In my previous company (a Food Company in South Europe), John had recently joined as a manager and had a distinct way of dealing with those junior to him. He set tasks via email, avoided personal interaction with juniors and when deadlines were not met owing to his tasks not being properly understood or the deadlines having been set with unrealistic expectations, John placed blame easily on juniors. While those under John tried to approach the issue with him, he insisted that there was no issue and that if there was, they should bring it up at the next review which was a few months away. Being junior to John, many were afraid to insist on action being taken immediately (with the fear that they would be held in poor regard by him and seniors he reported to) and so, simply let the issue slide. As the official 360-degre review period approached, a few months later, John made a conscious effort to assume a high degree of professionalism for the period surrounding the review, however, a few weeks later, relapsed into his usual state. This rinse and repeat process continued and a few months later, two major clients (managed by John)  launched official complaints on the poor deliverables coming out of John and his lack of proper communication. The client requested a change in the key-account manager. Following an official and lengthy review, John's employment with the firm was terminated.


The current 360-degree rating system in place did not allow John's deficiencies to be brought to the fore quick enough. While attempts by his juniors were made to highlight apparent issues in his management and communication style, it is only when clients complained, that formal action was taken. The juniors suffered through months of poor management and leadership and saw an erosion in the quality of their learning and development within the firm, as a result of John's management style. John, while talented, lost his job as he had done irreparable damage to the firm's brand.


The above situation need not have gotten out of control if the company's employees would have had access to a discreet, yet direct and real-time rating system. After interacting with John, they would have been able to log on and score him on a range of attributes (such as communication, task management, attitude etc.). Said attributes could have been tailored to the company's KPIs. As John's management issues were experienced by many within the firm, the decision makers with access to the Bugscore 360 real-time rating system would have immediately been alerted to the problem by way of increasingly negative scores on John, a higher frequency of scores and scores originating from multiple parties – all pointing to the same issue. These alerts would have allowed senior management resources to be mobilised towards John immediately. He would have been warned much earlier and would have had the time to take the steps necessary to make a professional course correction. In turn, his juniors would have benefited and ultimately, the likelihood of clients complaining would have drastically been reduced. Employee quality improved, clients happy, revenues salvaged, employee turnover reduced.

Zissis, COO