David Physick

Chris, one of the best examples of two way performance management conversation comes from Novotel, the mid-market hotel brand in the French Accor Group. They set some clear and precise rules about appearance and dress code for ALL staff and that no one should feel unable to comment on anyone else's appearance. The tale goes that a hotel manager was visiting another hotel and arrived with a loose tie and top shirt button undone. When announcing his arrival at reception and asking to see the manager, the receptionist asked, if under the new mode of openness, she could comment on the chap's dress-code. He demured a little but then said "Yes". Pleasingly, the story goes that he shook the receptionist's hand, said thank-you, tidied himself up, and praised the lady when he saw her boss. In turn, the lady's manager wrote to the Director who had introduced the rule and, in turn, he phoned the receptionist to say thank you and well-done. So, a two-way flow is feasible and it is these little things that get things to stick - equally, it is the little things that can hole an initiative below the waterline. If nothing happens, we're playing games in management rhetoric.

Bjarte Bogsnes

David,

Thank you for your wise words.The performance conversation you describe is more difficult than the "widget counting" one. Just like the roundabout, it is more difficult than the traffic light. But "easy" can't be our compass, it has to be what is good, and the good stuff is often more difficult.

Thanks,
Bjarte

Chris Grams

Hi David!

What your entry really highlights for me is the importance of a two-way dialog in the context of a common organizational purpose for understanding performance. This sentence in particular struck me: "Without involving people in setting the future course of the organisation, you gain compliant passengers rather than active co-drivers and navigators."

In my work on the MIX, with clients, and during my time at open source software company Red Hat, I've seen so much evidence that what you state here is true. The way I typically state it is thus:

If you don't invite people along on the journey, they will reject the destination.

I think what you are pointing out is that a conversation about performance should not just be a conversation about *individual* performance but also about *organizational* performance. And the best inputs on improving both individual and organizational performance won't just come from the top down, but the bottom up as well. We need to ensure there are channels that carry performance data in both directions!

You need to register in order to submit a comment.

Join the MIX Now or Login

David Physick

Chris, one of the best examples of two way performance management conversation comes from Novotel, the mid-market hotel brand in the French Accor Group. They set some clear and precise rules about appearance and dress code for ALL staff and that no one should feel unable to comment on anyone else's appearance. The tale goes that a hotel manager was visiting another hotel and arrived with a loose tie and top shirt button undone. When announcing his arrival at reception and asking to see the manager, the receptionist asked, if under the new mode of openness, she could comment on the chap's dress-code. He demured a little but then said "Yes". Pleasingly, the story goes that he shook the receptionist's hand, said thank-you, tidied himself up, and praised the lady when he saw her boss. In turn, the lady's manager wrote to the Director who had introduced the rule and, in turn, he phoned the receptionist to say thank you and well-done. So, a two-way flow is feasible and it is these little things that get things to stick - equally, it is the little things that can hole an initiative below the waterline. If nothing happens, we're playing games in management rhetoric.

Bjarte Bogsnes

David,

Thank you for your wise words.The performance conversation you describe is more difficult than the "widget counting" one. Just like the roundabout, it is more difficult than the traffic light. But "easy" can't be our compass, it has to be what is good, and the good stuff is often more difficult.

Thanks,
Bjarte

Chris Grams

Hi David!

What your entry really highlights for me is the importance of a two-way dialog in the context of a common organizational purpose for understanding performance. This sentence in particular struck me: "Without involving people in setting the future course of the organisation, you gain compliant passengers rather than active co-drivers and navigators."

In my work on the MIX, with clients, and during my time at open source software company Red Hat, I've seen so much evidence that what you state here is true. The way I typically state it is thus:

If you don't invite people along on the journey, they will reject the destination.

I think what you are pointing out is that a conversation about performance should not just be a conversation about *individual* performance but also about *organizational* performance. And the best inputs on improving both individual and organizational performance won't just come from the top down, but the bottom up as well. We need to ensure there are channels that carry performance data in both directions!