Organisations always strive for productivity gains. Making it measurable and continuous is every CEO’s dream, and the HR function comes under it.
Under the umbrella of pushing the net performance of employees upwards, employers do use the ‘bell shaped’ methodology for performance distribution. The argument is that forced distributions of performance ratings will cause improve competition as performance is regarded as relative to each other and the net gain would be shift of the ‘Bell Curve’. But is this really sustainable? And would this really motivate high performance or have a reverse effect of being viewed as a stick and be a demoralising experience, leading to drop in performance?
This is one prime reason why the Bell Curve model of assessing performance (a choice of many leading firms), has consciously not been chosen as a performance assessment model at Wells Fargo India Solutions. We do not believe in forced nurturing of only the best, and trimming out the rest philosophy; we believe in people. Productivity and performance to be achieved through informed, involved and enrolled people is our choice. At Wells Fargo, rewards and recognition is a culture, and ‘people as a competitive advantage’ is a corporate value.
People are Wells Fargo’s competitive advantage. Hence, when deciding on the performance of people, we took a conscious decision to not put curbs on the ‘percentage’ of people allocated for varying performance ratings.
We do not believe in disadvantaging contributors just because they cannot be slotted in a forced ranking system. For example, when two team members join, they are told that it is important to the success of our company that both are contributing members of the team. Both put in efforts and give similar output. At the end of the year, the rigid distribution percentage forces their managers to label one of the high performers as a mediocre one. Why remove one from consideration because the ‘bell’ can fit only one person?
We would rather put our belief in the ‘pull’ strategy. By giving a chance for recognising both not only will we sustain the motivation of both the top performers but they will also be change agents for the others.
Recognition works as the biggest motivator. Wells Fargo has a strong recognition culture and a robust program in place that honors individuals as well as teams for their achievements.
A very significant contributor to performance is the ‘pay’. It is thus our strength, that we have a unique compensation system that ensures transparency, equity and pay-for-performance. We also ensure that we have a strong supporting mechanism that will sustain the performance management system we practice.
While a robust calibration process in place makes sure we substantiate the ratings using measurable performance metrics while not using the ‘quota’ system of a forced bell-shaped curve, dedicated open house sessions on the performance management systems keeps the process healthy, transparent and clean. The calibration helps make the distinction between the levels of the performers and the sessions become platforms where all team members are encouraged to come forth and understand the assessment cycle, both as an assessor or the one being assessed, as the case may be.
The Bell Curve, practised in many organisations, is, however, not without its merits. Opting out of the ‘Bell” has earned us the unambiguous accountability of team members and have gotten us rewards from an engaged and committed team
