Which do you prefer: Anonymous or open evaluations of work performance?
February 27, 2007 10:41am CST
At work, we have annual work performance evaluations that involve self-rating as well as ratingg by supervisors. Then, you get a chance to discuss these with your supervisors. It is frightening, but at the same time enlightening, as long as you keep an open mind. We used to have peer evaluations, too. Would you prefer evaluations to be done in secret/anonymously or openly?
• United States
27 Feb 07
I like open evaluatios best for a few reasons. Number one- it gives me that chance to seek advice from my evaluators. Number two-I also get a feel for what my bosses think of me and number two- it lets me know who the people who are just out to critisize are so I can avoid them like the plague.
27 Feb 07
I agree on all three counts. To avoid a "free-for-all" and to promote some level of accountability on the part of evaluators, they must be willing to stand up to their assessments in a face-to-face encounter. This way, we hope constructive criticism prevails. More often than not, those who are just out to "destroy" others end up destroying themselves in the process, by creating an image of non-objectivity, spitefulness (if that becomes obvious), and all other negatives linked to failure to be "on the level". Thanks, threegoats!