Anonymous wrote:I know that your job is to do reviews to justify your existence, but ask yourself this - is the person actually benefiting the organization with the work that they do, how hard is it to replace them, and what work won’t get done while you terminate this person for not writing a brag sheet? Was it a busy week work-wise? My organization does this from time to time, and I guarantee that writing my own evaluation is at the bottom of the list of things to do when there’s a lot of actual work going on. I will get to it eventually, but these management discussions are often a waste of time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they are busy doing actual work?

Right! Review are just another BS tool HR uses to justify their existence. Such a f-ing waste of time.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I think you're on to something here, given the number of times OP has fallen back on, "But it's mandatory!"

I’m a PP who said I’d just fire this employee.

I don’t understand all of the people saying that OP is somehow wrong for having a mandatory review process.

If employees don’t comply with reasonable requirements, they should find a different job. Period. This is not complicated.

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.

I think you're on to something here, given the number of times OP has fallen back on, "But it's mandatory!"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all those who keep saying that OP and employers are being unreasonable, you are not being reasonable. Most states are at will employment states. If an employee has a mandatory procedure for reviewing and awarding performance or cost of living adjustments to employees, then it is mandatory and the employees need to jump through the hoops to get those raises/COLA. While you all think that this is unreasonable, and you blow off the review process or copy the input from the previous year, the entire process may have some important reasons. Most employers these days have to be very careful and on legal grounds to document their interactions with employees, and the process by which they review and aware raises and adjustments. Many employees are much more litigious these days and EEO standards have gotten stricter. There are many employees who will use any form of protected class as the argument for filing suit against an employer even when there are performance or adherence to rule issues. Employers use mandatory processes to help to ensure they have a documented process and procedure for reviewing all employees and that they have documented information for performance issues.

So, they are pro forma for you, but the process has to be documented. If you blow off the process and they have incomplete documentation, but give you a high rating, then if they get sued by an employee with performance issues who is a member of a protected class, the employment lawyers can point to the fact that you received a higher raise/COLA than their client, but that the company did not document why you, a non-protected class member, received a higher rating, but their client did not.

Having been in the position to have to let an employee of a protected class go in the past, when we were doing the PIP and later termination process, I had documentation about the other team members, their performance, and their ratings and I could include that the ratings had no pattern based on protected class (e.g. other employees in the same protected class had better reviews and better ratings and did not have the issues recorded against this employee).

So, while you think it is not important, for the employer, these processes are very important.

My understanding is the employee only blew off a self-assessment which I have never heard of being mandatory. I guess I've never worked at an organization so flush with cash that employees rate themselves and get a raise over inflation. My optional self-assessment goals have literally been reused since 5 years ago when I cared enough to make goals. OP are you hiring project managers?

Op here… please read responses where I’ve said multiple times that it’s not just a self assessment. They also get peer reviews and we go through a goal setting process. Mostly to serve them TBH. If there’s performance issues, this is (one of) the times to address that as well. We try really hard to react to constructive criticism or address wants/needs of an employee from a professional development standpoint. We are trying to retain employees and address their concerns.

We put more effort into reviews and professional development that any other place I’ve been and generally get the same feedback from other employees.

It’s mandatory to participate in our reviews, not sure what else to say. Also, not all bosses suck and some of us truly want to see people do well.

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.

Anonymous wrote:Guarantee the person is leaving and doesn't care about their review or the process.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So...have you mentioned that this is mandatory to the team and a requirement to receive a compensation increase? Sometimes management sends random requests are just more BS and not required.

Yes, it's been made very clear that it's mandatory. Multiple times.

Well, it doesn’t sound mandatory if nothing happens. I mean they don’t get raise, but they still have a job and paycheck coming? Seriously, what is the repercussions? None.