Do You Regularly "Fit Test" Your Employees?

One of the biggest conundrums in performance management is knowing how best to address the needs and possibilities of the different groups in an organization's talent base.  In particular, there is the challenge of how to bring out the best from the "thick middle", the 80% or so of "Steady Eddies" who get the job done, but don't necessarily stand out in their roles.

Anthony Tjan, founder and CEO of the venture capital firm Cue Ball, highlights a number of suggestions in his HBR Blog post The Challenge of the Average Employee.  One particular idea worth noting is what he calls a "Fit Point Test."  Tjan argues that we may be spending too much time discussing performance and not enough time discussing job fit in our regular conversations with employees - a particular pitfall for those in the middle of the pack.

...at regular intervals of a person's career, there should be not just "performance reviews" but also what I call a "Fit Test Point." Too many times we see someone who can do the job, but if we are truly honest know that in the long-run they will be stuck in the middle of the organization. My sense is that companies spend more time discussing performance than they do "fit." Performance reviews are biased towards looking out for the best interests of a company — as long as someone is doing their job they have a place. A "Fit Test Point" is a tool to carefully consider the best interests of an employee. Is this person in product development really better served finding a position as an industry or market researcher, or is that analyst who can clearly make the next two rungs of the management track better served making a switch in her career now given the opportunity cost of time? We all know situations where instincts and experience alerted us that a job was not the best fit for someone, yet we let the person continue because they filled a short-term need or because we lacked the courage to have the honest "Fit Test" conversation. Consider key inflection points of one's career advancement and have the parallel conversation of performance and fit reviews.

 What do you think of the idea of a regular Fit Test conversation - above, beyond and/or distinct from any performance review process?  What support and resources would managers need to conduct this conversation in a productive and appropriate manner? 

Who out there is already doing something like this and can share any lessons from their experience?

Image: Creative Commons photo "Square Peg in a Round Hole" by danstorey14

Comments

[E James (Jim) Brennan]

Isn't that the role of the Developmental Review? It focuses on the KSAs of the employee, proven and unproven, and how the enterprise can assist with personal career plans. Obviously conducted off-cycle from the performance appraisal review because it is 100% non-judgmental and must be non-threatening, it covers a much wider agenda than the current job: their desires, ambitions, proven competencies, strengths, weaknesses, what is needed for progression, non-traditional options for training and development, and even (trust level permitting) frank exploration of the limitations of status quo employer capabilities to satisfy known employee future expectations. A cooperative action plan is created, where the employee must act and the employer must provide support.

Since it is an intense employee-oriented career planning exercise, it requires a lot more from a supervisor than a simple current performance review. Special training and substantial additional resources are needed.

[Ann Bares]

Jim:

A good point, and one I considered as well. In my experience, though, most "developmental reviews" don't really deal with job fit in the manner that I think Tjan is advocating. They may cover an employee's particular career aspirations and potential promotion paths, but they often dodge the different, more difficult and honest assessment of an employee who is doing the job adequately and doesn't express an explicit wish for advancement - yet may need to consider alternatives for the employer's sake as well as their own long term success.

At least that was my take - but I may simply be unaware of good practice already happening in this area. Thoughts?

[Human Resources Management]

Very nice and useful points. Performance and Development Review is not simply tabulating scores on a performance ratings form; it is a holistic approach to the development of staff whilst effectively achieving University and individual objectives.