President has too many direct reports

We are looking at ways to make changes to the performance evalluation and compensation setting process for our execs. We have a very flat org and the President has too many folks who on paper report directly to him. This causes a nightmare come performance evaluation time.

Any suggestions, or suggested resources on what to think about when considering other options? We 6 work groups and each one is led by one person, but some are co-led or run by a group.


  • 6 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • Hi,

    If the reporting structure is strictly on paper, could the group leaders prepare the appraisals for the group members and the president focus on the group leader appraisals? Or, is it that there are too many group leaders?

  • Hi Sharon,

    It's that there are too many group leaders -- roughly 10. The problem is with the ones where the center is led by a group in which there is no clear hierarcy among the leaders. i'm leaning toward a model where they (with the president) desginate one of their group to serve as the one who reports to the president, but then there is the question of how the others are reviewed and how compensation is decided. It would feel wierd to them to have their coworker review them, but I don't want to put it back on the President.
  • Hi,

    One option would be to have each group member complete a self appraisal and the group leader and HR review them. If both are satisfied that the self appraisal is accurate, they could pass along to the President for review. If not satisfied, they could add comments that clarify (may need to go back to employee for clarification) then pass along to the President.

    This allows the President to keep abreast of individual performance but is not as time-consuming as creating the reviews from scratch. He could add a personal note to each review, if so inclined, then the review goes back to the group leader or HR to share with employee.

    For the group leader reviews, they could self-evaluate, HR review and pass to President.

    Hope this helps.

  • Another solution is to move away from annual evaluations. We only require a formal evaluation once every four years. There are exceptions such as a new employee must be evaluated every year for his/her first four years; or if the employee has been subject to discipline, changed jobs or job duties. Supervisors with large spans of control stagger evaluations so they are only doing formal evaluations on 25% of their reports each year. We have been doing this for about 3-4 years; and supervisors and employees seem to like the model.
  • Now this is an interesting idea! What do others think of extending the formal evaluation cycle?
  • Thanks for your suggestions, Sharon. I'll give these some thought.
Sign In or Register to comment.