How does forcing employees to go through yet another "review" add value to the company? Are all departments doing this?
As it stands, my dept. already has:
- 5+ managers over the day, any of which can provide this "feedback" we apparently so desperately need
- Monthly one-on-ones with our direct manager
- Weekly meetings where we get told we need to do more
- Quarterly reviews
- Mid-year reviews
- End-year reviews
- Metrics/Statistics for literally everything (we have a stat for how many characters you type into a customer update)
What does this Collaborator stuff add that the previous things missed? Not only do we have to get peer reviewed by 3-6 other people (who we barely see/work with depending on schedule/WFH), we have to find 3-6 other people to peer review. How can I tell a person what to improve on when I'm not their manager? I don't have access to their statistics/metrics, nor do I see their daily work output. My job is not to manage other people's pros/cons, otherwise I would be a manager, getting a manager's pay. On the other hand, if I gave a positive review to a coworker, would they get a reward? If not, why am I tasked with this?
Seems like this is a some kind of filler busywork where a manager needs to justify it's existence to the company, or an attempt at trying to find who's first to be laid off when that comes back around again.