Showing posts with label performance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label performance. Show all posts

Friday, May 26, 2017

Is Getting Rid of Performance Reviews Really a Good Thing

Is Getting Rid of Performance Reviews Really a Good Thing


The Huffington Post reports today on a new study about employee performance reviews by CEB, a consulting firm that offers talent management solutions to its clients.   In recent years, some firms have chosen to do away with the traditional annual performance review.   Some good reasons exist for eliminating these reviews, as the process often does not deliver desired results.  CEB finds, however, that eliminating such review systems may do more harm than good.  Here is an excerpt from the CEB report of their findings:

What’s more, the improvements in measures of employee performance that companies expect actually fall because managers struggle to make and communicate performance and pay decisions without ratings. In fact, less than 5% of managers are able to effectively manage employees without ratings. CEB analysis shows that eliminating ratings leads to four unintended outcomes.
  • Manager conversation quality declines by 14% because managers struggle to explain to employees how they performed in the past and what steps to take to improve future performance.
  • Managers have more time, but time spent on informal conversations decreases by 10 hours because managers do not shift that extra time toward ongoing, informal performance conversations.
  • Top performers’ satisfaction with pay differentiation decreases by 8% because managers have trouble explaining how pay decisions are made and linked to individual contributions.
  • Employee engagement drops by 6% because managers are unable to do the very things that are proven to engage employees, such as set expectations for their, hold clear performance and development conversations, and provide appropriate rewards and recognition.
In sum, the theory of removing the annual review process is that more frequent, informal feedback could be more effective than an annual "event" at which managers employ a formal ratings system to evaluate and rank employees.   In reality, it appears that many managers simply do not provide sufficient feedback when formal annual review systems are eliminated.  Perhaps we should not be surprised by these findings.   Many managers would rather jump in the water off the Maine coast in January than deliver feedback to their subordinates!   

Available link for download

Read more »

Monday, March 27, 2017

JRuby Compiler Performance

JRuby Compiler Performance


I was pretty excited when I heard that JRubys compiler was complete. I figured I could run some benchmarks against the C-Based Ruby Implementation to see how it was performing. Ive only run this suite once, but I hope to provide enough info so that you could replicate the results yourself. Please let me know if you think I missed something.


The Setup

The benchmarks were run on a Dell D820 laptop. It has an Intel Core Duo running at 2.17GHz and has 1GB of RAM. Im running Ubuntu 7.04 for an OS. The only wrinkle in my setup is that my root partition is encrypted using LUKS/dmcrypt. This will probably slow down the IO benchmarks, but Im assuming it would penalize both Ruby implementations equally.


For the C-Based Ruby Implementation, Im using the Ubuntu packaged Ruby version 1.8.5. For JRuby, I checked out the latest from Codehauss SVN (Rev 4474) and built the code using Suns Java version 1.6.0.


For the benchmarks, I pulled the suite from the Ruby Lang SVN (Rev 13608). 


I ran the benchmarks using the run.rb script. The C-Based Ruby Implementation was run with no command line options. I modified the script to run JRuby withe the following options:

  • -C to compile the ruby code before running it
  • -O to disable ObjectSpace
  • -J-Djruby.thread.pooling=true to enable thread pooling
  • -J-server to put the JVM in server mode

These options are explained in the Performance Tuning and Compiler pages of the JRuby Wiki.


The Results

The following shows the time it took the Ruby Implementation to perform the benchmark in seconds:



Here is the difference between the two implementations (CRuby - JRuby) again, in seconds:



As you can see, JRuby is performing really well on a lot of these benchmarks. It gets killed on eval, but I suppose that is to be expected. My guess is that JRuby is taking advantage of Java primitives to outperform CRuby at number crunching. Charles Nutters comments at another blog entry on JRuby benchmarking seem to indicate that this would be the case. Cant wait until JRuby is 1.1


Available link for download

Read more »

Saturday, February 25, 2017

Jay Bhanushali Cute nd Outstanding performance in ITA 2012 HD

Jay Bhanushali Cute nd Outstanding performance in ITA 2012 HD




Available link for download

Read more »