It means that this is a hastily written draft. 0: 30-65438+ 0: 35 am, 9: 17- 165438+ 0:37 am, * * * 205 minutes. When reading, you may find that some contents are repetitive or even not clearly organized. Due to time constraints, it is impossible to correct them one by one. I'd like to send it out for discussion first. Then, we will take the time to make a comprehensive revision according to your opinions. This document is not a specific implementation standard for evaluation. This paper mainly discusses which aspects should be evaluated. Some indicators here are too detailed, and it is difficult to collect these data without an automated management system. Therefore, the implementation details will be considered separately. Only the guiding ideology and indicators that can be included in the assessment scope are considered here. Consider what kind of assessment system is conducive to the development of this industry, the development of the platform, the country and taxpayers' hard-earned money.
I think to formulate the method of instrument management personnel assessment, we should first consider what is the purpose of building a platform and conduct guided assessment around the goal. For specific people, we should not only consider work attitude and personal ability, but also consider practical contribution. We should not only consider the contribution of employees to the "profit" of the unit, but also to the "name". We should not only acknowledge hard work, but also emphasize eclectic and creative contributions. If only a few indicators are considered, apart from the assessment indicators, no one may do anything related to the long-term development of the unit.
To formulate an assessment system, first, we should be fair, avoid eating the same pot, and encourage more work and more pay; Second, the assessment system has a strong orientation. Don't forget the original intention of building the platform, and don't forget why you started.
The purpose of building the platform is to optimize the allocation of resources, promote the enjoyment of * * *, avoid idle instruments, and serve teaching, scientific research and personnel training, as well as local national economic construction. I have also discussed what kind of platform is a first-class platform before. Different platform positioning requires different instrument managers. Conventional test platform requires less innovation for instrument managers, but it has a high degree of standardization. For scientific research service platforms, instrument managers are often expected to be more creative. The following refers to the scientific research platform of colleges and universities to discuss the post evaluation dimension of technicians.
The core elements of a first-class platform are roughly the five aspects mentioned above: equipment, talents, technology, service and management. Any contribution to this should be considered. For example, the whole process of equipment proposal, preliminary investigation, procurement, installation (on-site), maintenance and scrapping. The academic qualifications and qualifications of talents should also be considered. Technical level, technological innovation. Testing services, consulting services, etc. Management includes daily management, answering questions, reception, policy formulation, writing of various documents, reports and summaries, innovation of management system, writing of SOP, standardization of management and so on. Services include results, user reputation, satisfaction and so on.
Different instruments have different requirements for personnel. So different instruments need different skills. Therefore, it is suggested that the instrument can be graded if it is to be quantified. The instruments are divided into different grades of ABC. C of 500,000 and below; 5-2 million b; More than 2 million a-levels. Different levels of instruments are given different weights. For example, ABC corresponds to 1.5, 1.0, 0.5, etc. In addition, consider the number of sets managed by each person.
Technical expert 1.5, technical expert 1.0, general administrator 0.5. How to grade the technical ability of technicians is a problem. Maybe we can draw lessons from some ability requirements recognized by the laboratory to formulate measures. Criteria for judging the ability of instrument managers
I think technical experts should at least meet the following requirements:
Hardware: all components should be clear about their functions; Working principle; The installation, maintenance and basic maintenance methods of main components keep the instrument in the best working condition.
Software: minimum requirements, can operate the instrument according to the instructions. Advanced requirements, can understand all parameters, the meaning of all parameters, the calibration and setting methods of instruments should be clear, the usual maintenance methods, and be able to operate independently and skillfully.
Usage: Be familiar with the advantages and disadvantages and main parameters of the instrument. Can successfully complete the experiment. Collect data correctly. Whether software can be used to analyze data. When there is a problem in the experiment, it can judge and locate the cause of the problem.
Technical experts need to meet the following requirements:
We should be able to fix most problems, develop new applications of instruments and help users solve problems creatively.
The evaluation of technical level can be self-evaluated first, and then organized by experts. For technical experts, it is necessary to organize external peer review.
Any tool of a platform should be familiar to at least two people. This is also for the safety of management. For example, if someone asks for leave and someone changes jobs, it will not affect the normal operation of the platform. But different roles undertake different tasks.
Administrator's role: the role of the main administrator, who is responsible for all the daily work, and the second-level administrator will only be responsible when he is not on duty. We set it to three levels: A, B and C. A is the main administrator, and each instrument has only one. B is the second administrator and C is the standby administrator. The weight of ABC can be basically divided according to 2.0, 1.0 and 0.5. It is not excluded that the technical level of the administrators in Angle B is higher than that in Angle A ... When actually calculating the contribution, you can take the technical level X technical post, which can balance the differences between the two. If a person does a lot of simple work, his contribution should be in proportion to those who do less but have a higher level. In order to encourage everyone to improve their technical level, we should increase the work weight of high-tech talents.
