Shows & Panels
- AFCEA Answers
- Ask the CIO
- The Big Data Dilemma
- Carrying On with Continuity of Operations
- Connected Government
- Constituent Servicing
- Continuous Monitoring: Tools and Techniques for Trustworthy Government IT
- The Cyber Imperative
- Cyber Solutions for 2013 and Beyond
- The Data Privacy Imperative: Safeguarding Sensitive Data
- Expert Voices
- Federal Executive Forum
- Federal IT Challenge
- Federal Tech Talk
- Mission-critical Apps in the Cloud
- The Modern Federal Threat Landscape
- The Path from Legacy Systems
- The Real Deal on Digital Government
- The Reality of Continuous Monitoring... Is Your Agency Secure?
- Veterans in Private Sector: Making the Transition
Shows & Panels
Search Tags: performance ratings
Current performance rating processes affect more than 1.8 million federal employees, cost a fortune, often harm morale and productivity, and generate few benefits. So, why do agencies do them, asks Jeff Neal, former CHCO at the Department of Homeland Security.
Whether we admit it or not, most of today's performance rating processes are designed to tell employees they are not as good as they think they are. But what effect does that approach have on people? Former DHS Chief Human Capital Officer Jeff Neal explains why he thinks the process is destructive and is in need of an overhaul.
How would you like it if your spouse or significant other rated your performance, then made his/her findings known to friends and neighbors? In this fantasy world, you would naturally hope your performance would be rated as superior, Senior Correspondent Mike Causey says. But what if you were rated less-than-satisfactory? Would you vow to get better, or would you really rather not even know?
Is the performance-rating system in your agency rigged? Does a bear shed in the woods? Despite its noble intent, many workers say performance ratings where they work measure just about everything but performance, Senior Correspondent Mike Causey says.