Quixtar.com - Official Site of Quixtar Inc.
Reviews
Thursday, February 22, 2007
I've been pretty busy this past week (and most of next) conducting performance reviews.  It's pretty time-consuming but very rewarding. Reviewing performances of the past year provides an opportunity to celebrate successes and identify areas of improvement. A senior executive within Alticor once shared with me that she doesn't typically talk about her employees in a hierarchical sense, as in "my employees" or "my staff."  Instead, she talks about "the people I work with." 

I try to follow that practice because the people I "manage" are all highly skilled professionals who truly drive their own content areas, whether that be editorial content for our product brands, our support to IBOs, or what we share with external public audiences. I'm privileged to be the "passionate advocate" for this group and to work with them to remove barriers to their success.

Do IBOs conduct annual reviews of their own performance and that of other IBOs in their group?  IBOs have access to a lot of data about what their group has done.  They should know how well their downlines have progressed since starting in the business. If they don't already, I think IBOs should establish a formal review of IBOs in their group to identify opportunities for growth. I think IBOs probably do this on an ongoing basis with their downline, but I wonder if they establish annual, intentional reviews that measure against pre-established baselines (from the previous year).  

I try to meet monthly with those I work with, so we can have an intentional conversation about what they're working on and how it helps them achieve their stated objectives.  We talk more frequently than once a month, but that one meeting a month is where we look specifically at their goals.  It's a good practice and keeps me excited about what they're working on and helps keep them reminded of the larger goals (rather than the smaller tactics and tasks). 

OK.  Time to prepare for the next review. I hope you're having a good day! 


Comments

Tex said:
Thursday, February 22, 2007 #

I am not aware of any formal performance reviews in my line of sponsorship, or have I heard of any in any other line of sponsorship.

The idea is not appealing to me, as I associate performance reviews with a job, not something that business owners do.

However, the idea of reviewing performance is a valid one, and can better be characterized as mentoring. We want to keep doing what we are doing well, improve those things we can improve, and ensure we are not leaving something out.

The result of all this is results, does your business grow?

For the higher pins, they add up tool profits and Q profits as a measure of their results. For most IBO's, they measure tool costs and Q profits, which often are a net negative until a fairly high pin is reached, depending on structure, but often (if those who blog can be believed) this does not occur until Platinum.

This means it often takes dozens of IBO's to produce a single IBO with a net profit.

What "grade" do you give to that situation?  

ibofightback said:
Thursday, February 22, 2007 #

In our LOA active IBOs are encouraged to meet monthly with their upline and go through a range of business statistics and review and revise as necessary. In August of course this involves looking substantially at the year past and the year(s) ahead.

Of course, and unfortunately, despite encouragement, the reality is that very very few IBOs actually do this.

I'm of the opinion that the "secret to success" in the A/Q business is quite simple - treat it like a business.

Dave Robison said:
Thursday, February 22, 2007 #

About a year ago I wrote about an "MLM Exit Interview" that contains questions that might facilitate an MLM distributor's "performance review" or at least provide a starting point.

http://www.ontheroadwithdave.com/2006/07/mlm-exit-interview-mlm-mondays.html

I think a review would be a great thing for IBOs at the end of August or December.  Whether done individually or sponsor-to-downline.

Dave

Tex said:
Thursday, February 22, 2007 #

Hey Dave, I decided to take your exit interview, even though I didn't quit, but filled it out as if I did quit. I think all IBO's should take the exit interview now, and not wait until they quit to take it. If we wait until everyone quits, it is too late, right? See below.

Name: Tex

Immediate Sponsor: Mr. Inactive

Date: 2/22/07 (its my birthday!)

State: Duh

Date Sponsored: Over 10 years ago

Date of Separation: N/A

REASON FOR RESIGNATION

Another MLM Company: No

Regular Employment Conflicts: No

Unsatisfactory Income: No, if you consider Q income, Yes, if you consider net income. For more details, see Other, below.

Hours of Work Unsatisfactory: No

Family Conflicts: No

Other: Tools are too expensive, and upline doesn't come clean that this is how they make most of their money.

1. What are your reasons for leaving? And, what prompted you to leave now? See other, above. I'm broke, hope the upline is enjoying their new tool house, tool car, tool boat, tool plane, tool motorcoach, etc.

2. What was the most enjoyable part of representing this company? The Q employees were great.

3. What was the least enjoyable part of representing this company? The upline lied about where they made their money. I thought it was mostly from Q, but found out it was mostly from the tools.

4. Was this business opportunity what you expected? Please explain. No, see #3.

5. Would you have made any changes to the way your business operated? If yes, please describe. Yes, I would have developed my own tool system that was less expensive and encouraged Q to clamp down on the problem, not just whine about the way things are (which I am doing, in reality).

6. Would you ever consider representing this company again? If not, please explain. The Q company yes, the tool owners/profiteers, no.

