RESULT BASED PROMITIONS??

Subordinate: I have done exceedingly well and have met all my KPI (Key Performance Indicators) targets this year. I deserve a promotion.

Me: What is the way/strategy/ method which helped you in this achievement?

Subordinate: As a boss you should be happy that I have such a great achievement. It does not matter if I have some plan or not. What matters is only results?

As a Boss do you get into such Questions? What should be your reply? Should you only see the results or does the way also matters?

 This is the debate what I call as WHAT Vs HOW challenge. For this debate, I can across a very interesting concept called “Four Student Model” developed by Prof Kano.

 Pl refer to Picture-1.

The model describes state of a student, who attends classes in school in order to get good marks in the examination. Following are the advices given to this student: -

STUDENT A: - Has attended the classes regularly and gets good marks in exam. He is advised to continue doing the same and try to get better marks in future.

STUDENT B: - He had got good marks despite not studying. He might have done selective study of subjects which favoured him this time. Or his answers got correct just randomly (like multiple choice questions). In this case there is huge risk, as he may not be able to maintain his performance over a period. He is advised to invest tie in studying.

STUDENT C: - This student has worked hard throughout the year but did not get good marks. The advice to him is to improve the way in which he is studying in order to score more.

STUDENT D: - He is advised to be serious in studies, otherwise find some better course of his interest.

The same concept can be applied to industries also, with Attending Classes being replaced by Having Strategy and Result to be replaced by KPI achievement.

With this concept, the interpretation will be as below (Pl refer to Picture-2): -

STUDENT A: - Good strategy to achieve KPI. The same process must continue. We should try to make it fast/cheap/high quality.

STUDENT B: - Due to nonexistence of strategy, there is huge risk involved. This should be very carefully observed as the risk of failure are very high.

STUDENT C: - The strategy is in place, but wrongly set. Need to re investigate the same to ensure it is aligned with the current needs.

STUDENT D: - There looks to be a loss in interest, neither strategy exists nor there is KPI achievement. It is better to exit the same business and may enter something more interesting.

The above case of discussion between sub ordinate and me is a clear case of Student B type.

So, the subordinate might have had good achievement this year, but there is risk associated with his performance in coming years.

Therefore, if without having knowledge of planning/strategy he is promoted then I am putting risk to the company and to my own performance in coming years.

It will be better to discuss with him the importance of making plan/strategy to achieve his work as a part of his counselling sessions before promoting him to next levels.