The Metiss Group's Blog

With the first quarter of the calendar year having just finished, now is a good time for performance reviews.  Students receive performance grades each semester which typically lasts three months.  Public companies are required to report their performance each quarter.  Why do most leaders review performance of direct reports annually or semi-annually?  This is particularly troublesome when studies have shown the typical leader writing a review only recalls performance over the previous six weeks.

The two biggest reasons given for avoiding quarterly reviews are: 1) leaders don’t have enough time to write the review, and 2) their performance review form is too difficult to use.  We recommend simple quarterly reviews for at least three of the four quarters in which the leader has the direct report fill out a one page sheet of paper (5×7 cards work too) answering these four questions:

1.  What did you accomplish last quarter?
2.  What are you going to accomplish next quarter?
3.  How did you demonstrate our core values?
4.  What are your personal development plans?

Benefits: the leader spends little to no time writing the review and is not encumbered by any form; the direct report receives a review of performance quarterly and direction for the next quarter to stay on track with the leader’s expectations.

Try simple quarterly reviews to empower your direct reports for success

“Hide not your talents. They for use were made. What’s a sundial in the shade?” — Benjamin Franklin

Whether it’s the strengths based books from Marcus Buckingham and Tom Rath, your high school sports coach, or your grandmother’s cagy advise, we’ve all heard the maxim “use your strengths for success.”  Many leaders go as far as to assess their direct reports to determine their strengths and encourage them to capitalize on their unique abilities.  But what happens when those strengths are taken to an extreme?

An excess of anything can result in undesirable consequences.  Leaders need to be aware how this might impact their team.  One of the more common workplace challenges is the domineering associate recognized for delivering results and overcoming obstacles who, when taking their strength to the extreme, alienates those around them.  Another is the deep thinking, reflective associate successful for their profound problem solving abilities who, when getting too wrapped up in collecting and crunching data, fails to meet deadlines.

Empower your direct reports to identify, leverage, and capitalize on their talents.  Praise them when they succeed in this approach; but be prepared to offer course corrections if the behavior becomes too extreme.

Based on Patrick Lencioni’s book “The Five Dysfunctions of a Team,” trust is the basic foundation for a high performing team.  Teams cannot engage in healthy conflict, commit to each other, hold each other accountable, or achieve sustainable results with an absence of trust.

So how does a team build trust?  According to Lencioni, “Some of the most effective and lasting tools for building trust on a team are profiles of team members’ behavioral preferences and personality styles.  These help break down barriers by allowing people to better understand and empathize with one another.”

The psychometric instrument the team uses is not as important as going through the exercise.  Whether you use Myers-Briggs, PI, DISC, or another assessment tool, the value to the team is in having each team member share their results, discuss their strengths and weaknesses, and learn to leverage each team member’s strengths.  The shared vulnerability exhibited in the exercise creates a team bond and an inherent level of trust.

Empower your team to take an assessment, then share and discuss each other’s results to experience high performing success.

In 1976 J. Richard Hackman and Greg Oldham developed a key model of work design called the Job Characteristics Model. It has since become the basis for many job enrichment strategies and still implemented today.  Hackman and Oldham contend job satisfaction, motivation, and productivity result from the application of their model.

The core dimensions of the model are: job variety (ability to perform multiple job functions), job identity (how the job affects the organization), job significance (how the job helps society), autonomy (how much independence the job has), and feedback (what happens as a result of the job).

As leaders we may not be able to influence our direct reports’ variety, identity, significance, and autonomy but we can easily impact the feedback dimension of their accomplishments.  Unfortunately, once the results of a job have been completed and delivered, we often forget about them and move on to the next task.  Communicating to your direct reports the outcomes of their efforts will go a long way towards helping them embrace their jobs and be more productive.  Celebrate the positive outcomes and learn from the not so positive results; in either event, recount what happened (in most cases the outcome is positive).

Empower yourself to share the end product of your team’s efforts and your team will be more productive and successful.

Critical thinking is more than using logic or problem solving.  The critical thinking test we use for selection and development measures how well an individual recognizes assumptions, evaluates arguments, and draws conclusions.

Recognizing Assumptions includes reading between the lines, defining/redefining issues and exploring different points of view.

Evaluate Arguments is the ability to evaluate arguments based on the strength of the evidence supporting them, as well as the ability to analyze them without allowing personal bias or emotions to influence the analysis.

Drawing Conclusions is gathering, weighing, and assimilating information to form a sound conclusion.

Logic tells us an individual’s ability to draw the right conclusions may well depend on their ability to Recognize Assumptions and Evaluate Arguments well.  Both of those components rely on the ability for an individual to step away from their own train of thought or to develop the ability to look at things from other perspectives.

How much better could your direct reports perform individually or as a team if they were to improve their critical thinking skills?

Empower the success of your direct reports by encouraging development of critical thinking skills.

We’ve all been in those meetings where the discussion is dominated by a select few.  Inevitably the more forceful team members monopolize the conversation and influence the crucial decisions.  After the session there is an uneasiness that the agreed-upon direction, though seemingly deliberated, is not best for the team.

As a leader, your opportunity lies in finding a way to engage the quieter, more contemplative team members in your decision making discussions.  Unfortunately, those less likely to speak-up often have the best ideas but are reluctant to interrupt or engage with the more forceful team members.  The team is missing out if they are not finding a way to capture the thoughts of their reserved team members.

The best ways for a leader to benefit from all team members is to:

1. distribute talking points before the session and indicate what decisions are expected (this gives the reserved contributors time to formulate their thoughts and how they’ll articulate them);
2. prior to the meeting, encourage all team members to participate in the conversation (this gives the reserved contributors permission to open up);
3. curtail the more domineering team members from high-jacking the conversation (this gives the reserved contributors an opportunity to speak);
4. before decisions are confirmed, ask all team members individually if they agree or have more to add (this gives the reserved contributors a non-confrontational time to express themselves).

The best leaders find a way to leverage the strengths of team members.  The ideas and thoughts of your more thoughtful direct reports may be the most insightful.  Empower everyone on your team to contribute and you’ll experience great success.

Of the 23 personal talent skills we measure, the mean ranking for personal accountability is last – 23^rd.  Perhaps our society has simply accepted the weak behavior trait and essentially enabled it.  You do not need to accept it and you can actually encourage and develop your direct reports’ personal accountability.

To instill greater personal accountability:

1. Establish clear expectations and milestones with each direct report with their input.
2. Be certain to follow-up at the designated milestones for discussions about being on-track toward the ultimate goal.
3. If your direct report is falling off track, NEVER simply move the deadline without serious consideration of the behavior you’re reinforcing.
4. NEVER ask how you can help (that simply allows your direct report to delegate up!).  Instead ask, “What obstacles do you need me to remove or what additional resources do you need to get yourself back on track?”

With this empowering approach you are communicating your confidence that your direct reports are capable of getting themselves back on track.  You’re allowing them to come up with plausible solutions, and you’re encouraging them to experience success in achieving what you both thought reasonable at the onset.

Empower your direct reports by holding them accountable for their commitments; then watch their personal accountability increase, and their achievements multiply.