Generally speaking, the design of performance appraisal system mainly includes three aspects: one is the setting of performance appraisal objectives, the other is the determination of performance appraisal cycle, and the third is the selection of performance appraisal subjects.
First, the performance appraisal objectives
Performance appraisal target, also known as performance target, is the definition of employees' work tasks and requirements in the process of performance appraisal, and it is the reference system of employee performance appraisal. Performance objectives are composed of performance indicators and performance standards.
1, performance indicator
Performance indicators refer to the dimensions of performance, that is to say, from what aspects to assess the performance of employees. The setting of performance indicators should pay attention to the following issues:
(1) Performance indicators should be realistic, that is to say, performance indicators should be determined according to employees' work contents. Because the fundamental purpose of performance appraisal is to improve employees' work performance, performance indicators should reflect employees' work content, thus helping to find the shortcomings and problems in employees' work and make targeted improvements. In an enterprise, each employee's job content is different, so their performance indicators should also be different.
(2) Performance indicators should be effective, that is to say, performance indicators should cover all the work contents of employees, so as to accurately evaluate the actual performance of employees. This includes two meanings: first, it means that performance indicators cannot be missing, and all the work contents of employees should be included in performance indicators; Second, the performance indicators shall not overflow, and the work beyond the scope of duties shall not be included in the performance indicators, as shown in the figure (omitted). As can be seen from the above figure, the effective performance indicator is the overlapping part between the performance indicator and the actual work content. The shadow on the left indicates that the performance indicator overflows, and the shadow on the right indicates that the performance indicator is missing. The greater the overlap between these two circles, the higher the effectiveness of performance indicators. In order to improve the effectiveness of performance indicators, performance indicators should be determined according to the contents of job descriptions.
(3) The performance indicators should be specific, that is, the indicators should clearly point out what the assessment content is, not too general, otherwise the assessment subject will not be able to conduct the assessment. For example, when evaluating a teacher's performance, "teaching situation" is an unspecified indicator, because teaching situation involves many aspects. If we use this indicator to assess, the assessment subjects will be at a loss, and we should break it down into the following specific indicators: "punctuality in class", "logicality in lecture content" and "vividness in lecture method", so that the assessment will be more targeted. (4) The performance indicators should be clear, that is, when there are many different understandings of indicators, the meaning should be clear, and the assessment subjects should not be misunderstood. For example, there are two different understandings of the index of "project quality compliance rate", one refers to "the proportion of qualified projects to completed projects" and the other refers to "the proportion of qualified projects to completed projects", both of which are very big.
5] Performance indicators should be different, which includes two meanings: First, for the same employee, the proportion of each indicator in the overall performance should be different, because different indicators have different contributions to employee performance. For example, for the director of the general manager's office, public relations ability is relatively more important than planning ability. This difference is reflected by the weight of each index. Second, for different employees, performance indicators should be different, because each employee's job content is different. For example, the performance index of the sales manager is different from that of the production manager. In addition, even if some indicators are the same, the weights should be different, because the focus of each position is different. For example, planning ability is more important to the manager of enterprise planning department than to the manager of legal department.
[6] Performance indicators should be variable, which also includes two meanings: First, in different performance cycles, performance indicators should change with the changes of tasks. For example, if the enterprise has no plans to recruit new employees next month, then the performance indicators of the human resource manager next month should not set recruitment-related indicators, but should increase training-related indicators. Second, in different performance cycles, the weight of each index should also be different according to the different work priorities, and the work priorities of posts are generally determined by the work priorities of enterprises. For example, if an enterprise wants to focus on improving product quality next month, the proportion of quality indicators in the whole performance indicators will be increased accordingly, so as to arouse employees' attention to quality.
