Chris Hadfield, astronaut, says in his book that in space everyone is either a +1, a 0 or a -1.
Everyone should strive to be a +1, but mostly being a 0 is fine. Being a -1 is pretty terrible, a whole other person is needed just to get back to a stable state. Which is basically what the message above is getting at.
Isnt this basically every employee rating scale for their yearly evals?
Most ive seen are usually something like “below/meets/exceeds expectations” and 85% of the company gets meets. Theyre the 0 and a lot of meets are very good employees. Then you have those who basically do 2 peoples jobs in half the time. They Just get it, and the get shit done even if it wasn’t their job. Then there’s those -1 who need so much help they bring down those around them or take so much attention others cant complete their work
Yeah, but employee rating scales are often tied to a lot of other office politicking that makes them largely irrelevant to actual performance, in my experience.
Chris Hadfield, astronaut, says in his book that in space everyone is either a +1, a 0 or a -1.
Everyone should strive to be a +1, but mostly being a 0 is fine. Being a -1 is pretty terrible, a whole other person is needed just to get back to a stable state. Which is basically what the message above is getting at.
Isnt this basically every employee rating scale for their yearly evals?
Most ive seen are usually something like “below/meets/exceeds expectations” and 85% of the company gets meets. Theyre the 0 and a lot of meets are very good employees. Then you have those who basically do 2 peoples jobs in half the time. They Just get it, and the get shit done even if it wasn’t their job. Then there’s those -1 who need so much help they bring down those around them or take so much attention others cant complete their work
Yeah, but employee rating scales are often tied to a lot of other office politicking that makes them largely irrelevant to actual performance, in my experience.