I am being asked by the department head to assist in the probationary review of a new employee a few weeks into that person’s employment, as I am familiar with this person's work. This person is a technologist and has so far not met expectations - I am having to hand draft almost every single item that is to be incorporated into the electronic drawings, and it is taking too much of my time. I would like to be as impartial and honest in my review as possible and I am considering all possible circumstances that may attribute to the less than desirable performance (new environment, possible language barrier, joining mid-project, etc.) However, I feel that ultimately, despite these circumstances, that this person is not 'reasonably competent' for the position. His retention will ultimately result in additional strain on my time that would otherwise not be there had a reasonably competent technologist been hired. I should also note that I am not sure if there was any intentional misrepresentation during the hiring process. I don't want to mess with this person's livelihood and therefore I do not want to take my assessment/review of this person lightly. Has anyone been in a similar situation? What kind of language should I use in my review?

Make a list of notes. Then talk to the department head in person. That way you can talk through the questions you raise and agree on the content and wording of the final review.

I would set some benchmarks for the new employee of what tasks he should be able to do after certain periods of time. Make sure he knows what your expectations are. Once you have done that, if he doesn't meet the benchmarks, you should have no regrets getting rid of him.

If the employee is not proficient, or intentionally over-representing his abilities, YOU aren't hampering the progress of his career. HE is. No matter how good a sales job is done in initial interviews, eventually the truth (good or bad) will come out. I'm not saying that you should blast the guy. I'm just saying you should concentrate on the truth and the facts. You should structure this as much as possible as a learning opportunity for him, but his performance within that "opportunity" is up to him. I'm saying your performance is up to you. His performance is up to him.

Just be honest, the fact you're double checking your initial feelings suggests you're taking reasonable steps to be fair.

I used to find it hard sharing my opinions on some of our interns etc. that weren't up to par. However, over time, it got easier - though of course that may be a sad reflection on me!

Have you informed the Department head of your concerns regarding this employee's abilities and work habits. If not, do so now in direct conversation. It appears to be up to the Department head to meet with the probationary employee, to review his progress and discuss methods of improvement and possible termination of employment.

As stated by others above, document your negative experiences and include positive experiences, if any.

Having worked for a couple of employers who quite happily let people go during their probation, even if they had relocated, for things like disagreeing with managers etc, then I suspect you are applying more integrity than the average.

As an aside I think that your recruiting process should get a severe going over if it is regularly employing the wrong people.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

Stay away from terms and descriptions such as "not reasonably competent". Instead, use phrases such as "does not meet established expectations", etc.

Try this:
Before you go into the review, think of all the good things that the person does. Then during the review, praise the employee for their good attributes.

I suspect that you will start to see measurable results from that person and they will start to meet your expectations of them. I've seen too many supervisors/managers use the wrong types of motivation to try and get results from the employees/coworkers. You need to build this person up instead of cutting them down. If you don't develop your people into who you want them to be, through positive reinforcement, then you will spend a lot of your time training new employees over and over again.

The old saying goes:
You can catch more flies with honey instead of vinegar.

I've been in this position before; including the whole language barrier aspect of it. You need to be careful so you dont get yourself sued. In what capacity is the department head asking you to assist? You need to specifically document the expectations on paper and present them to the individual. Then document how the individual didn't meet the expectations. And you better be sure that the expectations are not in any way out of line or could be construed that you made impossible demands.

When you start using "not reasonably competent" you are stating your opinion and it will get you into trouble. Ron is spot on with that. Stick to the facts.

It seems you were not involved in the recruitment proccess.
How come you were asked and not the person who eventually hired that person? Do you know if the new employee fully understands what is expected of him?
As many of the posters up here said; the important thing is to state facts and not your opinon. In the end it is the department head who has to decide.
I had to do do performance reviews for some persons and I made the mistake that I am to this date still regretting. I used to cover up some facts in the review for a person. This eventually turned against me as the persons supervisor. So be honest and true. You might be an eye opener for this new employee. Do not be a martyr if this is affecting also you performance.

This just goes to show what a scam the hiring process is. The person probably had a great interview and said how he was the next best thing since sliced bread. Then when the rubber meets the road things are not quite what they seam to be. I've been brutally honest with people about what my skills are.... and I've lost out on virtually every interview I have been on. Maybe if I "stretched the truth" a little more I wold be more successful with the whole process.

Your obligation is to your employer, not to the employee who in your opinion is not cutting it. Just be completely honest in your assessment of his performance, good and bad, and let the chips fall where they may.