2. Performance standards
Performance standards define the job requirements of employees, that is, how and to what extent employees should accomplish what is defined in the performance content, for example, "the qualified rate of products reaches 90%", "give customers a satisfactory answer within two days after receiving complaints" and so on. The determination of performance standards helps to ensure the fairness of performance appraisal, otherwise it is impossible to determine whether the performance of employees is good or not. When determining the performance standards, we should pay attention to the following issues: (1) The performance standards should be clear. According to the explanation of goal motivation theory, the clearer the goal, the better the incentive effect for employees. Therefore, when determining the performance standards, we should be specific and unambiguous, which requires the use of quantitative standards as much as possible. For your convenience, let's look at an example. A company's performance standards for human resources recruitment supervisors are as follows:
① After receiving the demand of human resources from other departments, we can quickly recruit suitable personnel;
② The cost of employee recruitment is relatively low.
Such performance standards are very unclear. "Being able to recruit the right people quickly", what is fast, one week or two weeks, is not clear at all. "The recruitment cost is relatively low", and there is no specific explanation on how it is low. Quantitative performance standards shall be specified as follows:
① Recruit suitable personnel within five working days after receiving the demand of human resources from other departments;
(2) Staff recruitment expenses should be controlled between each person 150-200 yuan.
There are three main types of quantitative performance standards: first, numerical standards, such as "sales of 500,000 yuan", "average cost per 20 yuan" and "no more than 5 complaints"; The second is the percentage standard, such as "the product qualification rate is 95%" and "the satisfaction rate of each training is 90%". The third is the limitation standard, such as "complete the task within 3 days after receiving the task", "1 working day to reply to the applicant's job application" and so on.
There are two ways to quantify performance standards, one is to quantify in absolute value, such as the above example; The other is to quantify in a relative way, such as "sales increase 10%" and "cost decrease 5 yuan". The essence of these two ways is actually the same, but the forms of expression are different.
In addition, some performance indicators can not be quantified or the cost of quantification is relatively high, mainly indicators of work behavior such as ability and attitude. For these indicators, the way to define the performance standard is to describe the behavior in detail. For example, for negotiation ability, five levels of behavior description can be given, so that the performance standard of this indicator is relatively clear. See Table 2: Table 2: Performance criteria of negotiation ability.
Hierarchical definition
S has strong negotiation ability. When negotiating with external organizations or individuals, he can quote relevant laws and regulations very accurately, skillfully use various negotiation skills and methods, and persuade the other party to fully accept our reasonable terms, thus winning the maximum benefits for the company.
A has strong negotiation skills. When negotiating with external organizations or individuals, he can accurately quote relevant laws and regulations, skillfully use various negotiation skills and methods, and persuade the other party to basically accept our reasonable terms, thus winning some benefits for the company.
B's negotiating ability is average. When negotiating with external organizations or individuals, he can basically quote relevant laws and regulations accurately and use some negotiation skills and methods. After making some concessions, he can reach an agreement with the other party without causing losses to the interests of the company.
C poor negotiation ability. When negotiating with external organizations or individuals, there will be some mistakes in citing relevant laws and regulations, and negotiation skills and methods are rarely used. Only by making big concessions can we reach an agreement with the other party, which will make the company's interests suffer certain losses; Sometimes it is impossible to reach an agreement with each other.
D poor negotiation skills. When negotiating with external organizations or individuals, there are quite a few mistakes in citing relevant laws and regulations, and they basically can't use negotiation skills and methods, and often can't reach an agreement with the other party, resulting in great losses to the company's interests.
⑵ Performance standards should be moderate, that is to say, it is difficult to set standards, but employees can achieve them through hard work. In layman's terms, it means "you can jump and pick peaches". This is also an explanation from the goal motivation theory. If the goal is too easy or too difficult, the incentive effect on employees will be greatly reduced. Therefore, the formulation of performance standards should be determined within the scope that employees can achieve.
