I'm an advocate for data analysis. A big one at that. I don't believe in making a decision based on the current view. I always asked to go back, forward, current, and proceed to give my employees the benefit of the doubt, unless data shows otherwise.
Data don't lie, if collected accurately. For some odd reason, when it comes to managing people, I often find it hard to truly evaluate someone because proper data are still subjective feelings and emotions, even if they try to maintain professionalism and objectivity.
Regardless of my journey in managing people, I have find myself today to question the objectivity of how I'm being managed. HR law these days are pro "proven guilty until innocent". So needless to say, if you are being framed, you need to have an alibi to get you out of accusation that are incorrect.
2011, I found myself being caught in that for the first time ever supervising my group. I will spare the details of the event but the results were disappointing. I have since lost my reputation and it almost feels like the "favor" has left me. All because someone said something that was not true. Today I received my performance review and I am quite teed off by it. It seems as though that the negative incident was the main focus.
My question to the HR buffs out there, is it right to provide a PERFORMANCE evaluation based on a 1-time event? What about all the other positives and home runs that took place? Certainly someone should consider stopping the management and ask "what happened?" or "what were his obstacles?" since past data proved otherwise?
However it goes, I'm shaking this off. I thanked them for the feedback and I will work to prove, and prove to them that the snapshot impression is extremely skewed. I need to let my action speak louder than words. But quite frankly, if I could encourage any managers/bosses out there, please bat for your employees. They are your workforce that gets you to your organization's goal. Don't demasculate them based on a one-sided, one-time event, it's proposterous!
