Before the session
As an assessor, you have an important task. You will determine whether your colleague is eligible for a new level or profile. To fulfill this task preparation is expected from you as assessor.
To help you prepare, the Value Advisor will ask you nine questions upfront. We do this in advance so that we can clear up any uncertainties before the session starts. This also saves time during the session. These are the questions:
Is this the right group? (If not: is someone missing that you would have expected?) | We ask the requester to select a group of five colleagues for the assessment, so choices must be made. But sometimes, the requester leaves out a person with whom the applicant has worked a lot. It is then logical that this person is added to the assessors. |
Question | Why we ask |
Have you read the requester’s motivation? | Colleagues usually spend a lot of time and effort in writing their motivation. It gives insight into the most recent cases the colleague has been working on and what they find important. You could also ask the requester some clarifying questions based on this. |
Do you have enough knowledge about our compensation model to assess this request? | To determine whether someone can move to the next level or path in the compensation model, you need to know the model. If you do not have this knowledge, you can not know whether the next step in the compensation level or path is grounded.
You don’t need to know all the ins & outs -the facilitators are there to help answer any questions-, but the documentation below is a good refresher.
Do you need more information?
Information about The eight pathways (aka profiles)
Information about the Levels within pathways
Information about the complete profile |
Do you feel you are the right person to assess this request? | Because we look at visible work and actual behaviour, you must be in a position where you can see the visible work of the recent 4-6 months of the applicant. Logically, you are not able to see 100% of the work of the applicant. That is also why you are with a group of assessors. Together you need to have good visibility of their work. |
Did the requester significantly change their roles in the last few weeks/months? | A significant change can be acceptable, provided that the change is sustainable and the colleagues can say enough about the past 4-6 months. For example, a project of short duration cannot cause a re-evaluation. This question is also asked to avoid any form of manipulation. |
Does the colleague's requested level and profile feel logical to you? (If you think in advance that the colleague is not eligible for a change, answer with 'no'.) | We have found that when someone submits a request where the assessor(s) already have serious doubts, it is helpful to talk to the applicant. The applicant may have already developed doubts during the intake. In doing so, we want to prevent someone from submitting an application too early in order to avoid disappointment later on |
Does the requester act in the best interest of the company, and do they support its core values and principles? | This topic does not appear in the questionnaire. But because we think it is very important, we ask the question here. Our core values and principles are how we want to work with each other. If you are not sure what the core values and principles are check Our core values and our Principles: our core values unpacked |
Do they operate in line with Holacracy and the constitution? | We work with the constitution of Holacracy and expect every colleague to act in accordance with it. |
Would you hire the requester again? | This can be a tricky question to answer. Someone can do their work, but that does not make them a great colleague or a great contribution to the team. If the answer is no, it could be a good plan to have a feedback conversation with the colleague instead of going further with the application of the request. |
All the above questions need to be answered with a ‘yes’ or ‘no’.
Prep
Besides the nine questions above, you also need to think about the work the applicant did in the past months. What has the applicant worked on, contributed to, and added to the team or organisation?
The ultimate question is: Does the work line up with the level or profile the requester requested?
In the session, this question will be answered by all the assessors.
During the Session
The assessor group consists of five colleagues. You and four other colleagues will walk through 20 questions with the facilitator in their role Value Advisor. These questions belong to the requested profile. As an assessor, your task is to answer each question with red: no, or green: yes. In case of doubt, a red card is also drawn.
This is followed by an open discussion in which it is expected that you can motivate why you have chosen one or the other colour. Based on the explanations and examples from you and the other assessors about the work they have seen from the applicant, you can change your choice for each question. Ultimately, every question needs to be answered with a yes or no.
This leads to a scoring percentage and suggested outcome. This is also why ‘N/A (not applicate)’ is not a valid answer. Take a look at the Reassessment (and policy) to see all the exact steps.
Lots of valuable feedback for the requester comes up during this conversation. It is summarized and written down by the Value Advisor so that it can be discussed with the requester later.
After the session
From within the group of assessors, one person is designated to give the feedback from the session to the requester. Usually, someone from the group volunteers. If this is you, thank you! You have the responsibility to schedule a moment with the colleague a few days after the session. You receive the session notes containing the feedback from the Value Advisor. You do not necessarily have to take notes during the session.
The Value Advisors will communicate the session’s outcome (change or no change, and some administrative details) without the detailed feedback as soon as possible to the requester, usually immediately after the session. this way the requester will know the outcome of the session as soon as possible (less nerves!) but the feedback from the session can be given by a colleague who is more familiar with the work, and give them some time to get their thoughts together.