Kathryn Minshew Quotes

Real-time feedback and coaching promotes learning. When feedback is connected to compensation, feedback is muted, distorted, and given less frequently.

Even your most talented employees have room for growth in some area, and you're doing your employee a disservice if the sum of your review is: 'You're great!' No matter how talented the employee, think of ways he could grow towards the position he might want to hold two, five, or 10 years down the line.

When employees underperform, a leader tells them so.

If people want to criticize a performance, that I understand. I think that's important.

The whole purpose of annual reviews is to keep you abreast of whether or not you are fulfilling the requirements of tenure.

So as an amateur Olympic competitor I loved criticism, because it made me better. But now as a professional I don't really know how to channel it or where to take it, so I don't take it quite as well.

Most corporations have human-resources processes that involve discussions with your manager, performance evaluations, calibrations for performance and potential succession planning.

Get the best people and train them well.

Coaching is nothing more than eliminating mistakes before you get fired.

I always had to keep improving my skills in order to remain competitive and keep winning.

I feel good, I feel good. Our training staff, they're the best.

As much as we think of performance management as numeric and thus perfectly quantifiable, it is as much a product of context and social science as the products we design and develop.

The best way to make employees happy is to set realistic goals and achieve them. The big job is to make sure those small steps are pointing us in the right direction and demonstrate at the end of the year that they all add up to something pretty great.

Eliminate numerical quotas, including Management by Objectives.

If I had my way, I wouldn't do annual reviews, if I felt that everybody would be more honest about positive and negative feedback along the way. I think the annual review process is so antiquated.

I try to motivate people and align our individual incentives with organizational incentives. And then let people do their best.

My main job was developing talent. I was a gardener providing water and other nourishment to our top 750 people. Of course, I had to pull out some weeds, too.

You measure your people and you take action on those that don't measure up.

You got to be rigorous in your appraisal system. The biggest cowards are managers who don't let people know where they stand.

We will also have a more rigorous approach to professional development and managing unsatisfactory performance.

The characteristic shared by people at the top of their profession is that, to get better, they crave criticism. Most people don't like criticism, but if you are trying to shave two tenths of a second at 800 metres, that is what you crave.

Traditional performance reviews have passed their sell-by date. Big time. There's research showing that roughly two-thirds of performance appraisals have either no effect - or a negative effect! - on employee performance.

We know that recognition and intrinsic motivation are important to our success, but the key is finding ways to effectively operationalize them.

I have high expectations for the people who work for me. I figure that if they work really hard and do a good job on one of my campaigns or in my office, that experience will serve them well later on.

If performance management were a movie, it will become less 'Gladiator' and more 'Moneyball.'