I think that human resource development and employee education are understood as things that should be done in any company, but I think relatively few HR personnel have a clear picture of what, how, and to what extent they should be trained. I always say that competency standards are the basis for formulating an education and training system, but these competency standards are also a tool to help employees understand the ``current situation''. Indonesian employees have a strong tendency to think that they are relatively good at what they do, but this is because they have not defined what constitutes being able to do something. Also, helping employees understand the difference from the current situation will motivate them.

[Evaluation adjustment]

It is the company's duty to help employees understand where they are lacking and to provide them with opportunities to improve. No matter how experienced you are, no one will be able to produce the results your company wants without training them at all. It is necessary to understand the company's methods and culture before starting work. To this end, we communicate the current situation of employees as perceived by the company in the form of ``evaluation results,'' but these evaluations often require correction instructions from superiors, company management, or human resources. In this case, the boss who gave the evaluation has a strong tendency to think, ``This is not my evaluation,'' and when giving feedback on the evaluation, he ends up saying, ``I thought I gave a rating of 〇〇, but △△ changed it to this.'' Employees who are told this do not understand their current situation and remain dissatisfied. There is no point in mustering up the courage to tell your subordinates the results of your evaluation. So how should I give evaluation feedback?
When you hear complaints like this from managers, I recommend that you first discuss the unacceptable evaluation with your superiors and do not accept it until you are satisfied with it. Most managers smile bitterly, but they need to instill confidence in the fact that the people who know their subordinates best are their direct supervisors. However, evaluations cannot be made by idiot parents, so it is necessary to listen to adjustments from a broad and objective perspective and reconsider, ``Is this really true?''

[Evaluation after adjustment is also my evaluation]

And the evaluation you accept is your own evaluation. Let's objectively explain why we made that evaluation based on facts. And let's talk about the bright future, ``How can we do better?'' rather than the past, ``What is missing?'' Explain in specific terms that the employee can understand, such as what they need to be able to do and how well they can do it, what it is for, what the benefits are for the employee and the benefits for the company, etc. Even if you explain it logically, it doesn't necessarily mean that you will understand. If you have a different field of expertise, a different level of education, and experience, there is no point in communicating in your own words without considering the other person's understanding, and then asking, ``Do you understand?'' You're being told a lot of things you don't understand, and you're being asked questions that you'll be angry at if you don't answer "yes." Indonesian employees have a strong tendency to accept what their boss says. Therefore, superiors need to approach their subordinates.
There are some bosses who wonder, ``Why can't my subordinates do this?'' It's no wonder they can't. Your subordinates are not you; they are your subordinates because they don't have the same abilities as you.