Chapter 5. Measuring Results and Behaviors 5-1. Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall

Key Questions Where should each individual focus efforts? What are the expected objectives? How do we know how well the results were achieved? Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-2

Determining Accountabilities Collect information about the job (Job Description) Determine importance of task or cluster of tasks Percentage of employee s time spent performing tasks Impact on the unit s mission if performed inadequately Consequences of error Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-7

Determining Objectives Purpose: to identify outcomes Limited number Highly important When achieved Dramatic impact on overall organization success Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-8

Ten Characteristics of Good Objectives (Continued) 6. Bound by Time 7. Achievable 8. Fully Communicated 9. Flexible 10. Limited in Number Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-10

Determining Performance Standards Standards refer to aspects of performance objectives, such as: Quality How well the objective is achieved Quantity How much, how many, how often, and at what cost? Time Due dates, schedule, cycle times, and how quickly? Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-11

Good Performance Standards: Six Characteristics 1. Related to the Position 2. Concrete, Specific, and Measurable 3. Practical to Measure 4. Meaningful 5. Realistic and Achievable 6. Reviewed Regularly Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-13

Identify Competencies Measurable clusters of KSAs Knowledge Skills Abilities That are critical in determining how results will be achieved Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-15

Types of Competencies Differentiating Distinguish between superior and average performance Threshold Needed to perform to minimum standard Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-16

Necessary Components for Describing Competencies Definition Description of specific behaviors When competency is demonstrated When competency is not demonstrated Suggestions for developing the competency Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-18

Choose a Measurement System Comparative system Compares employees with one another Absolute system Compares employees with prespecified performance standards Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-19

Advantages of Comparative Systems Easy to explain Straightforward Identifies top as well as underperformers Better control for biases and errors found in absolute systems Leniency Severity Central tendency Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-20

Disadvantages of Comparative Systems Rankings may not be specific enough for: Useful feedback Protection from legal challenge No information on relative distance between employees Specific issues with forced distribution method Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-21

Simple Rank Order Advantages: Simple and easy to do Results are clear Disadvantages: Judges performance based on one dimension only May be difficult to rank similar performance levels Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-23

Alternation Rank Order Advantages: Simple and easy to do Results are clear Uses two anchors (best and worst) Disadvantages: Judges performance based on one dimension only May be difficult to rank similar performance levels Does not specify threshold for acceptable performance Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-24

Paired Comparisons Advantages: Thorough Final rankings are more accurate Disadvantages: Very time consuming May encounter problem of comparing apples and oranges Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-25

Forced Distribution Advantages: Categorizes employees into specific performance groups Facilitates reward assessment Competition may be good for organizational performance Disadvantages: Assumes performance scores are normally distributed May discourage contextual performance and teamwork Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-26

Advantages and Disadvantages of Absolute Systems Advantages: Can be used in large and small organizations Evaluations more widely accepted by employees Disadvantages: Higher risk of leniency, severity, and central tendency biases Generally, more time consuming than comparative systems Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-28

Behavior Checklists Advantages: Easy to use and understand Provides quantitative information Widespread use More objective than other systems Disadvantages: May feel impersonal and disconnected Scale points used are often arbitrary Difficult to get detailed and useful feedback Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-29

Essays Advantages: Simplest absolute method Individualized for each employee Can be done anytime Potential for detailed feedback Disadvantages: Unstructured and may lack detail Depends on supervisor s writing skill Comparisons virtually impossible Lack of quantitative information; difficult to use in personnel decisions Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-30

Critical Incidents Advantages: Focus on actual job behavior Provides specific examples Employees identify with rating Disadvantages: Collecting critical incidents can be very time consuming Quantification is difficult Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-31

Graphic Rating Scale(GRS) Method Graphic Rating Scale(GRS) Method : Graphic Rating Scale lists different traits (quality, reliability etc.) and a range of performance values from unsatisfactory to outstanding for each trait Supervisor rates each subordinate by circling or checking the score that best describes an employee s performance for each trait. The assigned values for the traits are then totaled. 2008 Prentice Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 9 32

Graphic Rating Scales Advantages: Meanings, interpretations, and dimensions being rated are clear Useful and accurate Most popular tool Disadvantages: Time consuming and resource-laden to develop Lacks individualized feedback and recommendations Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-33

Graphic Rating Scales: BARS Improvement Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) Uses critical incidents as anchors Involves multiple groups of employees in development Identify important job elements Describe critical incidents at various levels of performance Check for inter-rater reliability Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-34

Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS)-A combination of GRS and Critical Incidents Methods Developing a BARS 1. Generate critical incidents of effective and ineffective performance 2. Develop performance dimensions-cluster the incidents into specific dimensions eg. Sales skills 3. Reallocate incidents and Scale the incidents-done by a 2 nd group 4. Develop a final instrument-finally choose 6 or 7 of the incidents as dimensions of behavioral anchors Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-35

Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS)-A combination of GRS and Critical Incidents Methods Advantages of BARS A more accurate gauge because it is developed by those who know the job well Clearer standards about what is good, bad or average performance Feedback to appraises Independent dimensions-dimensions are not related Consistency by different raters Benefits of quantitative and qualitative factors combined Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-37

Quick Review Measuring Results Identify accountabilities Set objectives Determine standards of performance Measuring Behaviors Identify competencies Identify indicators Choose measurement system Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-39

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Printed in the United States of America. Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Copyright 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-40