Performance review time.

This is a particularly difficult exercise for a number of reasons. We never give ourselves adequate space for them. I have 11 people in my team. Each review takes 2 hours (minimum) to conduct. Preparation time is of the order of 6 to 8 hours. Best case that comes in at just over 10 full working days. And it's important to spend the time. This is one area where I really believe skimping is really a false economy (that's become a bit of a catch phrase lately).

And I feel particularly anxious because the size of my team and scope of the 5.0 project alone have made it incredibly difficult to spend as much time as I would like with every member of my team. The result is a very uneven distribution of my focus (which is perfectly acceptable if you read "First Break All The Rules" but regardless I haven't spent as much time as I wanted to with some people in the team over the past year).

And then finally, reviewing someone's performance is ... Just. Plain. Hard. Not everyone can accept criticism, even if offered in the form of constructive criticism. Somtimes people don't think about it in the right way. A good metaphor is that of a weaponsmith. One of my tasks is to make sure we have the best team possible and that the potential of every member of that team is maximised. If you're hammering out a new sword then you're deliberately looking for those parts of the blade that are rough, or slightly warped, or somehow "deficient". And that's where you apply the hammer. While you may stop every now and then to look at the marvelous way a part of the blade has turned out, most of your energy is of necessity focused on the parts that are not yet as good as you think they should be, because those are the parts that may give at an inopportune moment, ultimately resulting in a dirty great piece of metal sticking out the back of your spleen.

And we don't want that, do we?