Employee Not Participating in Review Process

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn't is sufficient that he gets no annual adjustment? That is likely saving the company a few thousand dollars over the next year. No performance review, no raise/COLA. You file an official review that the employee did not participate in the process, so an annual adjustment to his salary was not made. And you attach a copy of this to his permanent record.

Is there any reason that you need to be more punitive? If he otherwise does good work, then his employment and/or termination should be about his work. If he misses other mandatory functions, meetings, or work, then you put him on a PIP. But the annual review process is mostly for his benefit, e.g. he gets an annual raise. If he wants to forgo that, then it's his loss.

No. This was a mandatory process he did not participate in despite repeated warnings. He’s lucky if the only consequence he gets is a PIP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why you can't just write your assessment of the employee's workplace as best you can recognizing that it probably won't be as good or complete as it would be if this employee had provided input regarding their accomplishments. Then, based on their actual performance give them a raise or don't give them a raise.

No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Self assessments are a waste of time, you’re the boss you do the assessments

Nope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does the person's manager ever do one-on-one's with them?

We are small, so their "manager" is the small leadership team ... ie: the group this person refusing to do a review with. We don't really have departments and all work together in varying capacities, so everyone's boss/manager is our small leadership team. We are all active in day to day management.

Well, that sounds like a PITA. It's Office Space "I have eight different bosses right now" territory. Designate one person to be the actual supervisor already.

As for the employee not filling out their self-assessment and goals: are you not able to review the employee's performance without them? I mean, do you honestly have no idea how well the employee is doing at their job if they don't tell you first? Or can you just, y'know, review the employee's performance?

Review: “Failed to perform mandatory self-assessment procedure after multiple opportunities given. Ignored supervisor repeatedly (but answered other messages). No raise. Performance improvement plan implemented.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does the person's manager ever do one-on-one's with them?

We are small, so their "manager" is the small leadership team ... ie: the group this person refusing to do a review with. We don't really have departments and all work together in varying capacities, so everyone's boss/manager is our small leadership team. We are all active in day to day management.

Well, that sounds like a PITA. It's Office Space "I have eight different bosses right now" territory. Designate one person to be the actual supervisor already.

As for the employee not filling out their self-assessment and goals: are you not able to review the employee's performance without them? I mean, do you honestly have no idea how well the employee is doing at their job if they don't tell you first? Or can you just, y'know, review the employee's performance?

Review: “Failed to perform mandatory self-assessment procedure after multiple opportunities given. Ignored supervisor repeatedly (but answered other messages). No raise. Performance improvement plan implemented.”

Oh look another useless manager.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get the feeling that it's not the lack of review/feedback that's bothering OP, but the fact that the employee doesn't want to play by OP's pointless rules.

Agree, thinking about firing someone for not wanting to do a review and get their 2% is a bit ridiculous.

You know that “a lot more than 1.5%” is also a lot more than 2%, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP—take a hint. They don’t like the job and aren’t planning to be around long. They don’t care about the $5.50 a day raise—the raise can’t be very much since you said yourself they need the constructive feedback. Move on. No one likes these things.

Employment often requires doing things we “don’t like.” Welcome to adulthood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does the person's manager ever do one-on-one's with them?

We are small, so their "manager" is the small leadership team ... ie: the group this person refusing to do a review with. We don't really have departments and all work together in varying capacities, so everyone's boss/manager is our small leadership team. We are all active in day to day management.

Well, that sounds like a PITA. It's Office Space "I have eight different bosses right now" territory. Designate one person to be the actual supervisor already.

As for the employee not filling out their self-assessment and goals: are you not able to review the employee's performance without them? I mean, do you honestly have no idea how well the employee is doing at their job if they don't tell you first? Or can you just, y'know, review the employee's performance?

Review: “Failed to perform mandatory self-assessment procedure after multiple opportunities given. Ignored supervisor repeatedly (but answered other messages). No raise. Performance improvement plan implemented.”

Oh look another useless manager.

Not a manager. Just not a passive aggressive child like the anti-OP (and no, I’m not OP) posters in this absurd thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does the person's manager ever do one-on-one's with them?

We are small, so their "manager" is the small leadership team ... ie: the group this person refusing to do a review with. We don't really have departments and all work together in varying capacities, so everyone's boss/manager is our small leadership team. We are all active in day to day management.

Well, that sounds like a PITA. It's Office Space "I have eight different bosses right now" territory. Designate one person to be the actual supervisor already.

As for the employee not filling out their self-assessment and goals: are you not able to review the employee's performance without them? I mean, do you honestly have no idea how well the employee is doing at their job if they don't tell you first? Or can you just, y'know, review the employee's performance?

Review: “Failed to perform mandatory self-assessment procedure after multiple opportunities given. Ignored supervisor repeatedly (but answered other messages). No raise. Performance improvement plan implemented.”

Oh look another useless manager.

