  |
|||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||
|
 |
January 2006 | Issue 10
The "Aha!" Report What's the "AHA!" REPORT all about?
This series of newsletters contains AHA! information to help people and organizations hire the best employees, make the best promotion decisions, retain the most qualified people, maintain the widest applicant pool, follow best practices, and (if you are subject to US law) remain aware of EEOC hot-spots.
Measuring Performance: Not So Fast!
There is a lot of free advice in the marketplace about how to measure performance—and it is worth every penny!
Measuring performance is not as easy as some people would like you to believe. Let’s say, for example, that you and your manager agree on the following performance objectives at the beginning of the year:
• Reduce errors by 25%
• Conduct thorough needs-analysis on each account • Prepare detailed cost-benefit analyses • Manage multiple projects in intense environments • Effectively utilize company resources On the surface, these sound reasonable, objective, and provide clear direction. Right? For the next 12 months, you work hard, come in early and leave late. You never have time to address the error problem, but the subordinate who made the most mistakes happens to resign. You work overtime conducting every needs-analysis based on the best data at your disposal. An unexpected production delay interferes with several of your cost-benefit analyses. You willingly accept additional work when a peer is promoted. And after you thought about it, you’re not even really sure what “company resources” means.
The Manager’s annual evaluation of your performance:
A+ Reduced errors 30%
C- Did not do needs analysis thoroughly D Cost-benefit analyses were incomplete C+ Below average at managing multiple projects B Made effective use of company resources Feel like you were “sucker-punched?”
This is the problem with setting standards and evaluating performance. In many cases, “end-of-game” numbers have nothing to do with job skills. Outside factors, both pro and con, can make same-skilled employees appear vastly different. Were some of the objectives met? Yes. Were you totally responsible for any of the outcomes, good or bad? No. Will you be motivated to “do better”? Maybe in your next job.
How can this kind of randomness be avoided? The answer lies in knowing how to separate employee behaviors from global results. Employee behaviors include short-term, easy-to-evaluate skills such as: learning new information, setting objectives, planning and organizing, making good decisions, demonstrating care and concern for others, actively listening, fully evaluating data, and so forth. These are truly the only activities an employee can control. Do not ever use a statement like “pro-actively engage in competitive market activities that maximize profits” in performance measurement. High-sounding words, perhaps, but virtually impossible to evaluate because too many things are either unclear or out of the employee’s control. Stick with the basics. You would be surprised how much more you can do with less. |
 |
||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||
Join Email List