Is Meets Expectations Good Enough?
Doyle Slayton | Aug 16, 2009 | Comments 26
Reader Q & A:
I’ve known a lot of sales managers who frown upon “meets expectations” performers.
What do you think? Is “meets expectations” good enough?
I look forward to reading your thoughts on this one… I’ll share my opinion on the next post!
Check Out These Related Articles!
Filed Under: Blog • Featured • Leadership • Reader Questions • Sales
In my organization, meets expectations is what 70-80% of the consultants are rated. Less than 20% are above expectations…so you need to know how the organization rates employees before you make a final determination!
If you set challenging expectations then meeting them IS a valid measure.
There is a story about an automobile dealership where the low sales each month is fired. Does that meet expectations? Does it foster growth and development?
Engagement is all too often thrown about with little regard to what it really means.
It is incumbent on the Manager to assist their team in setting goals that are difficult but possible; never let your reach exceed your grasp.
Therefore, if the expectations are met then, by all means that is good enough because it means they have done the best they could with the tools they have. To exceed them means the bar was set too low or the Manager provided them with additional tools to exceed.
If you can exceed expectations in most dimensions of the evaluation you are probably promotable.
I think meeting expectations across the board is a challenge to beat, especially if I am looking for a promotion.
What I worry about are those not meeting expectations that creep in from time to time.
Who set the expectations that they are meeting? If the expectations are set correctly, meeting them should not be frowned upon. It should be the minimum to keep their job. Might not make them promotable, but that’s okay – not everyone CAN be promoted in most organizations.
If I thought the person had mnore in them, I would increase their expectations!
First, one must understand what “meets expectations” means. Meeting expectations is not a bad thing. For those who exceed expectations, they become promotable and should be considered.
The average employee is satisfied with simply meeting expectations and those individuals need to be recognized for that. Keep in mind that the “expectations” are generally set by the manager, therefore this should be considered acceptable.
I once asked an outstanding employee why he is not interested in moving up in the organization. He responded that he was satisfied with his position and enjoys coming in each day and meeting the expectations of the job. He was perfectly content to do what he was doing for the rest of his career. I always respected him for that.
It’s so frustrating watching someone who you know could be a high performer wallow around in what we perceive to be mediocrity. As sales managers we need to realize that what is average for us is just fine for many people. You can’t change that about them unless they decide to change.
The decision to change – could that be transformed in a process that is manageable?
I think this is possible, but only if you linked it with a genuine interest in the other – your employee -, and in their interests.
As a salesman, if you meet your requirements combined with the standards of your organization, that makes you a winner.
I think most of the comments thus far are getting it … “who set the expectations”? and what do they mean?
Goals and Objectives, for them to be meaningful, must be set by both the rep and the management. The manager should be aligning the corporations goals and objectives with each reps. If those expectations are met, then we have solid performers.
I recently met a CEO of a company that boasted he had always exceeded his budget, and I responded quickly – then you must be setting it too low.
So, be careful when someone claims to always exceed excpectations – one might be setting their sights too low to begin with.
I paused for a moment when I read your question. I have just spent 15 years working at Tiffany & Co. in business sales and each year we had PMP reviews (their version of Performance management). I was a top performer for 11 or 12 of my 15 years in most cases the PMP was either exceeds or outstanding. The problem I have with the PMP process (and I was on both sides of) is that it is meant to be done on an ongoing basis, but most managers are so busy with daily tasks that it is completed in a rush near the deadline and is done with a “snapshot” in time as opposed to a global understanding of the capabilities of the employee. If the snapshot is (in the opinion of the reviewer) marginal the employee receives marginal marks. If the employee is exceeding expectations in the numbers it is usually a good review when many times the overall performance is driven by economics and territory. Additionally, if the manager is in any way insecure, he or she will find ways to improve the person, or harp on a quality that they experienced one time, and make that the focus of the PMP. I beleive that we as managers should focus on understanding the employees desired drive and true abilities to help them achieve at that level. To generalize and set standards for a whole that is judged by an individual, in my opinion, by its very nature is to set limits on the possibility of a person and their potential contribution. To determine meets expectations, the person who is deciding is not the company (even though the company sets the standard), but the person who is doing the review. The reviewing individual can make or break the outcome. What if the reviewer is just meeting expectations in the employees mind and is not motivating to work with? This is a topic that bears discussion, as we move into a new econmic arena, why not look at the system itself to determine if the whole idea of performance mangement is “Meeting Expectations?”
There’s only one person that can judge if he/she meets expectations – ourselves. Sure sales managers or sales executives set sales goals, but top performers raise the bar and set their own. High performers set their own goals in work and life, and if we meet or exceed them, it is because we made it happen. There is only one person that needs to be satisfied, all others stand in line.
It really depends on if the expectations were realistic. I’ve seen a number of sales organizations base sales goals on hopes and dreams and not on market realities.
Absolutely “meets expectations” should be good enough. Especially if the expectations are properly set and shared with the individual. They should be celebrated as well as the exceeds expectations. In this way the entire group sees that “doing your job” is celebrated and at least rewarded with an honorable mention. In my organization everyone that “meets their number” is recognized and the “exceeds group” doubly so. I feel strongly that in this way the top raises the mid-level performers up again and again….
