• Jeff Moden (6/9/2009)


    Obviously not directed at Steve... this type of thing is a big steaming pile of hooie. Everyone thinks they can figure out humans with numbers and stats. Try the old fashioned method... TALK WITH PEOPLE!!!! IN PERSON!!!

    It doesn't help predict individual behavior, and is obviously no substitute for human contact. BUT, in a company with thousands of employees, can top management, or even upper middle management, actually get to personally know every employee? Not realistic in groups larger than a few dozen people. And if the company is spread out over a large geographic area, with offices in remote locations away from the central management office, it becomes impossible even in smaller groups.

    Most people can manage about a dozen or two dozen personal relationships at a time. A few can manage a hundred or more, but that's very, very rare. Think about how many people you know, which has probably been thousands over a lifetime. Now think about how many of those you can actually keep track of how they're doing at work, their morale, job performance, ethical standards, current pay vs market norms, etc. That'll probably be a few dozen. How many of those is the data current in your mind, versus weeks, months, or years out-of-date?

    Given those factors, management needs some sort of ability to know who's at risk and who isn't. I think a system like this, used appropriately, makes sense for that.

    - Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
    Property of The Thread

    "Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon