Discover how research in neuroscience is helping organizations transform managerial conversations, engage employees, and dramatically improve performance. Join Dr. David Rock (Director of the NeuroLeadership Institute) and Tom Baker (Sr. Vice President of HR at SanDisk) for a complimentary webinar on the neuroscience of connecting better in the workplace. This session will explore the case study of a recent brain-based initiative at SanDisk and how it elevated manager conversations to drive performance and engagement.
This webinar will highlight the big insights and distill the science behind the effort. Participants will explore how leaders can make performance conversations easier and more effective, including how to:
- Establish a growth mindset
- Minimize threat in difficult conversations
- Facilitate insight and motivate others to create sustainable habits
Companies have long spent considerable energy trying to develop scalable systems for keeping track of, motivating and rewarding the performance of their employees…
Read the complete article here.
When leaders dig into our Kill Your Performance Ratings research, many are eager to learn what a post-ratings workplace looks like. What steps did these organizations take and what are they doing in place of ratings to create a more engaging and rewarding environment? Lisa Dodge, Director of Global Performance Programs at Microsoft, will join us to share her company’s story in a Free Webinar. Discover why Microsoft removed ratings and take a deep dive into in how they transformed their performance management system for the better. Attendees will dig into Microsoft’s performance “before and after”, complete with internal research and case study data.
Discover how research in neuroscience is helping organizations like Time Warner Cable transform managerial conversations, engage employees, and dramatically improve performance.
In this video, David Rock, Director of the NeuroLeadership Institute, and Stacy Picklesimer, Sr. Director of Organization Development at Time Warner Cable, for a complimentary webinar on the neuroscience of connecting better in the workplace. This session explores fresh case study data and highlight big research insights into how leaders can make performance conversations easier and more effective, including how to:
- Establish a growth mindset
- Minimize threat in difficult conversations
- Facilitate insight and motivate others to create sustainable habits
From Strategy+Business:
Evidence is mounting that conventional approaches to strategic human capital management are broken. This is particularly true for performance management (PM) systems—the appraisal approaches in which employees (working with their managers) set goals for the year; managers interview others who have worked with them and write up an appraisal; employees are rated and ranked numerically; and salary, bonus, and promotion opportunities are awarded accordingly. A 2013 survey by the Society for Human Resource Management asked HR professionals about the quality of their own PM systems; only 23 percent said their company was above average in the way it conducted them. Other studies uncovered even more disdain. According to the Corporate Executive Board (CEB), a management research group, surveys have found that 95 percent of managers are dissatisfied with their PM systems, and 90 percent of HR heads believe they do not yield accurate information…
Evidence is mounting that conventional approaches to strategic human capital management are broken.
This is particularly true for performance management (PM) systems—the appraisal approaches in which employees (working with their managers) set goals for the year; managers interview others who have worked with them and write up an appraisal; employees are rated and ranked numerically; and salary, bonus, and promotion opportunities are awarded accordingly. A 2013 survey by the Society for Human Resource Management asked HR professionals about the quality of their own PM systems; only 23 percent said their company was above average in the way it conducted them. Other studies uncovered even more disdain.
According to the Corporate Executive Board (CEB), a management research group, surveys have found that 95 percent of managers are dissatisfied with their PM systems, and 90 percent of HR heads believe they do not yield accurate information.
Become a member to access this audio.
The technology to see very small things up close showed us we had much wrong about health. The technology to see big things far away showed us we are not the center of the universe. More recently, a technology called fMRI, that lets us collect images of oxygen use inside an active brain, has shown us that some of our long-held beliefs about human motivation may be wrong. Matthew Lieberman, one of the founding fathers of a field called social neuroscience, tells this story in his new book, Social: Why Our Brains Are Wired to Connect. Learn more…
Among the hundreds of reasons to hate performance reviews, here’s another: They dull certain parts of our brains. Temporarily, at least. Brain research shows that when a person’s status is threatened-something that often happens when we’re told in a performance review how we need to improve-activity diminishes in certain regions of the brain. When that occurs, says David Rock, the author of “Your Brain at Work” and the director of an institute aimed at applying neuroscience to leadership issues, “people’s fields of view actually constrict, they can take in a narrower stream of data, and there’s a restriction in creativity.” Not exactly a state of mind anyone wants to have. But we don’t need neuroscience to tell us why the annual performance review song-and-dance is so universally reviled. We have our own reasons: the endless paperwork, the evaluation criteria so utterly unrelated to our jobs, and the simplistic and quota-driven ratings used to label the performance of otherwise complex, educated human beings. Read more…
Nearly every mid to large size company in the world now has some kind of performance management system, a process that in theory should help people set to achieve goals and ultimately drive performance.
Yet only 14% of organizations are actually happy with their performance management system as it stands, according to industry research firm CEB. Despite that, so far only 3% of companies are doing anything radical around how they manage performance. The rest are tinkering on the surface, altering the number of goals being set, shifting from a 3 to a 5-point rating scale, or changing the rating criteria.
While I respect that significant change in a large organization is tough, tinkering isn’t doing much. Research shows that there is no measurable impact on performance linked to the number of ratings people have, or from altering the wording for these ratings. It seems that we need a significant rethink of the whole concept of how we manage performance.
Driving this need are seismic changes in demographics as well as how work is structured today. Annual goals might have worked 20 years ago, but between new technologies and a rapidly changing economy it is hard for goals to be relevant for more than a quarter. Even quarterly feedback does little for younger generations craving to learn something useful every week from their boss. And consider the fact that most of the time performance is only discussed with one manager – even when that employee is involved in a half dozen emergent teams unrelated to his manager’s work.
The nature of work has become more relational and creative than ever, with a greater need for collaboration — which some performance systems accidentally inhibit. Read more…