Great comments as usual.
Assuming “meeting expectations” is defined in the context here as a salesperson selling their quota, then from a business perspective, give me all the ones that repeatedly just miss. That way, the company gets the revenue without having to pay bonuses, spiffs, President’s Clubs etc to the reps and their managers…..
Following this line of reasoning, anyone ever get burned by “overachieving” as well?
I was repeatedly burned by overachieving! I was a top performer in 2003, 2004 and 2005 and beat plan by 28,26, and 30% in each of tose years and then they wondered what was wrong with me in 2006 when the numbers were flat to prior year. What a bummer!!
Add the word “consistently” to “meets expectations” and you add another dimension. If you clearly outline the expectations each year and you have some one who consistently meets expectations each year…do everything you can to keep, develop and find more of the same.
EXPECTATIONS BREED DISAPPOINTMENT!
(So don’t have any to start with.)
If it’s too late to undo existing expectations, and someone who works for me who simply “meets” existing expectations? He or she is fired. I cannot afford to have anyone (especially a sales rep) who’s not exceeding expectations at every turn.
There are too many people out there to choose from who are looking for a break and who WILL excel in their performance (and for whom expectations are not even needed)!
Keep in mind though that –importantly– “expectations” are NOT goals, and that goals need to be realistic, specific, flexible, and due-dated in order to work. Expectations are vague, often unrealistic, rigid and rarely due-dated, which makes them invalid as a performance measurement.
Thanks for stirring the expectation pot, Doyle. Have a great $ale$ week! Hal
Certainly can be – depending upon the purpose of the “grading” It almost seems perverse to say the expectations are “X” and now that you have met them we are unhappy. However, if people have potential that is untapped, this is a different issue and coaching could well be the solution
Expectations is just like predictions. So, get the facts, accept realities and meet the challenge.
Doyle,
That’s kind of a loaded question. Any smart sales manager should expect you to try to exceed expectations. However, given the state of the current economy, meeting expectations is almost like exceeding expectations because several people are falling short.
As a person who does the front end cold calling and qualifying, I fell short of my quota for the first time ever this past quarter as a result of prospects not even willing to take a meeting because they are stagnant. However, I still did better than everyone else in my position.
Kind regards,
Emanuel Carpenter
Author of “Dead Guys Don’t Buy”
A sales performer who can deliver steady, predictable revenue month in and month out will always be welcome on my team.
Certainly, I am always looking to cultivate star performers. But the foundation of a sales team is provided by those performers who put the numbers up every month.
Indeed, it is the consistency of those performers and the predictability of their revenue that allows a manager the latitude to work with star performers to help them take their business to the next level.
This point has been made by a number of posters and I agree: if the numbers are calculated properly, then there is no shame in merely meeting them.
A low-maintenance sales performer who does her share may not be groomed for advancement but can certainly be an important member of a high performance sales team.
Some follow up thoughts:
Ideally the employer is providing a rubric (see your local teacher for a definition). Specific examples in a rubric qualify each level of performance in one or more dimensions of behavior or learning. And the conclusions drawn from the rubric suggest a course of action.
Goals are not necessarily expectations since a new born salesman might achieve ‘exceeding’ by hitting more than 95% of a standard goal for the standard salesman.
What the employee may expect from failing/meeting/exceeding expectations should be as clearly spelled out as the expectations themselves. This is a pragmatic feeling that vague expectations are generally backed by vague promises of rewards.
Hal –
I’m not certain what you’re saying. You wrote:
“Expectations are vague, often unrealistic, rigid and rarely due-dated, which makes them invalid as a performance measurement.”
and
“If it’s too late to undo existing expectations, and someone who works for me who simply “meets” existing expectations? He or she is fired. ”
Would you resolve the contradiction for me? You fire people over an invalid performance measurement? And elsewhere you imply that the majority of your people must exceed expectations. Is that simply because you’ve always been willing and able to pay top dollar for talent?
Most sales professionals are goal driven; managers must set high expectations to motivate them. Serious problems occur when expectations are not balanced across the entire sales enablement team (sales, pre-sales, services, etc.). A motivational divide forms that manifests as apprehension, indifference, or resistance to the expectations set.
I wrote “Keeping the Sales Team Engaged” with that in mind: http://bit.ly/2jl9wI
The article addresses sources de-motivation and disengagement across the team and suggests corrective steps that managers can work into the expectation setting exercise.
Given that this is a SalesBlog we are talking about Sales roles being assessed as ‘Meets expectations’.
If these ‘job goals’ are defined as meet or exceed quota, plus include: customer satisfaction measures, personal growth measures, career enhancement measures then ‘Meets expectations’ is a Good result.
Occassionally exceeds is better and then consistently exceeds is best.
Hmmm…. Who’s fault/responsibility is that? And, ‘good enough’ for whom? Is the salesperson ‘satisfied’ or does the manager need to provide more challenge. There is more here than just a label–personality traits should be considered and assessed as well. Maybe thinking ‘bigger picture’ here is the higher solution!
It depends, what one expects from the people in an organisation if your expectations are high, they will meet your expectations if your expectations are low they will still match up to your expectations.