Is it a strict error to set a high level of performance evaluation standards?

Performance appraisal is the process of evaluating and ranking employees' work performance, and commonly used methods include quantitative index method, qualitative index method, 360-degree evaluation method, result-oriented evaluation method, etc. Here's a brief rundown of the various methods:

Quantitative Indicator Method: We set and measure certain specific and quantifiable indicators, such as sales, production efficiency, work quality, etc., to evaluate and rank the work performance of employees. The advantages of this method are that it is objective, quantitative, and comparable, but it is easy to ignore the non-quantitative performance of employees, such as communication, teamwork, etc.

Qualitative indicator method: through the evaluation and analysis of certain specific and hard-to-quantify behaviors, attitudes and skills that employees show at work, such as innovation ability, leadership, communication ability, etc. The advantage of this method is that it provides a more comprehensive and in-depth understanding of the employee's job performance and ability, but the evaluation results are susceptible to subjective factors.

360-degree evaluation method: This method evaluates and ranks employees' work performance by evaluating their performance in the bench buried work from multiple parties, including superiors, colleagues, subordinates and self-evaluation. The advantage of this method is that it provides a comprehensive and objective picture of the employee's performance and ability, but it requires a lot of time and effort, and the results of the assessment may be inconsistent.

Results-based evaluation method: This method evaluates and ranks employees' work performance by evaluating their actual performance and results. The advantage of this method is that it can pay attention to the actual performance and results of employees, but it is easy to ignore the quality and efficiency of employees in the work process.

In addition to the above methods, there are other performance appraisal methods, such as key performance indicator method, comprehensive evaluation method, etc.

At the same time, there are also some errors in performance appraisal, such as:

Evaluator Subjective Error: Evaluators may be influenced by their own subjective biases to make unfair evaluations of employees' job performance.

Unclear or unfair evaluation criteria: If the evaluation criteria are unclear or unfair, it may affect the accuracy and fairness of the assessment results.

Unreasonable evaluation time: If the evaluation time is not reasonable, the performance of employees in certain periods may be ignored, which will affect the accuracy of the evaluation results.

Performance appraisal can usually be understood as a part of performance management, in order to have a more comprehensive understanding of common deviations, from the perspective of performance management as a whole, common deviations can be summarized into the following four types:

1. Deviation in the understanding of performance indicators: that is, there is ambiguity between the evaluator and the appraisee's understanding of performance indicators, such as sales revenue indicators, whether they are calculated according to the volume of shipments or calculated according to the amount signed by the contract, and different personnel have different understandings; The solution is to clearly describe the meaning of the indicators, avoid ambiguity, and stipulate detailed statistical standards or clear statistical standards.

2. Longitudinal deviation of performance results: that is, after performance evaluation, the performance results issued are inconsistent with the actual work results of the appraisee, and the appraisee's work performance is outstanding, but the performance results are poor, or the appraisee's work is mediocre, but the performance results are very good. The reason for this lies in the unclear performance appraisal standards and the unreasonable setting of work standards and appraisal methods.

At the same time, due to the above reasons, the halo effect, halo effect, recent effect, and similar to me have caused errors such as the manifestation of errors. The solution is: clarify the assessment standards, set reasonable work standards and evaluation methods in line with the actual situation.

3. The horizontal deviation of performance results, that is, the horizontal comparison of employee performance results, employees with outstanding work performance are lower than those with average work performance, and this deviation is often manifested in different work content between posts or departments, the reason, in layman's terms, is that the starting line is different, and the measurement scale is different. The solution is to look at historical data or make reasonable data estimates, and unify the starting line and evaluation criteria based on historical data and estimates, so as to reduce the lateral deviation of performance results.

4. The deviation of the performance standard value, that is, the performance standard is set too high or too low, this deviation often occurs in the newly set indicators or indicators without historical data, and the solution is to revise the performance standard value according to the actual data.

Answer]: The best way to overcome the distribution error is the "forced distribution method", that is, the employees of the all-sensitive masking body are ranked in order from best to worst, and then the corresponding score is given according to the theoretical number distribution of each score segment. and oak.

Answer]: a, b, c, d, e

1.Based on the analysis of the work post and the actual investigation of the post, and on the premise of objective and accurate data and various original records, the importance and role of performance management are clarified, and a scientific, reasonable, specific and feasible evaluation element index and standard system are formulated.

2.Starting from the objective environment and production and operation conditions of the enterprise, according to the production type and characteristics of the enterprise, fully consider the personnel quality and structural characteristics of the employees of the enterprise, select appropriate evaluation tools and methods, emphasize the flexibility and comprehensiveness of performance management, start from reality, have a purpose, constantly summarize the successful experience, and earnestly learn the lessons of failure, so as to effectively avoid the emergence of various evaluation errors and biases.

