical vs. management tracks.
- The ladder should be the same across the entire company. The software engineering managers should decide this. Promotion typically ends up being subjective and around how much the manager likes you. One approach is to lean on the Dreyfus model of skill acquisition.
- Decoupling pay from title… What if you have an excellent widget maker but has no interest to be a widget designer (i.e., good at production line work). Should their pay be impacted if they have no desire to go beyond that? Tie compensation with performance, not title. Jameson said maybe pay bands should be a guideline rather than a hard rule.
- On the “brag document” format, Geoff has found note-keeping to help significantly with this. Having 1:1 notes for your direct reports allows them to review and summarize. Also, for his current position, whenever Geoff does something notable, he adds a bullet point to his job description for reference.
- We talked about how we need to get rid of this notion of having to change jobs to get big pay boosts. Companies do small raises to control costs, but they lose a lot in turnover.
- Geoff likes the notion of “compare against the ladder, not against others.” There’s an assumption that you have a good ladder/rubric. Something that came to mind is a grading curve; maybe if many people are not measuring up well, you have a culture problem or a ladder problem.
- Lirio, where most of us work, now does quarterly reviews. “The overhead of running a cycle tends to be fairly heavy, which leads companies to do them less frequently.” How about make them lighter weight? This is kind of like deploying; if it sucks and people avoid it, make it less painful. Documentation is good for seeing trends and coaching people on improvement.
- We talked quite a bit about how raises and bonuses are distributed and how it’s a numbers game. You want to be equitable and also give people what they deserve.
- Jamie has worked at a company that uses the Nine Block system. The intention is to identify high performers so you can invest and promote them. Who gets to decide who goes in what block? Geoff said that a 360-review approach could work; get input about the individual from others that interact with them.
Section 6.6 — Career Levels, Designation Momentum, Level Splits, Etc.
- Geoff found this section difficult to read. It sounds too academic and he couldn’t relate to the levels.
- Managers need to talk to their people and give them feedback. We need feedback to improve.
- “…surprise is the cardinal sin of performance management…”
- “If a company is experiencing particularly frequent level expansion, it is usually a sign that progression, compensation, or recognition has been overly tied to your level system.” Geoff saw this at his previous company where people got promoted via new titles, but basically did the same job.
- Crisis designations… Give someone a raise or a title change because you think they’re looking for another job. This is like Jameson being promoted to an interim manager position with no timeline about how temporary or permanent this change is.