7. What did you like most about this company? And, what did you like least about this company? I like everything about the Q company, but the tool owners/profiteers lied about where they made their money, I don't like liars.

8. Would you still recommend this business opportunity or team and our products in the future? If you mean Q, yes. If you mean the tool/system owners/profiteers, no.

9. As a new distributor, was your training helpful for what you were actually doing six months later? If not, please explain. Yes, just too expensive.

10. What could have been done to prevent you from leaving? Tell the truth about the tool profits from the beginning, but then I probably wouldn't have joined in the first place.

11. What was the quality of supervision you received? Good? Fair? Poor? What could your sponsor or team do to improve his/her management style?

Communicate? Motivate? Facilitate? Recognize? Other? Please explain Who cars about any of these if they are based on the lies of the tool profits?

12. What does your new company offer that this company does not offer? If you mean the tool system, honesty.

13. What points would you make if you could tell your entire upline how you feel about this company? The Q company is great, but they are liars and cowards, I think they already know this.

Kia said:
Friday, February 23, 2007 #

I'm glad some organizations and individuals are approaching the review of performance professionally and establishing baselines and measuring growth (or lack thereof).

Tex, you say that performance reviews are not appealing to you because that's too much like a job.  OK, being an IBO is not a job, but it is work. And that work should have goals and objectives (not for "things" you want as a result of your business, but what your business should be to deliver what you want out of life).

A part of your own personal performance review should be what you're investing in your business and what you're getting out of it.  If what you're getting isn't satisfactory, you should change what you're doing. If you never change what your doing, you're likely to get the same results.

One last note, Tex. I think you raise good points, including some that the company is actively pursuing. I also think that your style for sharing your opinions across the Opportunity Zone does not help your cause. The length and repetitive nature of your responses only serve to irritate, rather than inform and engage.

The purpose of these blogs is to have a good dialog, not beat down any particular viewpoint (pro or con). We have not imposed any length restrictions in our blogs because we thought too many rules discourage open and transparent dialog. Some people are considering the wisdom of that decision.

Mike said:
Friday, February 23, 2007 #

Kia,

On post length, and redundancy...thank you.

I had decided to minimize any contribution to the opportunity zone family of blogs as topics were becoming narrow and obsessive.

Mike.

Tex said:
Friday, February 23, 2007 #

Kia: I'm glad some organizations and individuals are approaching the review of performance professionally and establishing baselines and measuring growth (or lack thereof).  

.

Tex: The basis of "professional" has to begin with honesty.

.

Kia: Tex, you say that performance reviews are not appealing to you because that's too much like a job.  OK, being an IBO is not a job, but it is work. And that work should have goals and objectives (not for "things" you want as a result of your business, but what your business should be to deliver what you want out of life).

.

Tex: Your response reads like you didn't see the remainder of my message. If you want to "cherry pick" my response, I will ask you to respond to the rest of it (dialog). Kia, what is your response to the final question in the above post? Is it a valid point?

.

Kia: A part of your own personal performance review should be what you're investing in your business and what you're getting out of it.  If what you're getting isn't satisfactory, you should change what you're doing. If you never change what your doing, you're likely to get the same results.

.

Tex: I did change, haven't I made that clear? The issue is many of the system owners/profiteers preach "keep doing what you're doing".

.

Kia: One last note, Tex. I think you raise good points, including some that the company is actively pursuing. I also think that your style for sharing your opinions across the Opportunity Zone does not help your cause. The length and repetitive nature of your responses only serve to irritate, rather than inform and engage.

.

Tex: When the tool profit issue is fixed, I will ride off into the sunset, with a smile on my face. When you consider the scope of the issue, I think you will agree it is difficult to be reminded too often. When should we expect updates on this issue? That would help the dialog issue mentioned below, as dialog infers two-way transfer of information. If we know real progress is being made, there will be less of a need to keep the discussion on the front burner.

.

Kia: The purpose of these blogs is to have a good dialog, not beat down any particular viewpoint (pro or con). We have not imposed any length restrictions in our blogs because we thought too many rules discourage open and transparent dialog. Some people are considering the wisdom of that decision.

.

Tex: That's fine, I can be "short and sweet", but I am not sure how limiting the post length is compatible with "good dialogue". I try not to "beat down" other viewpoints, only offer facts for consideration. Sometimes that takes more words to do effectively.

Kia said:
Friday, February 23, 2007 #

Tex:  Your style of posting my comments and then your comments and then my comments and then your comments isn't helpful.  Just say what you got to say and move on.  

The several dozen comments you've posted expressing nearly identical opinions have been noted and, as we've shared with you, are being acted upon.  Again, this issue will not be resolved overnight.  (So get some sleep.)

Kia said:
Friday, February 23, 2007 #

Tex, let me add that I do read your entire posts and I'm sorry if I don't always address every sub-point you make in them.  As for a "grade" given on how much progress is being made with the field?  Incomplete.

.

