Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects

Performance Reviews

Merged Abby Matthews requested to merge am-performance-reviews into master
1 unresolved thread

Merge request reports

Loading
Loading

Activity

Filter activity
  • Approvals
  • Assignees & reviewers
  • Comments (from bots)
  • Comments (from users)
  • Commits & branches
  • Edits
  • Labels
  • Lock status
  • Mentions
  • Merge request status
  • Tracking
  • Robert Speicher
  • LGTM but needs talk about merit increase process

  • Thanks for the review @rspeicher

  • assigned to @jparrow

  • Joan Parrow added 1 commit

    added 1 commit

    • 1af7cbdb - Change q and a wording to include merit increase connection

    Compare with previous version

  • Joan Parrow added 1 commit

    added 1 commit

    • 017228d0 - Correct sp and grammar issues

    Compare with previous version

  • Joan Parrow added 1 commit

    added 1 commit

    • 41961c7d - Correct missing markers to bold txt

    Compare with previous version

  • Joan Parrow added 1 commit

    added 1 commit

    • f451bbcb - correct grammar and wordsmith phrasing

    Compare with previous version

  • Joan Parrow added 1 commit

    added 1 commit

    • 52a5c3bf - Removed ratings pending completion of definitions

    Compare with previous version

  • @rspeicher Can you help me insert a table into this MR? Let me know and I'll email you the ratings and definition table to insert in the Q & A sections to replace placeholder. Thanks!

  • @jparrow Happy to! Check out https://help.github.com/articles/organizing-information-with-tables/ which explains the syntax well, and if you still need help just ask.

  • Joan Parrow resolved all discussions

    resolved all discussions

  • Thanks @rspeicher I'll give it a try. Too bad I can't cheat and copy and paste my table! If I mess it up too bad, I'll holler for help.

  • Joan Parrow added 1 commit

    added 1 commit

    • 2e50d8bd - Added performance rating descriptions table

    Compare with previous version

  • Hey @rspeicher could you take a quick look to see if I did the table correctly and if any fixes are needed?? Thks very much!!

  • @jparrow If you click the Changes tab in this MR, and then View file @ [something] you can preview how it will look.

    It mostly looks correct, but I'm not sure why the left-hand column surrounds everything with colons. If you're trying to align things like suggested in the documentation, note that you only add those colons to the "header row", that is, the row of hyphens just below the column headers.

    Also it looks like |-----|-----| is included at the end of the table, which shouldn't be necessary.

  • Also by looking at the preview I noticed that the Q and the A are currently on the same line, but we probably want them on their own lines, in which case we need to add an additional line break between the two.

  • Joan Parrow added 1 commit

    added 1 commit

    Compare with previous version

  • Brittany Rohde added 1132 commits

    added 1132 commits

    Compare with previous version

  • Sid Sijbrandij mentioned in commit fc2120dc

    mentioned in commit fc2120dc

  • 85
    86 **Q: When are performance reviews due?**
    87
    88 **A:** All reviews must be completed by end of day (EST) Wednesday, April 19, 2017.
    89
    90 **Q: Will we have an opportunity to review and compare self and manager reviews?**
    91
    92 **A:** Yes, managers will receive a copy of self reviews as they are completed. After all managers are finished, we will close the 2016 review cycle and share manager reviews with their direct reports to facilitate open and meaningful dialog around alignment and differences between manager and self reviews. Performance gaps identified should generate productive development conversations.
    93
    94 **Managers:**
    95 In cases where you’ve identified your top performer, we should learn from what makes that person successful to share with others.
    96 In cases where below average performance is identified, you should plan to deliver a PIP to clearly identify performance gaps and expected changes.
    97
    98 **Q: Why link performance to the increase process?**
    99
    100 **A:** Cost of living adjustments (COLA) encourage participation, generate mediocrity and lead to the disengagement of high performers, while performance-based (merit) increases reward results and motivate continued development and higher achievements.
    • "encourag[ing] participation" still seems like a good thing.

      Are we trying to say that annual, guaranteed raises like a COLA encourage doing the bare minimum, because hey, you'll get a raise anyway? If so I don't think this conveys that yet.

    • Please register or sign in to reply
    Please register or sign in to reply
    Loading