Leading vs. Judging - Part 1 by Mark Stone

January 2024. Folks who've worked with me know that I'm outcome-oriented and data-driven. Our projects should have clear deliverables, and we should be able to measure what business impact we're achieving. It is so easy to transfer how we think about projects and systems to how we think about individuals in our organization. The annual performance review process should also be outcome-oriented and data-driven.

Or should it?

Individuals want a review process that fosters opportunity for professional development. Managers want a review process that inspires best performance while providing clear signals about performance. And yet, if you ask individuals to describe an organization's performance review process, the descriptor you are most likely to get is "demoralizing." That's a signal.

When we set specific and measurable objectives for individual performance, and then evaluate actual performance against those measures, we are making a judgment. Being judged makes people uncomfortable, and as leaders we should take care not to confuse judging with leading. Let's back this caution up with some data.

Making New Year's resolutions is a lot like setting annual performance goals. So what happens when you ask people to make very specific and measurable New Year's resolutions versus resolutions that are more aspirational, open-ended, and not specifically measurable? One compelling study shows that people are more likely to succeed with resolutions that are more vague. Resolving to go to the gym three times a week is a tangible goal, but also a brittle one. If you only go twice a week is that really failure? Resolving to exercise more regularly is hard to measure, but also allows more ways to be successful. Quoting the study's author: "Being unsuccessful is demoralizing."

As leaders we should be wary of our own instinct to measure everything. Our role is to inspire, not to demoralize. Judging is not leading.

Add / view comments.