What approach is fairer for evaluating employee performance
Thread Content
A new performance evaluation system has been introduced recently, based on self-application followed by review by supervisors; previously, it was the supervisors who assigned scores based on an individual’s usual performance Which one do you approve of? How does your company implement it?
We use workload, work quality, work attitude, and plan completion as the main assessment criteria. However, no one knows exactly how much performance-based pay they should receive each month; it can only be compared to the amount from the previous month, so it does not serve as a proper means of evaluation. For example: A performed well last month and received a performance bonus of 2000. However, since the company’s performance was poor that month, A’s performance-based bonus should have been 1800. As a result, A received a reward without knowing it ； This month, A was unhappy because they did so much work yet received only a small amount as payment; as a result, they became less diligent in their work. However, after the company made some changes that month, A received a performance bonus of 3000. The amount that should have been allocated to A as a performance bonus was 3500. Although A was under penalty, they still received more money, and they were not aware that they had been punished.
In my opinion, list all the people who are related to your work, dividing them into two categories: input-type and output-type. For the input-type, you are the one who assigns scores to them (you are their client), while for the output-type, they are the ones who assign scores to you (they are your clients). Some people are both input and output types, but this does not affect the scoring. Leader ratings are just that – they depend entirely on the leader’s personal preferences, and they’re not necessarily fair or just (although absolute fairness and justice don’t exist). The weight coefficients must be determined based on their importance, and efforts should be made to avoid any subjectivity in light of the work requirements. Performance evaluation is the most urgent, important yet least effective system faced by all growing companies; due to a lack of integrity, it often becomes a mere formality, conducted just for the sake of evaluation. Whether a company has a future depends on its mechanisms ； To determine whether a mechanism is advanced, look at performance evaluation.
I’ve heard of this method used by the original poster; it’s also a fellow sea traveler who hasn’t been online for a long time. They are required to report on their work tasks and progress on a weekly basis, and then fill out forms over the weekend to report on what has been completed and the reasons behind it. It seems that the company’s philosophy is that one should not wait for the manager to assign tasks, but rather find their own work to do; the company does not support those who are idle.
Personally, I prefer the approach of submitting applications myself. It has a positive effect on jobs that involve repetition, but it’s not necessary for engineers. Giving feedback marked with PP really doesn’t matter; if there’s work to do, just do it, and if not, use that time to learn, improve skills, and get trained by reviewing previous project documents. . . http://image.haha.mx/2016/04/05/big/2186676_0feedefa28a1d77459de2e473879c74e_1459843998.jpg