The Performance Matrix
The reality is that there are big differences in individual performance. Statements like “she does the work of three people” or “he is worth his weight in gold” are often more true than myth. The best managers recognize this and do their best to identify and promote high performers and develop or eliminate low performers. People’s decisions – who to hire, who to fire, who to promote, who to spend their time with – make or break most leaders.
To assist in this process, a Performance Matrix can be applied periodically (semi-annually or annually) as the basis for recruiting, performance appraisal, and talent reviews.
Most performance appraisal rituals consist of annual numerical rating systems that provide little information on how to actually classify and differentiate employee contributions. Yet effective leaders and managers intuitively know that seemingly comparable employees, with comparable pay scales, often make vastly different levels of contribution. It is not uncommon to hear phrases like “that person is worth at least twice as much as that other person.” Why is this? And how can we develop performance appraisal systems that encourage and acknowledge these dramatic differences in individual contribution?
First, we must recognize that there is a clear distinction between the contributions of self-centered people and people who are more focused on the well-being of the organization as a whole. While everyone acts out of self-interest at some level, some people act primarily out of self-interest and cannot really contribute to any discussion about the well-being of the entire organization without referring (explicitly or implicitly) to their own needs. This is what we mean by self-centered people.
Egocentric people are pretty easy to recognize. They are the ones who will twist the dialogue, no matter what the topic is, in any way necessary to be able to tell you what they think or talk about their background. They love to tell you what they know and, frankly, they are not very inclined to listen to what you may know. They often start with the assumption that they have the answer. They overgeneralize from their own experience to the great theories of the universe. Especially if they are in high-level positions, they expect the administrative staff to bow to their every whim. Lastly, they are much more likely to be men than women.
Egocentric people believe that the world revolves around them and that it should be. Their need to consider their own personal agenda when solving any organizational problem is often much more apparent to those with whom they interact than they realize.
The importance of all this for our purposes here is that it turns out that self-centered people are lousy leaders and managers. There are many reasons for this:
Egocentric people tend to blame others for failures, rather than accept responsibility, and this, of course, makes it impossible to establish a constructive learning organization.
It is impossible for them to have a genuine dialogue on any organizational issue without explicitly or implicitly inserting their own personal agenda.
Great leaders learn to love the people they work with, both their peers and those who work for them. Egocentric people love themselves first, and others a distant second, if they do. Potential followers feel this, and emotionally run as far away from self-centered leaders as possible. Simply put, people know whether their boss cares about them or not, and the boss can’t fake that. No matter who you think they should lead, no one will really follow a self-centered boss down the hill.
The actions of egocentric leaders are primarily driven by increasing their organizational power base or personal financial performance, rather than improving the market power and effectiveness of the organization as a whole.
This brings us to the second dimension on which individual contributions can be evaluated: the level of production and results that the person can offer, either directly or through the management of their work group. It is a fact of organizational life that individuals vary greatly in this dimension. Based on their values, attitude, talent, life circumstances, knowledge and experience, we could think of three levels of performance:
High-performance performers. These are people who can be counted on to consistently perform a large amount of work per unit of time. High achievers are often internally driven, as evidenced by personal stories in which they have delivered high performance over a period of years, regardless of organizational context.
Solid performers. These are people who can be counted on to deliver results that exceed the organization’s acceptable standards.
Weak returns. These are individuals whose individual contributions are not up to the standards of the organization. Often times these people can “talk a good game” but when it comes time to deliver, the results are not found.
By putting together these performance dimensions, a Performance Matrix can be used to classify and differentiate the different levels of individual contribution to organizations:
Headaches are weak performers who are also self-centered. These are the people who not only complain, but add marginal or negative value to the organization. Transforming headache individuals into valuable organizational actors is a low-probability proposition. The solution for these people is simple to conceive, although not always so simple to implement: they need to leave the organization, either voluntarily or involuntarily.
