* *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
23-10-17, 03:31AM

Login with username, password and session length

Recent

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 71814
  • Total Topics: 1564
  • Online Today: 99
  • Online Ever: 826
  • (23-02-15, 06:44PM)
Users Online
Users: 4
Guests: 64
Total: 68

Author Topic: Review objectives  (Read 3687 times)

BIMB

  • VLH Supporter
  • Newbie
  • ******
  • Posts: 7
Review objectives
« on: 08-08-17, 10:18PM »
Anyone else had a review and their targets for their objectives been increased??? Is this right or wrong??? I thought when objectives were set at start of the year they should stay the same??? How are you meant to work towards a met or exceeded for your pay review???????

OvaSees

  • Know All
  • ****
  • Posts: 386
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #1 on: 08-08-17, 11:20PM »
Happens all the time at Tesco, goalposts continually being moved because it has no cohesive, strategic plan - it just takes each week/period/quarter as it comes then reacts in the next one when it finds it's fallen short, or it sees some managers outperforming and tasks them harder to carry the underperforming ones. This is becoming an increasingly common trend and my partner comes home from work every week describing this, and this is what I tell them...

What you describe comes down to a matter of whether you have genuinely been set a new or revised objective (something which you agreed to achieve in a measured and calculated way with specified resources) or simply been given more task (told do more and/or work harder with the same or reduced resources).

A true objective should stretch and challenge the recipient, otherwise what's the point of an 'objective' if you're going to deliver it anyway without much if any effort? So surely you should argue that if you 'meet' the new target then that you means you 'exceeded' the previous one which you agreed to on the basis that it was defined to stretch and challenge you, therefore on the basis of the objective that you were set at the start of the year you are performing as 'exceeded'. To support this, it's worth a reminder that an objective is not an objective if it is simply imposed upon you - that would be task instead, upon which you can of course be measured but not managed as this increased target has been introduced due to at least one variable that is beyond your control - if this variable was in your control, you would be exceeding anyway wouldn't you?

But to be an objective it has to be SMART (specific/strategic, measurable/motivating, achievable/attainable, realistic/relevant, timed/testable) and thus agreeable to both you and the objective setter. The situation you describe does not sound realistic or achievable and from what you say is therefore not agreeable - you've simply been told to do or achieve more, which means the initially agreed objective was therefore poorly defined and/or set which is not your issue - this is an inadequacy through lack of foresight on behalf of the objective setter who is now setting you up to fail to cover their incompetence, a common tactic in Tesco. If however your objective is being reviewed due to some unforeseen or unplanned event, then the whole objective needs redefining - which includes the timescale and/or other resources required to deliver, otherwise it's just a task. If the objective setter has any kind of management sense, they will understand that it benefits nobody to set objectives that nobody will achieve - including themselves.

Ask yourself a simpler question - lets say the target for scan rate on checkouts is 90 items per hour. If you agreed an objective with a cashier to scan 100 items in one hour, then after 30 minutes you saw that they had scanned 65 items already and then told them they had to scan 130 items in that hour, would it be fair and reasonable to describe them as a 'miss' and/or manage their performance if they ended up scanning 110 items in that hour? I suspect you know the answer to your own question  ;)

Equalizer87

  • Sad Muppet
  • ******
  • Posts: 1764
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #2 on: 09-08-17, 09:23AM »
Any objectives they give you should be clearly justified in a "business plan" and not just dreamed up out of the back of a managers head.

If they cannot present a business reason for these increased objectives, then they have no foundation for you to be measured against it.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"

Wearethehearts

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 88
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #3 on: 09-08-17, 10:09AM »
It's simply a way of ensuring NO manager gets an exceed, move the goalposts, I would dare say if you got close to the new targets at your quarter 3 review they would move them again, to ensure you don't exceed, personally, I would challenge the "new " targets stating that you agreed your year targets at week 1.  Tell them you suspect this is being done with the sole purpose of limiting your ability to earn, which is unreasonable, get the area rep involved, make as much noise as possible, Tesco hate folk talking up, standing up for their rights, you will find it may not change the new targets , but it will make your SM realise you will not accept him/her limiting your potential to earn.

Miffed72

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #4 on: 09-08-17, 06:36PM »
1 of my objectives as a tm is to achieve a green wmty.
In the 30yrs the store has been open it has never had a green.
Epic fail# whats the point!

Sackdave

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #5 on: 09-08-17, 10:05PM »
Ask your manager weekly how your doing with your objectives and document it, you can do this on a let's talk form, anything you're not achieving ask  them for help and next steps, again documented, your manager should want you to achieve your objectives so shouldn't have a problem with documenting the conversion. Have this paper trail and then if you have completed your great leaders next steps you should at a minimum be a meet. Or if all else fails fake customer view point , fiddle waste routines, bully staff in wmty by lying to them that their bonus depends on it, which is what happens in our store.

TheOLDone

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #6 on: 10-08-17, 12:29AM »
wow its really got to this....

londoner83

  • VLH Supporter
  • Smart Arse
  • ******
  • Posts: 521
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #7 on: 10-08-17, 09:55AM »
Still waiting for End of Yr review; as well as Qtr 1 and 2....be interesting if they try and discuss my objectives at qtr 3.

