Wes Kao

When we examine performance reviews, do they fully capture capabilities as well? It is impossible to encapsulate performance in a single metric. What factors do you consider as the most important ones for a high preforming team member? I recently encountered a matrix that introduced an intriguing approach by incorporating potential as a new axis to performance evaluation. When this layer is added, it may reveal that high-potential resources might be experiencing low performance due to other factors. If I were to introduce another dimension, it would be work environment difficulties and resiliency. There are numerous additional metrics, and measuring quality, efficiency, and effectiveness can be challenging at times. However, retaining misleading metrics can do more harm than good. An excellent example illustrates this: 'When a programmer writes 80 lines of code per hour, they may produce a significant volume of code, but it does not speak to the quality of the code.' Therefore, if we persist with incorrect metrics, what are the potential consequences? Image source