[3] in Staff Recognition
[rita@Athena.MIT.EDU: Comments for 'thanks' meeting #2]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Cecilia d'Oliveira)
Mon May 18 11:00:46 1992
Date: Mon, 18 May 92 11:00:26 EST
From: cec@MIT.EDU (Cecilia d'Oliveira)
To: thanks@MIT.EDU
------- Forwarded Message
From: rita@Athena.MIT.EDU
To: cec@Athena.MIT.EDU
Cc: rita@Athena.MIT.EDU
Subject: Comments for 'thanks' meeting #2
Date: Sun, 17 May 92 09:03:36 EDT
I definitely agree that we should not be forced to set a time limit
to the frequency of awards/rewards nor feel that we MUST choose someone
or some team because our process may be shifted from recognizing a
good job to filling "some" award requirement.
* Also, are we issuing awards or rewards?
We should also be careful that the 'thanks' mailing list-discuss group
does not become a forum for flaming people. Also, I'm concerned that
people may flood the group with too many thank-you's. We don't have
enough, but we don't want overkill.
Managers should also be informed of any nominations because sometimes
co-workers have incomplete views of their own accomplishments.
Finally, we should recognize BOTH teams and individuals, but from my
view-point, I recognize teams since I'm working with a team to
get the job done.
See you at the meeting!
---thanks
Rita
------- End of Forwarded Message