Yup. I’d happily fire many of these people. Getting rid of people with a poor attitude is under appreciated.

Not a manager. Just not a passive aggressive child like the anti-OP (and no, I’m not OP) posters in this absurd thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does the person's manager ever do one-on-one's with them?

We are small, so their "manager" is the small leadership team ... ie: the group this person refusing to do a review with. We don't really have departments and all work together in varying capacities, so everyone's boss/manager is our small leadership team. We are all active in day to day management.

Well, that sounds like a PITA. It's Office Space "I have eight different bosses right now" territory. Designate one person to be the actual supervisor already.

As for the employee not filling out their self-assessment and goals: are you not able to review the employee's performance without them? I mean, do you honestly have no idea how well the employee is doing at their job if they don't tell you first? Or can you just, y'know, review the employee's performance?

Review: “Failed to perform mandatory self-assessment procedure after multiple opportunities given. Ignored supervisor repeatedly (but answered other messages). No raise. Performance improvement plan implemented.”

Oh look another useless manager.

Not a manager. Just not a passive aggressive child like the anti-OP (and no, I’m not OP) posters in this absurd thread.

Personality disorder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't their manager just schedule a meeting and tell the employee it's mandatory. Putting their job in jeopardy is ridiculous. They're doing their job.

FWIW, I write the exact same things on my review every single year. Verbatim.

In hindsight, that's what should've been done. We just have always blocked out time and let people sign up within those slots that work for them and it's never been an issue. We won't do it that way again next year.

Ah, I think that is a mistake. No need to change your entire process for one dullard. Deal with the dullard and keep everyone else doing what you have done in the past.

FWIW, if I had been the dullard's boss, I would have just shown up in his cube, pulled up a chair (blocking the exit, of course), and conducted the review right then and there. I would have prepared my own forms, and used them. If the mountain won't come to Muhammad, then Muhammad will certainly go to the mountain...and the mountain will learn he should have gone to Muhammad if he hadn't wanted his review conducted in a cube in the full hearing of everyone. I probably would have arranged for a cube lunch, too, so that everyone was there listening in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m super confused why OP hasn’t asked the employee what’s going on. That seems like an obvious step.

Because OP is an ineffective manager. I think the employee is completely in the wrong here, but OP isn’t willing to do anything about and this is sending the message that this kind of behavior is acceptable.

Op here… we are withholding his raise. Also I was asking for advice on how to proceed beyond that as this JUST happened. Honestly, I’m inclined to do more than just withhold a raise (as stated in my OP) but everyone here seems to think I’m in the wrong for having things that are mandatory for our employees to do. Sooooo… this thread has told me I suck both because I’m overreacting and also underreacting

No, I think you're being trolled by one or two young, inexperienced people. I'm reading the posts from the end to the beginning and what you're saying sounds like you're a contentious manager dealing with someone who obviously needs to be off-loaded but isn't willing to take the steps himself to do it. I agree with at least one other poster that a PIP is going to be necessary. At some point you have to consider all the other team members. This one guy is dragging everyone else down by his behavior. Don't let him control you that way. You need to watch out for the majority, not the one person who won't act like part of your team.

[Anonymous]

I dont manage a lot of people but if I were in OP's situation I would schedule a meeting with employee with the subject line "discuss annual review" and during the meeting explain what the review is, why it is necessary/required, what the consequences of not doing it will be and whether employee has any issues with completing it by X date.

I also think its odd that so many people consider these useless and option. I dont love this process, but it can be the basis for a real conversation about performance and goals. I also am old enough to think that if my employer requires something (reasonable) I should do it, even if I think its stupid ....and I have done more than my fair share of idiotic, pointlless workshops--whatever something blah blah toolkit lean management training, or required attendance at whateverdiversity/team building/thought leadership/flavor of the week seminar is being taught by outside consultants for a ridiculous fee.

[Anonymous]

I dont love this process, but it can be the basis for a real conversation about performance and goals.

Fine, but what is the point of evaluating yourself? What if you think that you are great, but your boss disagrees? Or vice-versa? How does that help anyone, and why does your own opinion of your work performance matter, anyway? Just let your boss tell you what he thinks of you, ideally at intervals more frequent than once per year. If you disagree, say so then, but self-evaluations just seem silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I dont love this process, but it can be the basis for a real conversation about performance and goals.

Fine, but what is the point of evaluating yourself? What if you think that you are great, but your boss disagrees? Or vice-versa? How does that help anyone, and why does your own opinion of your work performance matter, anyway? Just let your boss tell you what he thinks of you, ideally at intervals more frequent than once per year. If you disagree, say so then, but self-evaluations just seem silly.

Huh. So you never reflect on what you've done, either professionally or personally, and considered what you did well or what you did poorly or what you would do differently? Interesting. And you've never wanted to discuss with your manager and evaluator what you think you've done well that perhaps, just perhaps, you don't think your manager knows about or appreciates enough? Again, interesting.

DP.