Employees need and want feedback. Whether he’s the boss or the lowest-ranking employee, a person wants and needs to know how others think he’s doing.
What to Evaluate
By employing the discipline of a formal appraisal process, you can evaluate an individual’s specific performance goals for the appraisal period. You can also explore issues important to your culture and use what you learn as a foundation for coaching people to achieve higher levels of performance. The numbers can be measured on their own. The challenge for you is to evaluate all of the other ele- ments that combine to make your culture what it is—or what you want it to be.
For example, to evaluate passion for excellence, you might rate your staff in terms of the extent to which they
! demonstrate pride in their work
! complete their work on time and on budget
! solve problems effectively
! meet client-service expectations
! communicate clearly and listen well
To measure integrity, you might rate the staff on whether they
! behave unethically or tolerate unethical behavior of others
! maintain their continuing-education requirements willingly
! put the firm at risk with their own behavior
To assess lifetime learning, you might explore whether they
! are committed to expanding their knowledge and education
! apply technology tools well
To find out whether they lead by example, you might ask whether they
! demonstrate a positive attitude toward the firm’s goals
! take responsibility for actions and accept responsibility for mistakes
! act as a role model or mentor for others
To measure a balanced life, you’ll want to observe how well they
! act as a role model in how they balance business and personal activities
! avoid becoming obsessive about work
! avoid becoming obsessive about play. (Remember, a balanced life doesn’t mean taking a lot of days off from work but rather keeping work and nonwork in sync.)
To assess their respect for others, you may want to rate them on whether they
! respond to feedback from others respectfully
! keep you informed of progress on client work, if appropriate
! treat colleagues and subordinates respectfully
! respect clients in what they say and do and how they respond to issues
Your challenge is to make sure that every person in the organiza- tion adopts not just one of the virtues but rather the total concept.
Partners, for example, will say that PILLAR is not appropriate for them because nobody would expect them to lead “a balanced life.”
After all, they’re the most important person on the planet and God only knows what would happen if they didn’t spend all their time in the office. But it’s particularly critical that partners, of all people, exhibit the values and behavior that have been defined as important to the organization.
We must continually remind our partners at Moss Adams that their succession (and, consequently, retirement plan) depends on the admittance of future partners. And if people think that partnership is a dog’s life, they won’t aspire to it. This doesn’t apply only to the balanced-life concept but to the other virtues as well, like passion for
excellence and lifelong learning. We expect all of our people—but especially our partners—to lead by example. Behavioral change, unfortunately, comes slowly—unless it comes by virtue of a near- death experience.
We try to weed out those in the firm who cannot embrace these concepts. No matter how big their economic contribution to the firm, people who set negative examples eventually sap the firm of its lifeblood. The long-term economic toll of bad apples is significant.
PILLAR, of course, is just an example of how one firm reinforces its expectations and the culture it’s trying to create. Each firm must establish its own boundaries and expectations, although your firm is free to borrow the PILLAR approach if you feel it applies. The key is to be clear about what you expect of everyone, know what culture you want to build and sustain, and have a means for evaluating and reinforcing the right behavior. Should you choose to ignore all of the soft issues and focus solely on making money, that is a clear statement of culture and will appeal to some people. But we would recommend broadening your perspective.
How to Evaluate
Most firms that are successful in reinforcing behavior do so through a structured evaluation process in which peers evaluate peers, super- visors evaluate subordinates, and subordinates evaluate supervisors (upstream evaluation).
A peer evaluation allows your colleagues to judge you and your performance against your performance objectives and the culture that you’re trying to create. By pointing out when you’re drifting away from the mark or calling attention to your strengths or weak- nesses, they give you the opportunity and the insight to improve.
An upstream evaluation allows your subordinates to evaluate you objectively, knowing there will be no negative consequences from showing you how those who work for you perceive you. This is criti- cal for building a dynamic organization because if you’re not trusted, respected, or liked, you will lose your ability to leverage your busi- ness effectively.
Of course, the smaller the firm, the harder it is to employ these tools effectively because everyone knows the source of the com-
ments. That’s why you must encourage openness and candor when eliciting these appraisals and make it clear that you will not seek retri- bution for criticism. As you listen to the constructive comments and you work to change either the perception or the reality, you begin to create a team atmosphere of trust and respect that contributes to the success of the business.
Larger practices can create a more structured appraisal process and, to some degree, preserve anonymity for subordinates who are doing upstream evaluations of the practice leaders. Some firms outsource this process to consultants to ensure objectivity and trust in the process. If the owner has a business coach, for example, the coach would be an appropriate choice for compiling the responses, and the coach would gain a better foundation for coaching the indi- vidual in business matters.
In the late 1990s, we were asked by a prominent financial adviser to serve in this intermediary role. He seemed to be a living example of someone “lonely at the top.” It wounded him when he heard criticism of himself from people in the firm or even from others in the industry. Yet he was not sure how to minimize this or even what issues to address. To help, we created an upstream evaluation process that applied not only to him but also to anyone in the firm who had employees reporting to them. Over a three-year period, we tracked and monitored each manager’s evaluations, but especially his, since he was most eager for the feedback.
In the first year, the semiannual evaluations were very tentative;
the staff would give him very high scores (on a scale of one to five), but their comments tended to be more critical and out of sync with the numeric evaluation they assigned. We used the comments as the basis for counseling him. In the second year, when the staff saw that the owner did not blast them for what they said, they tended to score more accurately and their comments were more substantive. By the third year, we saw a perceptible increase in trust.
Although we were pleased to see the evaluation process take root, we were even more pleased to see how constructive feedback on issues of importance to the firm helped the owner and his senior-level peo- ple improve their performance and their relationship with their team and reduce turnover. With each evaluation, we were able to counsel
the owner on how well he communicated with the staff, how well he recognized their contributions to the firm, how he awarded pro- motions, and how effectively he encouraged employees to improve their own performance. Over time, the business became both more efficient and more profitable. But oddly enough, this improvement did not result from a greater emphasis on sales; it occurred because there was greater emphasis on the firm’s mission and culture and a unified commitment to the firm’s goals.