Adobe and Traditional Performance Reviews Report

Added on - 18 Sep 2019

  • 9

    pages

  • 2164

    words

  • 46

    views

  • 0

    downloads

Showing pages 1 to 3 of 9 pages
Question 1.Why did Adobe abandon traditional performance reviews?Adobe management was highly agile, had increased collaboration and speed but it was clearlyseen to neglect the advance itself for managing as well as leading the people. AdobeManagement realized that their previous annual review process was not able to deliver theexpected results. The following problems were seen in the traditional performance review:1.With the stack ranking, the employees were seen to feel compelled make sure that theyare among the top 15% performed. Due to which every employee aimed to maximize hisown personal success, at the expense of the team. This led to decreased team efforts,creating issues for the company. The employees were force fully evaluated theiremployees in four categories namely: high performer, strong performer, solid performerand low performer. This evaluation took place on the annual basis resulting in increasedemployee frustration and demotivation.2.The performance reviews were highly infrequent and problematic as they did not help inidentifying the issues. The reviews were usually seen to be based on the past performanceand did not focus on future aspects therefore impacting the employee aspects adversely.The review process was dreaded by employees because the feedback was unexpected.3.The performance labels were highly dreaded by the employees and the performancereviews are not even aligned with the organizational realities of the business operations.Therefore the traditional performance review system was seen to have high voluntary attritionafter the reviews and was seen to be highly consuming for the managers. The whole performancereview system made the employees feel scared and frustrated as they were not having clue oftheir performance until that particular time of the year. This way the performance review gave no
opportunity for the employees to improve. With all the employees being rated against their ownteam member, the organization lacked team management and no employee was able to determinetheir financial worth to the organization. The traditional approach was highly demotivating andfrustrating for the employees leading to inclination in the attrition and involuntary departure ofthe employees. Therefore, Adobe realized that the best way is to abolish forced ranking fordetermining the compensation for their employees. (Why Adobe Abolished The AnnualPerformance Review And You Should, Too, 2014).Question 2. What does “stack ranking” for performance reviews refer to?Identify the positive and negative impacts of stack ranking for employees andfirms/organizations.Stack Ranking or Forced ranking is a performance review system which ranks its employeesagainst each other. In simple words, the manager is directed towards evaluating the performanceof the employees against their own team members rather than in a common measure ofevaluation against the standards which are pre-determined. And the results of these type ofperformance reviews are seen to be highly blunt where the top 15 percent of the performers arerewarded amply and the bottom ones are straightway shown the door (Forbes Welcome, 2016).The organizations are seen to believe that the implementation of the forced ranking procedurewill help in differentiating talent and as a tool for stipulating the employees falling under theassigned category.Benefits1.The stack ranking helps in differentiating the productive and unproductive employees.This ranking method helps in preventing the managers to assign average or related rating
across the board. This type of ranking helps to compare the performances of theemployees and thereby helps in identifying the high and low performers.2.With the identification of the high performers, the organization can take proactivemeasures for retaining their best employees. The organization can organize variousprograms and workshops for retaining their best talents.3.The stack ranking can easily identify their low performers and thereby providesorganization to motivate these employees and increase productivity by monitoring andcoaching these employees towards giving better performance. By addressing the lowperformers, the organization can motivate and engage other employees also (What isStacked Ranking? Should You Use It?, 2016).Challenges1.The stack system prevents real evaluation of the employees. Certain share of workers areseen to have their rating altered for creating a mere accurate distribution of score leadingto suspecting of the whole performance management process in the employee’s eyes.2.It created an individual culture in the organization promoting individual competitivenesswhich is directly detrimental to the team dynamics and the essence of team work. Thisleads to decreased team ethics in the organization and therefore decreased productivity.3.The performance review process is turned into a demotivation among the employeethereby obstructing the cultivation of growth and improvement in the workingenvironment.4.The sharing and coaching is discouraged and the low performers do not get a chance ofimprovement.