3.The focus of performance appraisal should be on judging performance behaviors and output results, and establishing a behavior- and outcome-oriented appraisal system as much as possible.

4.In order to avoid mistakes such as personal bias, a 360-degree assessment method can be used, in which multiple evaluators participate together.

5 Among the various problems that may arise, the vast majority are caused by the evaluator, whose own quality and the level of performance management have a great impact on the performance appraisal work.

6.In order to improve the quality and level of performance management, we should also pay attention to the management of all aspects of the performance appraisal process.

Answer]: The causes and harms of performance evaluation errors are mainly as follows:

1) Causes of performance evaluation errors.

Performance evaluation errors can generally be divided into two main categories based on the reasons for their formation:

The first type is conscious error, which mainly includes three types of distribution error: over-width error, over-strict error and centering trend error. This type of error is related to the motivation of the evaluator, which refers to the deliberate inflating or depressing of the performance grade or score of the evaluator, or always conservatively giving an average score in the middle of the range and avoiding high and low scores. Errors that are too wide and centered trend errors are more common errors in performance evaluation, while errors that are too strict occur under certain conditions.

The second type is unconscious error, which includes errors caused by halo effect, rolling stereotype, proximate effect, first cause effect disturbance backup modular, contrast effect, etc., which are errors caused by the evaluator unconsciously, often due to the evaluator's judgment or cognitive bias based on unslow and accurate information.

2) The harm of performance evaluation errors.

If the top management of the organization formulates various personnel policies or takes corresponding measures based on these large errors in information, the effect of these policy measures will inevitably be greatly reduced or even counterproductive.

Errors in performance evaluation are likely to have a negative impact on employee motivation, job satisfaction, and engagement, as well as the operations of the organization as a whole.

Ineffective performance reviews can throw performance improvement out of the right direction, and employees can become overwhelmed or even leave because they don't feel fairly treated.

If evaluators fail to close reasonable gaps that should have been opened when evaluating employees' performance, the effectiveness of the organization's performance-based compensation policy may also be greatly affected, which is especially unfair to those who perform well.

Answer] Laughing: D

The coincidental errors of performance appraisal results mainly include wide and thick errors, strict errors, concentrated tendencies and intermediate tendencies. Similarity bias is a manifestation of the egocentric effect of wide fluid.

The problems existing in the performance evaluation criteria include unclear evaluation purposes, lack of evaluation standards, unreasonable evaluation cycles, unreasonable evaluation cycles, and insufficient use of evaluation results, as follows:

1. The purpose of the evaluation is not clear.

Some organizations do not have a clear understanding of the purpose of performance evaluation, and only regard performance evaluation as a work that has to be completed and evaluate for the sake of evaluation, rather than regard performance evaluation as a systematic project for the organization to improve the management level and performance level, resulting in the original function and role of performance evaluation can not be effectively played.

2. Lack of evaluation criteria.

In layman's terms, the evaluation criteria solve the problem of grading the specific evaluation content, that is, to what extent the target value has been completed, whether it is "excellent", "good" or "average". Formulating evaluation criteria for each evaluation content is a cumbersome project, so many organizations omit this link.

However, due to the lack of objective and unified evaluation standards, the evaluation subjects can only rely on subjective judgment or personal preferences when conducting evaluations, which leads to different evaluation subjects having different views on the same evaluation content, which in turn makes the evaluated person feel unfair, and even affects the normal operation of the entire performance evaluation system.

3. The evaluation cycle is unreasonable.

In some organizations, the evaluation cycle is too long, resulting in some short-term performance problems that cannot be detected and solved in time; However, the evaluation cycle of some organizations is too short, resulting in high management costs and resistance among organization members.

4. The evaluation cycle is unreasonable.

There are many ways to evaluate performance, but each method has its own content that is suitable for evaluation. When conducting performance evaluation, organizations should pay attention to selecting appropriate evaluation methods according to the characteristics of evaluation indicators. However, in management practice, many organizations ignore the fit between evaluation indicators and evaluation methods, and try to use a method to "complete the work", resulting in the bias of performance indicator measurement.

5. The evaluation results are not fully used.

The result of performance evaluation is a truthful reflection of the performance of the evaluation object, and can reflect the work attitude, behavior and results of the evaluation object. If the results of the evaluation are not applied to human resource management decisions such as salary payment, job promotion, training and development, the performance evaluation process will become a mere formality.