Blue52

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #8 on: 11-08-17, 02:12PM »
The roll out of reviews are meant only one review per year with catch up meetings to see if you are on track.

billandben

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #9 on: 11-08-17, 09:10PM »
I was a teamleader the last time I had a review 8-)

Sackdave

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #10 on: 11-08-17, 09:25PM »
All review grades have to be sent off. In my experience they are sent off before the reviews happen. If you're not happy with your review grade . Appeal and get the union to ask for a copy of the email sent from the store managers account or PM account, this will show that your grade was pre judged.

David1

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #11 on: 11-08-17, 11:13PM »
Just to be clear.
No manager at any level should be receiving quarterly reviews. The correct process is one yearly review.

OpShunned

  • VLH Supporter
  • Smart Arse
  • ******
  • Posts: 883
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #12 on: 11-08-17, 11:22PM »
... although, if managers had been reviewed more often and held up to the light, some of the rats would have been flushed out of the sewage pipe along with the parasites that lived off them?


JL

  • Smart Arse
  • *****
  • Posts: 986
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #13 on: 12-08-17, 12:03AM »
Just to be clear.
No manager at any level should be receiving quarterly reviews. The correct process is one yearly review.

David1 you have a few questions on the nights to twilight section

Equalizer87

  • Sad Muppet
  • ******
  • Posts: 1764
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #14 on: 12-08-17, 09:37AM »
... although, if managers had been reviewed more often and held up to the light, some of the rats would have been flushed out of the sewage pipe along with the parasites that lived off them?

How is that possible when most of the ones doing the reviews are rats themselves? ??
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"

OvaSees

  • Know All
  • ****
  • Posts: 386
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #15 on: 12-08-17, 11:40AM »
Just to be clear.
No manager at any level should be receiving quarterly reviews. The correct process is one yearly review.
'Correct process' and what actually happens at Tesco are two completely different things. My partner may not have quarterly 'reviews' but still has quarterly 'one to ones' instead at which their performance and objectives are discussed, the targets invariably moved and a performance rating is strongly intimated at but described as 'what you are tracking towards'. That sure sounds like a review to me, so what's the difference? It's a mechanism to keep the pressure on, as if they don't have enough already.

David1

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #16 on: 12-08-17, 03:50PM »
What is unreasonable about having a conversation with someone about how they are performing? It may be alien to people at Tesco but in the majority of companies it is intrinsic to their business to discuss employee performance on a continual basis.
Surely you can't expect a formal quarterly review process to be removed and no discussion about performance to take place until the end of a financial year?

OvaSees

  • Know All
  • ****
  • Posts: 386
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #17 on: 12-08-17, 05:30PM »
There is nothing unreasonable about it, nor did I infer as such. But to be clear -  a business whose 'correct process' (as you describe it) is to have only one annual review actually (as you describe it) conducts reviews continually? No wonder its management is confused.

There is a succinct difference between a formal performance review and a discussion over progress/regress, whilst Tesco may state a policy of only having one annual formal review the reality is that this is happening more frequently under the guise of 'supporting performance'. As I post, managers in our store are currently scrambling about for 'evidence' in preparation for their half year reviews, a situation which I presume led to this thread being started. They were also reviewed - and rated - in Q1. After just 13 weeks, my partner was rated 'miss' on the basis that they had not delivered to a target that was allocated 52 weeks to be delivered. Whilst I fully understand practices within other business environments - I dare say better than you do - this kind of unrealistic behaviour is unique to Tesco. It's how its management year-end performance grades are 'forecasted' - or should I say 'pre-determined'.

forrestgimp

  • VLH Supporter
  • Smart Arse
  • ******
  • Posts: 514
  • Cant wait to retire when I am 110
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #18 on: 12-08-17, 08:42PM »
pwned..........

OpShunned

  • VLH Supporter
  • Smart Arse
  • ******
  • Posts: 883
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #19 on: 12-08-17, 10:34PM »
 :D :D

If you work for Tesco, you don't have the luxury anymore of having 'time' to gauge progression/regression. You can worry your b utt off day after day and then chop! Alun Stewart doesn't give a t oss how you were doing, you're going!

It's why no-one gives a flying f art anymore. Just waiting for the one armed bandit merchants to yank your chain.
« Last Edit: 12-08-17, 10:38PM by OpShunned »

londoner83

  • VLH Supporter
  • Smart Arse
  • ******
  • Posts: 521
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #20 on: 13-08-17, 09:43AM »
The management review is a can of worms....

How can you be reviewed against objectives at end of year if they have never been set?

How can your store manager email off your grade before you and your manager have had the review and discussed your performance?

Like much in Tesco what is supposed to happen is way off the reality in stores....

Be very interesting if Daves rumoured management cull is based in part of managers reviews.

OvaSees

  • Know All
  • ****
  • Posts: 386
Re: Review objectives
« Reply #21 on: 13-08-17, 10:57AM »
Indeed. As evidenced by 7 pages of postings from managers at http://www.verylittlehelps.com/index.php?topic=16061.0, why do 'performance reviews' anyway if they are not going to be awarded a performance-based pay rise despite being on such a contract? The only conclusion you can draw from that coupled with the original post here is Tesco is simply trying to place more managers in the 'miss' category to manage them out under the guise of 'supporting their performance', another example of policy abuse vs reality.
« Last Edit: 13-08-17, 10:59AM by OvaSees »