Sociocracy, also known as dynamic governance, is a decision-making and governance system. Its aim is to create an environment of trust, transparency, and accountability within an organization and to help people who work together to decide together as well.
One aspect of sociocracy is its approach to performance reviews, which is designed to promote fairness, objectivity, and continuous improvement.
In a traditional pyramidal (top-down) organization, performance reviews are often conducted by managers or supervisors, who may have biases or limited knowledge about people working in the organization.
In sociocracy, the review process is more participatory, with peers and colleagues providing feedback to each other, as previously planned and consented.
At the begining, the colleagues identify and agree upon specific goals and objectives for the upcoming period for each role they have in their circle (working group). These goals are then used as a benchmark for the future performance review. They also set a term for the performance review. This may be 3 months, 6 months, one year or whatever the circle members consider necessary for each role.
When the time is coming, a performance review is scheduled and added to the agenda. It may be a one role review or an entire circle review, depending on the specific circumstances.
The first person to speak is the focus person (the person whose review is taken into consideration). It will be shared reflections about the activity in the role - what the focus person believe it went well and what the focus person beleive it could be improved in the future.
Then, the other members of the circle will share their feedback talking in a round. The focus person receives feedback from their colleagues.
They should provide specific examples of how the member performed in a specific role or as a member and what could be improvred.
This feedback is intended to be objective and constructive, rather than critical or punitive.
After receiving feedback, the member has an opportunity to reflect on what they heard from the colleagues about the performance / behaviour and set goals for the upcoming period.
The review process ends with a discussion of how the member performance can be supported and improved moving forward. A plan for improvment could and should be consented.
One of the benefits of using sociocracy for performance reviews is that it can promote a culture of continuous improvement.
By involving colleagues in the review process, members receive feedback from a variety of perspectives, which can help them identify areas for possible growth and development. Multiple feedback perspectives are an opportunity for learn and self-improvment.
Sociocracy can also help to promote fairness and objectivity in the review process. Because feedback comes from colleagues rather than just one manager or supervisor, there is less risk of bias or favoritism influencing the review. Blaming is out of the question.
In conclusion, sociocracy offers a unique approach to performance reviews that can promote fairness, objectivity, and continuous improvement.
I invite people who interacted with me to participate on
I would appreciate your accepting my invitation and thank you in advance for your fair feedback. Thanks.
Best regards,
Your friend
@TedRau @jerry.koch-gonzalez @dem.steve @molly.grover @phouben @roberto.bonino @andrew.grant, @pia.rohn @lea.shani, @thomas.kemps and all the other people that interacted with me in SoFA.
p.s.
I am open and willing to find how could I become a better sociocracy practitioner and fellow. Thanks!