Let me apologize if my last few comments to you have sounded snippy. I really do think you can provide a valuable voice of dissent (and eventually, I hope, support) on topics we're talking about in the Zone. I just hope your style changes a little so your opinions may actually be read by people who come here, rather than causing their eyes to glaze over.

Tex said:
Friday, February 23, 2007 #

Kia,

Although my comments are repetitive to you and others, there are always new readers of these posts (we hope, at least). These folks will probably not go back to the beginning and read every message, so if we don't have any guidance from you regarding issues and timelines, the message tends to get buried under new posts and new threads.

This is one of the weaknesses of blogs. You can fix this by changes the blog design a little, by posting some major topics on the front page and showing general timelines/decisions.

I sleep well every night, especially after your adatudes blog started, it appears you are getting serious about some serious issues.

"Incomplete" is a good answer, at least you are still working on it.

Let me apologize for however I come across on these blogs that is in any way upsetting, I assure you I only have the best of intentions regarding something I feel VERY strongly about, and "upsetting the apple cart" is not only acceptable, but necessary, in my opinion, to correct a condition that has gone on for far too long a time. I hope you understand you have the communication technology to minimize the disruption the major changes will cause if implemented as needed. When something this important is at stake, clarity is much more important than diplomacy, in my opinion.    

Brad said:
Monday, February 26, 2007 #

Thank you Kia for addressing repetition and length.  I am guilty of the length from time to time, but that's because of training from high school English teachers that liked "fluff" rather than substance, and I acquiesced to earn that "A" :)

Never the less, I too have totally skipped posts by Tex lately, and have avoided blog post replies because I knew it was “tool”-heavy, which interests me very little right now, at least until a post comes out on the Zone asking for comments on tools.  There are other issues that can help and can be acted upon sooner.

Tex, just a suggestion: set up a page on a website that outlines your stance, the problems you see, examples, and 3 solutions to your problems, and use that link for "Your URL" when inputting your Name for Zone posts.  Then, reference this link if a tool issue is about to surface.  Just a thought.

Kia said:
Monday, February 26, 2007 #

Excellent suggestion Brad.  We've even talked about that here at Quixtar: when dealing with a comment/question we've had to respond to on a number of occasions, provide a link to our previous response on that. It's not my preference, because I don't think that's really an ideal form of dialog.

Tex, I appreciate your viewpoint and your zeal for change. Keeping your posts focused and on-point helps a lot, and allowing others to post comments without jumping on each one will help encourage dialog. I'm not telling you to not post ... just to allow others to get a word in edgewise.

Oh, and Brad, I was an English major at a college that demanded a lot of essays, so I too suffer at times from overwriting. My journalism diploma from another college, however, helps moderate that tendency.  Inverted pyramid style of writing ... most important stuff at top ... less important stuff (like this) at the bottom.

Tex said:
Tuesday, February 27, 2007 #

Brad,

Thanks for the suggestion, I would prefer to work within the system (Opportunity Zone) than create my own site and then be accused of "pimping" it, as I have seen from others.

Kia,

I don't have any issue with linking to repetitive questions to a place within your own site, as long as you state that if the link does not address the original question, to ask again, in a different manner.

Using links productively would be a good thing, in my opinion, as there are a lot of repeated messages on most blogs.

So much in fact, many of them are beginning to "burn out". The goal is first to dialog, but then action must be taken, or we will be dialoging without getting much accomplished.

As I suggested to adatudes, it would be great to have your front page list 3-4 of the "hot topics" and give a weekly or bi-weekly update on these issues.

This should significantly reduce the amount of unproductive posting, in my opinion.

Brad said:
Tuesday, February 27, 2007 #

Kia: "less important stuff (like this) at the bottom."

Haha, yes.  And with that statement, I guess we're even for me inadvertently leaving "Real Quixtar Blog" off a list of Quixtar-Linked sites many moons ago. :-)  Thanks for keeping up with dialogue and responses!

A Zone suggestion: have a drop-box, of sorts, on the Zone homepage for discussion ideas.  Passer-bys can click the link and send off a post to the Zone moderater with suggestions of important issues for IBOs.  It could be a public posting too thus reducing reduntant issues if it has already been mentioned.  Even a tally/poll system could be incorporated?

Kia said:
Wednesday, February 28, 2007 #

Brad: Lots of good ideas.  I think we're still in the building stage (more blogs on the way!) but once we have our roster up we can start adding refinements. As for being "even," don't worry: you were never in the red with me!

Leave a Comment

(required) 
(required) 

First and last names are encouraged in keeping with the spirit of transparency and openness in which Opportunity Zone was created.

(required - not displayed)  
 
Comments policy: Please note that comments are moderated. All comments are welcome as long as they are on topic, respectful, and do not advertise competing products or businesses. We reserve the right to remove without warning any and all offensive, unlawful, defamatory, or libelous comments, as well as any personal attacks or offensive language.