(3) Performance standards should be variable, which includes two meanings: First, it means that for the same employee, in different performance cycles, with the change of external environment, performance standards may also change. For example, air-conditioning salesmen, because sales are divided into off-season and peak season, the performance standard in off-season is lower than that in peak season. Second, for different employees, even in the same performance cycle, performance standards may be different due to different working environments. Or take the air-conditioning sales staff as an example. There are two salesmen, one works in Kunming and the other in Guangzhou. Because of the climate in Kunming, there is basically no demand for air conditioning, while the demand in Guangzhou is relatively large. So the performance standards of these two salesmen should be different. The performance standards of salesmen working in Guangzhou should be higher than those working in Kunming. Second, the performance appraisal cycle
Performance appraisal cycle, also known as performance appraisal period, refers to the frequency at which employees are assessed. Because the performance appraisal needs to consume a certain amount of manpower and material resources, the appraisal period is too short, which will increase the expenditure of enterprise management costs; Too long performance appraisal cycle will reduce the accuracy of performance appraisal, which is not conducive to the improvement of employees' work performance, thus affecting the effect of performance management. The following factors should be considered in determining the performance appraisal cycle:
1, the nature of the position
Different positions have different job contents, so the cycle of performance appraisal should also be different. Generally speaking, the job performance of a post is easier to assess, and the assessment period is shorter. For example, the assessment period of workers is relatively shorter than that of managers. Secondly, the job performance of the post has a great influence on the overall performance of the enterprise, and the assessment cycle is relatively short, which is helpful to find problems and make improvements in time. For example, the performance appraisal cycle of sales positions is relatively shorter than that of logistics positions.
2, the nature of the index
Different performance indicators are different in nature, and the assessment cycle should also be different. Generally speaking, the assessment period of indicators with stable nature is relatively long; On the contrary, the assessment cycle is relatively short. For example, employees' work ability is relatively stable than their work attitude, so the assessment cycle of the ability index is relatively longer than the attitude index.
3, the nature of the standard
When determining the assessment cycle, we should also consider the nature of performance standards, that is, the time of the assessment cycle should ensure that employees can reach these standards through hard work. This is actually related to the appropriateness of performance standards, such as the standard of "sales of 500 thousand", which takes about 2 weeks to complete according to experience. If the appraisal period is set to 1 week, employees can't complete it at all; If it is set to 4 weeks, it is very easy to achieve. In both cases, it is meaningless to evaluate the performance of employees.
Third, the main body of performance appraisal
Appraisal subject refers to the person who evaluates the performance of employees. After the development in recent years, most enterprises have basically given up the practice of the superior of the assessed as a single assessment subject when implementing performance appraisal, but generally introduced 360 assessment to realize the fairness and objectivity of performance appraisal. However, because most enterprises don't really understand 360 assessment, there are problems in setting up assessment subjects. These enterprises stipulate that all assessment indicators should be assessed by the superiors, peers and subordinates of the assessed, but different assessment subjects have different proportions in the final calculation of assessment results. This seems fair, but in fact it contains greater unfairness. As we know, the evaluation content of the assessed is composed of a series of evaluation indicators, and different subjects have different understandings of different evaluation indicators. Some appraisal indicators are best known by the superior of the appraisee, such as the appraisee's work performance and business knowledge. Some assessment indicators are most clearly known by the peers of the assessed, such as the communication and coordination ability and cooperation ability of the assessed; However, some assessment indicators are only understood by the subordinates of the assessed, such as the ability of the assessed to cultivate subordinates. If subjects who don't know an evaluation index are asked to evaluate this index, then the evaluation result is very doubtful. In order to ensure the objectivity and fairness of performance appraisal, we should choose the appraisal subject according to the nature of the appraisal indicators, and the selected appraisal subject should be the person who knows the appraisal indicators best, such as "collaboration" in colleague appraisal, "cultivating subordinate ability" in subordinate appraisal and "service timeliness" in customer appraisal. Because the performance target of each position is composed of a series of indicators, different indicators are assessed by different subjects, so each position also has multiple rating subjects. In addition, when different assessment subjects have a better understanding of an indicator, these subjects should assess this indicator to eliminate the one-sidedness of assessment as much as possible.