The Makings of a Good Employee

The Surprisingly Simple Formula That Cuts Through the Noise

“Employee data whispers the truth about your culture.” — Kevin Guiney

Years ago, I worked for a director in an industrial setting who wasn’t the type to mince words. He was what you'd call a straight shooter—meat and potatoes, no fluff. One day, during a conversation about employee performance, he said something that stuck with me:

"A good employee comes to work every day, works safely, is productive and stays out of trouble."

That was it. Four things. Simple. Direct. No jargon.

It struck me how rarely we define what being a "good employee" actually means. We all throw the term around: He's a good guy. She’s one of our best. That one’s trouble. But those are vague labels, shaped by personal impressions. What if we had a common definition? What if we aligned our mental picture with actual data?

I realized that everything my director mentioned could be measured. Our company already tracked these things: productivity metrics, safety incidents, attendance records, and discipline files. So, I set out to test a hypothesis.

---

The PADS Index: Measuring What Matters

I picked a large department and pulled the relevant data for each employee. I created a basic index with four categories:

• Performance (output, quality, or other production metrics)

• Attendance (absenteeism and tardiness)

• Discipline (any formal infractions)

• Safety (injuries, near misses, and incident reports)

I scored each employee on these dimensions, added up their scores, and ranked them.

Then I went to the supervisor of that department and asked, without showing any data, "Who are your top two employees? Your bottom two?"

His gut rankings matched the index exactly. Top two on his list? Top two in the data. Bottom two? Right there at the bottom of the index.

It was a powerful moment of validation.

And there was another insight: those at the top of the list had virtually perfect records across the board. Those at the bottom? They weren’t just failing in one area; they were failing in multiple areas: inconsistent attendance, safety infractions, and often a history of disciplinary issues. The takeaway was clear: consistent underperformance is rarely isolated — it tends to bleed across metrics, often rooted in a deeper pattern of low accountability or quiet resistance to expectations.

---

From Concept to Culture

What started as a simple correlation test—an experiment to see if gut instinct aligned with the data—quickly evolved. At the time, I was the local HR Manager, and this facility was part of my assigned portfolio. The HR team later developed a dashboard based on this idea. Supervisors could now view the employee data in a simple interface—consolidated PADS type scores and trends over time. It helped make internal transfers smoother; when someone moved departments, managers could quickly understand who they were getting. It also created opportunities for coaching and recognition.

Most importantly, it created a shared understanding. We no longer had to guess who was "good" or "bad" based on hearsay or bias. We had facts.

---

Labels Matter: From "Good" to "Effective"

I came to see that even the term "good employee" might not be ideal. It's loaded, even moralistic. "Effective employee" might be more accurate. After all, we’re not judging character—we’re evaluating outcomes and behaviors that contribute to a safe, productive, and stable workplace.

---

Turning the PADS Index into a Predictive Hiring Tool

Because performance issues often show up across multiple dimensions, the PADS model lends itself well to one of the most impactful HR functions: hiring.

If an employee's poor performance usually shows up in multiple areas—spotty attendance, safety violations, and disciplinary action—why not evaluate these traits before hiring?

The next time you're interviewing a candidate, instead of relying solely on polished resumes and rehearsed answers, consider taking a more holistic approach—one that explores the key dimensions of the PADS model. Below are a few example questions, each prefaced with context to help candidates better understand your expectations and workplace culture.

---

Attendance

At our company, we expect employees to report to work reliably, with exceptions only for legitimate absences such as vacation, statutory holidays, approved bereavement leave, or illness, as outlined in our policies and applicable employment standards.

With that in mind, how would you describe your attendance record with previous employers?

---

Safety

We consider safety a core value—protecting our employees, our customers, and the general public. That’s why we look for people who not only follow procedures but take personal ownership of working safely.

Have you ever been cited for a safety infraction? If so, what did you learn from the experience?

---

Discipline

We work hard to maintain a positive, respectful, and productive workplace. While occasional misunderstandings can happen, consistent alignment with workplace expectations is important for team morale and trust.

Have you ever found yourself in a situation where your behavior or decisions were questioned by a manager? If so, how did you respond or reflect on it?

---

This approach isn’t meant to intimidate—it’s about understanding the full picture of who you’re hiring. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, and the PADS model offers a structured, fair way to assess that.

It also makes the interview more transparent and gives candidates a chance to share context or demonstrate how they've grown from past experiences.

Note: Always ensure your interview questions comply with local labor laws and human rights legislation. When in doubt, consult with legal or HR counsel to tailor your hiring practices appropriately.

---

What Today’s Best Companies Are Doing

In the 20 some years since this idea first took shape, I’ve seen how it’s aligned with a broader movement: today’s leading organizations are using People Analytics to make smarter, fairer, more consistent decisions:

• Platforms like Workday, SAP SuccessFactors, and BambooHR offer dashboards that track attendance, performance, training history, and more, helping HR and managers monitor behavior and trends at scale.

• Microsoft Viva Insights and tools like Glint combine behavioral signals with pulse surveys to measure engagement, burnout risk, and emotional tone—offering a near real-time read of employee sentiment.

• Safety platforms like Intelex and Enablon integrate data from near misses, PPE compliance, and worker fatigue assessments to predict risk and prevent injuries before they occur.

• Skills mapping systems such as Eightfold AI or Fuel50 allow companies to assess, track, and develop internal capabilities—aligning training opportunities with current and future business needs.

• Calibration sessions, promoted by firms like Betterworks and Lattice, bring managers together to evaluate employee performance using shared criteria—ensuring fairness and reducing manager bias.

But the truth is, you don’t need a Fortune 500 budget to start. The PADS approach is lean, intuitive, and immediately actionable using data you probably already have.

---

A New Lens on Performance

Here’s what I learned: when you define performance clearly and track it simply, you move from guessing to knowing. You stop relying on vague impressions and start having sharper, more objective conversations:

• About who deserves recognition.

• About who needs coaching or support.

• About how to build a stronger, safer, more dependable team.

So the next time someone asks, “Hey, is Joey a good employee? I’m thinking of bringing him onto our team,” try responding with:

“Give me a minute — I’ll check the PADS data to confirm he’s an effective employee.”

Because when performance shows up across the board — in attendance, discipline, safety, and results — you shouldn’t have to guess. The data should speak for itself.