Skip Navigational Links
LISTSERV email list manager
LISTSERV - HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM
LISTSERV Menu
Log In
Log In
LISTSERV 17.5 Help - MUSEUM-L Archives
LISTSERV Archives
LISTSERV Archives
Search Archives
Search Archives
Register
Register
Log In
Log In

MUSEUM-L Archives

Museum discussion list

MUSEUM-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

Menu
LISTSERV Archives LISTSERV Archives
MUSEUM-L Home MUSEUM-L Home

Log In Log In
Register Register

Subscribe or Unsubscribe Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Search Archives Search Archives
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: Evaluation of Supervisors
From:
Indianapolis Art Center <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 15 May 1996 19:38:44 -0400
Reply-To:
Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (20 lines)
 Discuss on
>Museum-L of the pitfalls and methods of existing systems would be
>appreciated.

I'd like to know too!  In business school we were always taught that
subordinates reviewing supervisors was not a good idea, but that a
peer-level review system was very workable and has been done.  I guess a
recent graduate-level personnel management textbook might have what you're
looking for.

While we have no formal bottom-up evaluation system, we do have some
structure in the annual performance review that allows the person being
reviewed to let the supervisor know what he/she can do (the supervisor) to
make the reviewee's job easier, more effective, more efficient, whatever, on
a regular basis.

Julia Muney Moore
Director of Exhibitions and Artist Services
Indianapolis Art Center

ATOM RSS1 RSS2

HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM CataList Email List Search Powered by LISTSERV