During our quarterly People Analyzer reviews, managers tend to rate everyone plus or plus-minus on core values to avoid giving negative feedback. How do we train leaders to use the Core Values Bar with enough rigor to protect operational standards?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

The People Analyzer is only as useful as the courage of the person holding the pen. When managers give soft ratings to avoid difficult conversations, they create a culture of artificial harmony that damages the entire organization.

To eliminate rating inflation, the Integrator must first clearly define the rating thresholds:

- Plus: The employee exhibits the core value most of the time. They are an exemplar of that behavior.
- Plus-minus: The employee exhibits the core value some of the time, but lapses often enough that it is noticeable.
- Minus: The employee rarely or never exhibits the core value.

Next, enforce the company Core Values Bar strictly. A standard bar might be three pluses and two plus-minuses, with zero minuses allowed. An employee who fails to clear the bar cannot remain in the organization without an immediate developmental timeline.

Managers often use plus-minus as a coward's way out, softening what should be a definitive minus. Train your leadership team with this standard: If you have had to coach an employee on a core value violation more than once during the quarter, that rating is a minus, not a plus-minus.

Furthermore, require managers to justify every plus-minus and minus with concrete behavioral evidence before holding the Quarterly Conversation. If an employee is below the bar, the manager must implement the EOS Strike Rule: thirty days to correct the behavior, thirty days to sustain it, and thirty days to finalize the decision if no improvement is seen.

Protecting the Core Values Bar is not about punishment. It is about protecting the high-performing culture your best people deserve.