How To Prevent Obstruction By Knowledge
Our point of view, perception, and learning are all objects of our knowledge, and these are things that prevent us from going ahead. "I already know everything there is to know about that. I don't need to learn any more." We have arrived only at the fourth rung of the ladder, yet we think it is the top rung. Whatever the value of what our intellect and our insight has attained, we have to abandon it. If we don't, we put an end to further progress. Even though it has some value, our knowledge has become an obstacle. If we are caught in our knowledge, if we say that our knowledge is absolute truth, we suffer from the knowledge-obstacle. Those who have knowledge but know that they have to abandon it in order to go further do not suffer from the knowledge-obstacle.Objects of knowledge are like water that has become i

Thinking of Starting a Lifestyle Magazine
The UK market for men’s and women’s lifestyle magazines is going through a highly dynamic period; there have been many major launches and much corporate activity in recent years, which has had an impact on the overall market.The improved performance has been due in large part to a dramatic resurgence of the men’s lifestyle market, prompted by the launch in early 2004 of the two weekly magazines Zoo and Nuts. However, the women’s sector has also shown a robust improvement, with a 10% increase in consumer expenditure during 2004.Original consumer research into magazine readership and attitudes which was commissioned by Key Note, available through www.marketsensus.com and undertaken in August 2005 revealed that a third of all adults are loyal magazine readers, buying the same magazine every week or month.Every year the dance begins. Supervisors and managers know they’ll soon have to do the annual performance review for all of their employees. They get the notice from HR reminding them of the deadlines. They get copies of the forms that will be used. They may even get some training on how to use the forms or conduct the reviews more effectively. Every few years the process will change – either in a small administrative way or in some more substantial way – at least from the perspective of those revising the process.

But to the supervisor, it is all the same. Once a year they have to have a performance conversation with their “direct reports.”

While the employee doesn’t get the memo from HR, they know the time is coming too – they know that at some point they’ll get an email from their boss, or the topic will come up in a staff meeting. “Performance Reviews will be soon, look at your calendars and let’s find a time to do this.”

Most supervisors make this proclamation with a serious tone – they know that they represent the organization’s interests, and that even if they don’t like doing these reviews, they know they are a part of the job. Most employees with more than a couple of years on the job know what their bosses are thinking as well – and the dance continues.

And so it goes – supervisors do performance reviews because they are expected to. And employees participate because they must. Far too infrequently does this conversation lead to meaningful changes in performance – either taking a high performer and making him or her a star or taking a person with some performance challenges and helping to make significant strides of improvement.

Of course these are the goals of the performance review – to provide people with feedback on performance, compare that to the expectations of the job and provide an opportunity for conversation on how to improve (regardless of the current level of performance).

These goals are wonderful. Unfortunately, in most all cases, a performance review, no matter how well done, no matter the intentions of the participants or the skill of the supervisor, won’t achieve these goals.

In other words we do the performance review in our organizations because these goals are valid and “everyone does the

y – at least from the perspective of those revising the process.

But to the supervisor, it is all the same. Once a year they have to have a performance conversation with their “direct reports.”

While the employee doesn’t get the memo from HR, they know the time is coming too – they know that at some point they’ll get an email from their boss, or the topic will come up in a staff meeting. “Performance Reviews will be soon, look at your calendars and let’s find a time to do this.”

Most supervisors make this proclamation with a serious tone – they know that they represent the organization’s interests, and that even if they don’t like doing these reviews, they know they are a part of the job. Most employees with more than a couple of years on the job know what their bosses are thinking as well – and the dance continues.

And so it goes – supervisors do performance reviews because they are expected to. And employees participate because they must. Far too infrequently does this conversation lead to meaningful changes in performance – either taking a high performer and making him or her a star or taking a person with some performance challenges and helping to make significant strides of improvement.

Of course these are the goals of the performance review – to provide people with feedback on performance, compare that to the expectations of the job and provide an opportunity for conversation on how to improve (regardless of the current level of performance).

These goals are wonderful. Unfortunately, in most all cases, a performance review, no matter how well done, no matter the intentions of the participants or the skill of the supervisor, won’t achieve these goals.

In other words we do the performance review in our organizations because these goals are valid and “everyone does th

and let’s find a time to do this.”

Most supervisors make this proclamation with a serious tone – they know that they represent the organization’s interests, and that even if they don’t like doing these reviews, they know they are a part of the job. Most employees with more than a couple of years on the job know what their bosses are thinking as well – and the dance continues.

And so it goes – supervisors do performance reviews because they are expected to. And employees participate because they must. Far too infrequently does this conversation lead to meaningful changes in performance – either taking a high performer and making him or her a star or taking a person with some performance challenges and helping to make significant strides of improvement.

Of course these are the goals of the performance review – to provide people with feedback on performance, compare that to the expectations of the job and provide an opportunity for conversation on how to improve (regardless of the current level of performance).

These goals are wonderful. Unfortunately, in most all cases, a performance review, no matter how well done, no matter the intentions of the participants or the skill of the supervisor, won’t achieve these goals.

In other words we do the performance review in our organizations because these goals are valid and “everyone does th

xpected to. And employees participate because they must. Far too infrequently does this conversation lead to meaningful changes in performance – either taking a high performer and making him or her a star or taking a person with some performance challenges and helping to make significant strides of improvement.

Of course these are the goals of the performance review – to provide people with feedback on performance, compare that to the expectations of the job and provide an opportunity for conversation on how to improve (regardless of the current level of performance).

These goals are wonderful. Unfortunately, in most all cases, a performance review, no matter how well done, no matter the intentions of the participants or the skill of the supervisor, won’t achieve these goals.

In other words we do the performance review in our organizations because these goals are valid and “everyone does th

the job and provide an opportunity for conversation on how to improve (regardless of the current level of performance).

These goals are wonderful. Unfortunately, in most all cases, a performance review, no matter how well done, no matter the intentions of the participants or the skill of the supervisor, won’t achieve these goals.

In other words we do the performance review in our organizations because these goals are valid and “everyone does them.” Then when they don’t reap the desired results, organizations look to update the forms, improve the feedback skills of the supervisors or otherwise improve the process.

Here is the best way to improve the process: Eliminate the Performance Review.

That’s right, I said get rid of performance reviews!

The Fallacies of the Performance Review

Imagine that a dancer had a personal coach. That dancer would expect their coach to provide them with a clear picture of what excellent performance looked like, expect ongoing encouragement, positive feedback when appropriate and correction when needed. The dancer wouldn’t be very happy if the coach only watched once in awhile throughout the year during occasional performances or practices, then scheduled an annual meeting to discuss progress.

In the same way, a golfer would want a coach to provide feedback frequently and timely.

We read these examples and nod our heads in agreement. Then we go to work and do exactly the opposite.

In the most fundamental ways our work is no different from the dancer or golfer – in our work we perform (do our work) all the time. In order for us to benefit from coaching it needs to be in context, and in the flow of our work. Unfortunately the performance review process is set up to look at our work as a snapshot, rather than a running video recording.

Stated simply, while performance is an ongoing process, a performance review is an event (and usually a far too infrequent event at that).

What You Can Do as a Leader

There are several things you can do as a leader to work within your current performance review process and still make it work significantly better. Everything suggested is within your control and won’t violate any of the tenets of your existing organ