Classification of instrument values: because different instrument values have different operational complexity, we need to divide an abc3 file from the perspective of instruments. Within 500 thousand, 500 thousand-2 million, more than 2 million. More than 200 can be a file, then 500 thousand to 2 million can be b file, and less than 500 thousand can be c file. Different instruments can be multiplied by different coefficients.
Management Participation: refers to whether management participation is required when using this tool. Whether administrator action is required is a measure. If administrators need to participate, this difficulty coefficient can be set to 1, and if not, it can basically be set below 0.5.
In addition to the above management methods, there are also test hours, test fees and service users. The measurement of cost should also be linked to the value of tools. Some instruments here are highly automated, or mainly operated by users, and the other is that administrators do experiments themselves, so we should distinguish them. The number of users of the service is also a measure. If an instrument only serves a fixed user, the workload will be much smaller. User increments can also be introduced as reference indicators here.
For the contribution of managers, we should consider the contribution of fame and profit. In addition to the contribution of fees and other benefits, there are also contributions to enhancing brand awareness and popularity. At this point, the status of technical experts is highlighted. There are several platforms of well-known national technical experts, and their popularity will be greatly enhanced. In addition, the platform with technical experts will also be in a favorable position in the negotiations with instrument companies. Therefore, technical experts must have special talent policy support and cannot be mixed with general instrument management personnel for assessment. Otherwise, the widening income gap will cause contradictions. I suggest setting up a special talent policy for high-end talents. Now more and more platforms are trying to introduce high-end talents, technical talents or technical PI into technical teams.
Including the improvement of personal ability and the contribution of unit service ability.
For example, through self-study, you can manage more instruments and complete more applications. Whether most functions of the instrument can be fully tapped.
Some work is difficult to measure, and some things will not be carried out routinely every year, but they are very important for the development of the unit. These unconventional works can be classified as public welfare or creative contributions. For example, we should draw up the brochure of the unit, actively promote services, hold meetings, and exchange technology.
Number of published papers, number of patent applications, number of textbooks compiled, number of SOPs compiled, number of trainings held, number of trainees, number of courses offered, going out to attend meetings, inviting reports, etc.
Therefore, the evaluation of a person should consider:
(1) Parallel comparison between different administrators; (2) It should also be compared from the historical dimension, such as whether there is progress compared with the previous year. If everyone in a team makes progress every year, it is possible to grow into a technical expert in a few years; (3) It is also necessary to compare the managers of similar instruments from the national dimension, whether they are well-known in the industry and whether they are recognized. For example, is there an invitation report for professional meetings? If a professional conference in a certain field is held in China, this person is always invited to give a report, which usually means that this person is more recognized.
Personally, we need to consider the number of instruments he manages, the value of instruments, testing and services, technical level and fees. The number of times the instrument is used and the number of users who use it.
I think the number of users of the service should also be an indicator. If an instrument has only one or two users, the requirements for managers will be relatively low. Because after these two people used the meeting, his workload was actually very small, and there was basically no need to ask questions. So the number of users is also an indicator. There are also whether training, maintenance and regular maintenance are related to the state of the instrument, whether the instrument can work stably for a long time, the service quality of users, the satisfaction of users, and whether there are complaints. These are quantitative assessment indicators. Reference to some laboratory-approved specifications can provide reference.
And some creative contributions. The so-called creative contribution refers to other things he does, and what he takes the initiative to do is not within this assessment index. For example, take some management suggestions, organize some activities, organize some meetings, organize some training activities, including national activities, including some academic reports organized by him, and organize some new technology training. The research he participated in, the research he organized. These are all things that need to be considered in the evaluation. Of course, there are also technical articles he published, and some articles he published in the forum to answer other people's questions. You can even consider the Baidu index. Search his published technical network articles, reading times, etc. Join the network literature to replace the simple periodical paper examination. Some colleges and universities have incorporated this into the pilot evaluation of scientific research and teaching posts. This actually reflects a kind of social influence.
Quantifiable reference indicators include published technical papers, SCI papers, applied projects, undertaken projects, project level and funding. Whether he teaches or not can also be used as a reference indicator. Did you apply for a patent, and then there were some other work highlights? The so-called work highlights can be measured in this way, and the top ten work highlights can be included in the annual work summary of the unit. Have you won any prizes? Is there an invitation report?
