To What Extent Should a Manager’s Evaluation Be Based on the Performance of Their Subordinates?

From the start of having a “real” job, I quickly concluded that the quality of management was crucial. I went so far as believing that, as a society, we should focus on training and developing people to be better managers and leaders. Every work will require and benefit from individuals with good management and leadership skills. One of the many ways management is so critical is that it has a tremendous impact on the employee–both in terms of the latter’s productivity and job satisfaction. I suspect this is obvious and banal, and yet to what extent are managers evaluated based on their employees’ performance? Now, managers don’t have complete control over their employees–and in some situations their authority can be quite limited–so let me rephrase the question: To what extent are managers evaluated based on their actions relating to getting the best performance out of their subordinates? In my work experience, managers aren’t really evaluated on this. Now, I’ve always assumed two things: 1) That managers should be evaluated on how well they help their employees perform, and 2) this is common practice in other organizations and businesses. I’m wondering if these two assumptions are correct, and I’m interested in hearing from others, based on their experience and perceptions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.