Anxiety also performs weakly, but has the best interests of the organization at heart. The challenge with headaches is providing them with the skills training, performance goals, and mentoring support so they can improve their performance. The heartaches that can turn into valuable professionals are some of the most loyal employees an organization has. On the other hand, the headaches that are unwilling to acknowledge performance gaps or cannot improve their performance should go away. These are some of the most difficult actions a conscientious manager must take, because they know that the employee really wanted to be successful. The best organizations go to great lengths to give heartaches every chance to succeed, before concluding that they can’t.
Cowboys and cowgirls are employees who think primarily of themselves, but can still pay off. In high-tech companies, the classic example of this is the rogue programmer who produces software that works, but refuses to follow any kind of structured process to do so. Salespeople who send the message, “don’t tell me how to sell, or ask me to follow a process, leave me alone to go sell,” are another example. The underlying assumption of Cowboys and Cowgirls is that “results are the only thing that matters.” The problem with tolerating these people is that their interpretation of the results is too limited, if the organization only focuses on what is achieved but does not pay attention to as is achieved, then nothing has been learned to ensure that results can be repeated (or improved) in the future.
Professionals are people who show up to work every day, work hard, care about the interests of the organization, and deliver results. They are the “backbone” of the organization. Retaining professionals and identifying and mentoring those who can become Business Builders is truly a defining proposition for many organizations in today’s knowledge-rich, talent-short economy. In the knowledge-based organization, many of the real assets of the company are in the brains of these professionals. Only when those brains are actively involved does the organization have a chance to succeed.
Rock stars in organizations generally behave like rock stars on VH1. They love being on stage, showing everyone how much they know. They crave attention and tend to dominate (and often ruin) meetings in which the organization is trying to get something done. They are too poor to share ownership of a task (how many rock stars really like to share the stage?). They have fun showing how smart they are, and will go out of their way to orchestrate situations for a chance to do so. Sometimes they are not so subtle about this; One of us once had a classmate who was a classic rock star who got up from his chair at a board meeting, took the presentation pointer from us in mid-sentence, and started to finish the presentation.
The most irritating thing about Rock Stars is that, in a knowledge-based company, you need some of them. They simply bring too much talent for a high-performing individual contribution to the table, and often too much experience to get rid of. However, you need them in the right role. We have a guideline here that is very important and very simple: rock stars shouldn’t have any working for them. As we’ve seen, all self-centered people are lousy leaders and managers, and rock stars are some of the worst, because really believe they are good at almost everything. (The best managers start with the belief that they have something to learn from their direct reports – this is heresy for a rock star.) We have seen this guide violated many times, with hugely destructive consequences for the organization, probably because rock stars have charismatic personalities that superficially suggest that should be good leaders. Instead, rock stars belong to staff roles or individual contributor roles within a line organization, where a strong leader above them can maximize their contribution and minimize their harm.
The most important professional development is that which turns Professionals into Business Builders. The other major development focus is turning Heartaches and Cowboys and Cowgirls into Professionals. On rare occasions, rock stars can also become business builders, but this usually doesn’t happen because the rock star gets too much ego satisfaction from their performance on stage. (They are too busy attending to these ego needs to spend much time with others.)
Operationalization of the performance matrix
Use The Performance Matrix in your hiring process. The best employee development system is to get the right people on the bus first.
Use the Performance Matrix in your talent review process and your performance appraisal system. Categorize each employee on the performance matrix. Set specific goals for what percentage of your employees should be professionals, business builders, and rock stars.
Use The Performance Matrix in your employee development system. Give your Cowboy and Cowgirl employees every opportunity to become professionals by communicating the visions, strategies, goals and programs that represent the organization-centered vision. Give your Heartache employees every opportunity to become professionals by defining results, building on their strengths, and helping them find the right fit.
Do not tolerate the self-centered behavior of cowboys and cowgirls, even though they may be generating strictly defined short-term results. It won’t pay off in the long run, and the short-term consequences of self-centered actions are more serious than you might think.
Don’t let Rock Stars direct or direct anyone. Forever.