Scenario 2: Adobe Abandons Annual Performance ReviewsMuch like GE, Adobe used a ranking-based performance management system for many years. In2012, the Senior Vice President of People Resources announced that Adobe would betransitioning away from annual performance reviews. By Fall of 2012, they had beganimplementing a new system, known as the "Check-in" approach. In this system, feedback wasprovided as soon as it was needed (rather than waiting) and contained steps for improving (notjust punishing). It was believed that this system saved over 80,000 hours that would've beenspent on annual performance reviews, and it was also associated with lower turnover amongemployees. This approach had three tenets:1.Expectations: Set, track, and review clear expectations/goals (what and how) and clarify roles, responsibilities, and success criteria frequently throughout the year. Employees were expected to begin each year with a document outlining the objectives of their team or business unit, and managers and employees were expected to update their objectives asneeded throughout the year (rather than only once per year).2.Feedback: Give and receive ongoing feedback and coaching on a frequent and timelybasis to recognize and address and/or improve performance against expectations. Managers were encouraged to be constructive when giving feedback, and to give feedback through "Check-ins" whenever needed, rather than waiting until the end of the year to provide feedback.3.Growth: Provide opportunities to develop and increase skills, knowledge, and experiencein employee's current role in alignment with business needs and individual aspirations. Rather than focusing on employees' past performance during an annual performance review, the Check-in system encouraged managers to focus on how employees will perform going forward. It is intended to give the employee ownership over their growth.This system placed more responsibility on managers than did their old ranking system. Managersnow had to be more attentive and observant of employees, and provide constructive feedback onshort notice. They also needed to consider employees' growth aspirations. All of the informationon the Check-in system was provided online for employees and managers to access. This systemfaces a number of challenges though. Managers may not desire such increased responsibility. Itmay be difficult to justify promoting or firing an employee at a later point in time if feedbackwas delivered in a check-in that isn't documented. Pay decisions in this system aren't guided byscores on an annual performance review, they're controlled more by managers' assessments ofemployees' performance.What can Adobe do in each step of performance management to ensure that the new Check-insystem is implement fairly and effectively? How can Adobe best implement step 1 (define performance) of the performance management process in the new check in system? How can Adobe best implement step 2 (monitor & evaluate performance) of the performance management process in the new check in system? How can Adobe best implement step 3 (Review performance) of the performance management process in the new check in system? How can Adobe best implement step 4 (Provide consequences) of the performance management process in the new check in system?