There is also attendance. Are you punctual? This also includes his daily working hours, average daily working hours and attendance days. Here, you need to subtract the number of days off. On average, there may be some teaching or going out for meetings every day. , you need to delete it.
Highlight work system: Like the representative work system of scientific research posts, this is a bit too simple and rude for platform management. Those who can do PPT often take advantage, and those who can play NB can sometimes blind some people who don't know the truth. Therefore, the direct leadership of instrument managers should have certain judgment.
The above is the assessment of daily work.
Those factors that reflect a person's initiative and creativity should also be included in the assessment scope. For example, did he do some service promotion, including some innovative musical instrument training methods, such as recording video tutorials. And did he write some instrument operation manuals, teaching materials, technical guides, operation guides, maintenance guides, etc. , or responsible for drafting national standards, industry standards, local standards, etc. , and participated in some competency certification.
There is also an assessment of technical ability, that is, how well he has mastered instrument technology. How to judge whether users can be trained in these aspects, from hardware to software, from principle to application, operation flow of instruments, common problems, troubleshooting, maintenance and application expansion. If there is software, all the running parameters of the software are set, the meaning of all the parameters, what kind of samples to be processed, the requirements of the instrument for samples and how to deal with them. What kind of information can be obtained from the experiment, how to do data processing and how to deal with some abnormal situations? How to calibrate and maintain the instrument? Another question is whether he knows his domestic counterparts. Have you had some exchanges with your domestic counterparts, which user units are there in China, and have you taken the initiative to participate in this circle and actively answered some questions in the circle? Is there any popularity in the circle? I think this is a reference index for technical ability assessment.
Contribution to the unit: All the above are based on some relatively objective indicators, and some indicators are based on the overall contribution to the unit. For example, strive for resources, such as instrument research, laboratory decoration design, and some daily work management. Have you participated in some public affairs? Just like decoration, usual safety inspection, office work, reception, writing reports and so on. These can be counted as public affairs. Strive for competitive resources, including scientific research funds, technology development funds, equipment purchase funds and so on. This should be considered.
The above are basically measurable indicators, and there is a higher-level consideration, that is, whether an instrument administrator can become a well-known domestic technical expert, whether he can become a core technical personnel of his unit, whether he has a certain popularity in China, and whether he can represent the technical level of his unit. I think it is important to encourage such people. If we put them together with other instrument managers, I don't think they can reflect the value of such people. So I think such a person can be regarded as a technical leader with all kinds of skills. Give them higher support, including research start-up funds, including higher wages. Don't use it as an annual assessment in the future. If you do, it will definitely cause some unfairness. There must be a lot of people, and it is difficult to accept this assessment standard. It can be said why he can get a higher salary with fewer tests. But a unit, I think a first-class platform must have first-class technicians, so such people must be protected. A first-class platform is definitely not the most expensive platform for instruments and the most grand platform for scenes. As Mei Yiqi, the old president of Tsinghua, said, "A great scholar is not a building, but a master." ? First-class platform, not first-class instrument.
If a leader positions the platform as only doing some routine tests, I don't think this platform will become a first-class platform. This platform may make money, and it may be very moist and well done, but if it is a platform of universities and scientific research units, rather than a simple testing service platform, then I think this positioning is inappropriate, so I suggest that every unit should have some talent policy support at the level of similar technical talents and technical experts.
The following is not detailed. List it here first.
The "one of the best" talent policy is to give special support to technicians who can walk in the forefront of domestic counterparts. If you simply count points, time, service and expenses, people with outstanding skills may not have an advantage. These people need protection. If a platform has excellent technicians, it will enhance its popularity and overall level, and it will be in a favorable position when negotiating with the company.
Technical expert funding forms: how to implement an evaluation system, meet standards and support. The other is pre-funding, such as an additional annual salary of 654.38+ 10,000, continuous funding for 3 years, and what level must be reached. What if I can't reach it? This needs to be considered. A talent fund is a bit like a research post, and the other is a bit like pre-research support. How to operate it depends on each unit.
The first draft of this assessment system needs to be revised constantly, and I hope teachers from all units can participate.
Regarding the competitive employment of instrument management (quite difficult to achieve), if more than one person can reach proficiency in a position, we can promote competitive employment, or consider rotation and so on.
At present, many large-scale instruments are still facing the problem of hidden idleness, that is, "killing chickens with a knife", which is the simplest and most basic function of millions of instruments.
Personally, I hope this article can achieve an effect, that is, after reading this article, I no longer think that instrument managers are simple manual workers, but high-tech talents who need to work hard.