Following on my recent musings about performance management and judgement vs metrics, I wonder out loud: Why Do We Have “Performance Evaluations”, Anyway?
I'm quite curious about the experiences of folks on here at https://social.coop -- if any of you has worked in co-operative and other more self-organized structures, can you share if/how were "performance evaluations" done? And, relatedly, did compensation have any component related to "performance"? (And if so, how did that work?)
I was working in a small team earlier this year. We agreed at the beginning to discuss at the end how to split the funds we were getting to carry out the work.
We all know each other pretty well.
The process was new for us all and wasnt very smooth.
I think that having a bit more of a chat early on about how the money was going to be split may have helped.
We all agreed on a division at the end and are all still friends.
Making discussions like these are what I think makes social coop brilliant.
Hopefully we can develop Social Coop into a 24/7 "helpline" for coops around the world to ask for similar advice and support.
@dazinism @anaulin I haven't really experienced this in a paid work context, but I have been in volunteer collectives (including shared houses) where we assumed we could 'cross that bridge when we get to it', because we all knew each other well. I think it's always better to work it out beforehand, especially anything involving money or assets. Agreeing on conflict resolution processes at the start is helpful too. Friendships take less strain that way ;-)
social.coop is a cooperatively-run corner of the Fediverse. The instance is democratically governed by its members, who generally share an interest in the co-op model, but topics of discussion range widely.
Our instance is supported by sliding scale contributions of $1-10/mo made via Open Collective. You must have an active Open Collective account to apply for membership; you may set one up here