The issue with typical Performance Measurement

Performance Measurement

The issue with typical Performance Measurement

Performance management has traditionally been considered as evaluation of employees by its line manager or senior peer. This evaluation, for me, has few limitations. First one is that the whole evaluation is based on the mindset and perception of the evaluator regarding the candidate and is more affected by the working relation between the two persons. Second issue is that the evaluation does not necessarily cover the whole work, performed by the candidate, during the whole evaluation time period and is mostly based only on the time period the candidate worked or interacted with the evaluator. Third issue is that some candidates are often involved in multiple projects in parallel which could be of different magnitude but when the evaluation is conducted, all the projects are given equal weightage.

For me this means that if you have to score higher in your evaluation then you should be taking a different approach rather than just focusing on your work. It builds a general perception that you must be focusing on building a good relation with the evaluator to be in its “Good Books” rather than putting your head down and working hard. This means doing those things that carries foremost interest of the evaluator. Then, if you are lucky that the same evaluator is evaluating you at the end of evaluation period, then you are more likely to get better feedback.

It is usually normal to work with evaluator for limited time only, so you should feel fortunate when you get the evaluator with whom you had a very good project and/or had a very good working relationship. Another issue is that if you have worked on multiple project, you can simply get good score by working hard and efficiently on smaller projects as all will be treated as equal in evaluation.

So, what is solution to the issues? For me, I think the evaluation system should be evaluating based on regular and comprehensive input, throughout evaluation time period, by the candidate itself. The whole evaluation system should be based on matrices and let resource fill in the data rather than involvement of human evaluator. This will allow uniform evaluation by removing different evaluation styles which have to be considered equal. The projects can be given weightage based on the planned engagement percentage for each project.

OGMC provides a wide range of Services and Trainings to help organizations adopt and transform into advance performance measurement and management.

Share this post

Comments (4)

  • Umair Qayyum Reply

    Another solution could be multi-rater evaluation i.e. evaluation by more than one person.

    March 30, 2020 at 1:18 pm
    • Muhammad Zeeshan Ali, PMP, PMI-ACP Reply

      Yes, it could lower the dependency on the primary evaluator but problem again remains the same that it will depend on human interactions and level of understanding.

      We have seen over the years that adding multi-rater have in-fact made things even worse.

      March 30, 2020 at 1:25 pm
      • Umair Qayyum Reply

        But in automated system there are lot of loop holes that can be exploited and it could not be a true representation of one’s work done.

        March 30, 2020 at 1:30 pm
        • Muhammad Zeeshan Ali, PMP, PMI-ACP Reply

          Systems can be improved over time but Human nature cannot be changed. Systems are much more consistent especially in situation when there are multiple evaluates which in case of humans, is not possible.

          For example, I may award 8 to the bast candidates while you do always rate him/her 7. Then how can both of them be considered equal with their scores different but same level of capabilities? That is where systems are consistent.

          March 30, 2020 at 1:40 pm

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.