Handed up 2 reports today - MPW and FIN.
MPW's report was draggy. Cos it's damn hard to read a 38 paged report with 25 pages full of text with the rest, appendices in a 10.4" VAIO. I can't remember how many times i lost track of where i stop and where i've scrolled. Anyway, it's done.
And soon, we'll have to do evaluation on our group members for some mods. Actually how do you define a good group member? A person who is very task-oriented, and produces good quality work but not very good in terms of working relationship with the group, OR someone who is more towards relationship-oriented person, produces a not-very-good quality of work, but tries hard to contribute?
I would choose the latter one anytime. I don't believe in people producing results but cannot gel well with the group. To me, it'll definitely bring down the dynamics of the group. Is it only the results that you want to see? I really enjoy my HR group, cos we can all work together, happily. Even when there's problems, we're solving them with joy! It's so nice to know that there are people out there for each other when crisis strikes.
If we gonna evaluate people only through results, then people can never succeed because their quality of work will never be on par with the high quality work people. Then we're all like our professors, only judge us through results. If so, then what is peer evaluation???
ok. shower.