Unformatted text preview: is one. Not listening to customers or
peers before or after a failure is another. Never ignore the
evidence; particularly when it says you’re wrong.
– 20 – Fig. 2-3 – 21 – S E TTL I N G I N Fig. 2-4 Methods to find out what’s going on 1. But what if we ALL screw up? 2. Fig. 2-5 3. step 1.
step 4. 4. Talk to someone in a meeting
Talk to someone in the elevator
Talk to someone in the kitchen
Talk to someone in the bathroom VA LV E M E THOD D IA G . 2 So if every employee is autonomously making his or
her own decisions, how is that not chaos? How does
Valve make sure that the company is heading in the
right direction? When everyone is sharing the steering
wheel, it seems natural to fear that one of us is going
to veer Valve’s car off the road.
Over time, we have learned that our collective ability
to meet challenges, take advantage of opportunity, and
respond to threats is far greater when the responsibility
for doing so is distributed as widely as possible. Namely,
to every individual at the company.
We are all stewards of our long-term relationship with
our customers. They watch us, sometimes very publicly, – 23 – V ALVE: H ANDBO O K FO R NEW EMP LO YEE S make mistakes. Sometimes they get angry with us. But
because we always have their best interests at heart, there’s
faith that we’re going to make things better, and that if
we’ve screwed up today, it wasn’t because we were trying
to take advantage of anyone. 3
How Am I Doing? – 24 – V ALVE: H ANDBO O K FO R NEW EMP LO YEES Your Peers and Your Performance
We have two formalized methods of evaluating each other:
peer reviews and stack ranking. Peer reviews are done in
order to give each other useful feedback on how to best
grow as individual contributors. Stack ranking is done
primarily as a method of adjusting compensation. Both
processes are driven by information gathered from each
other—your peers. Peer reviews
We all need feedback about our performance—in order
to improve, and in order to know we’re not failing. Once
a year we all give each other feedback about our work.
Outside of these formalized peer reviews, the expectation
is that we’ll just pull feedback from those around us whenever we need to.
There is a framework for how we give this feedback to
each other. A set of people (the set changes each time)
interviews everyone in the whole company, asking who
each person has worked with since the last round of peer
reviews and how the experience of working with each
person was. The purpose of the feedback is to provide
people with information that will help them grow. That
means that the best quality feedback is directive and – 26 – HOW AM I DOING? prescriptive, and designed to be put to use by the person
you’re talking about.
The feedback is then gathered, collated, anonymized,
and delivered to each reviewee. Making the feedback
anonymous definitely has pros and cons, but we think it’s
the best way to get the most useful information to each
person. There’s no reason to keep your feedback about
someone to yourself until peer review time if you’d like to
deliver it sooner. In fact, it’s much bette...
View Full Document
This document was uploaded on 03/03/2014.
- Fall '14