Setting KPIs and Objectives for Next Year's Performance Appraisals: How Do You Do It?

Can anyone tell me how to set KPIs and objectives in performance appraisals for the next year? Questions to answer: How to set KPIs and objectives? Steps during the year? Performance review process? How to conduct progress checks? How to achieve desired results from employees? - AdaM

This doesn't answer your question, but I think performance appraisals shouldn't only be a one-way street, i.e., only a boss appraising his subordinate. It's got to go both ways... see the article on 'why your boss is programmed to be a dictator' at www.changethis.com. I think if the boss appraises the subordinate, the subordinate should also appraise his boss in terms of the boss's management of him.

I mean, if a boss is hopeless at communicating and that affects the subordinate's performance, it's not fair if the boss blames the subordinate for that failure. 360 degrees is fine, but it should hit where it really hurts: a full-scale appraisal by the subordinate that affects the manager's pay packet.

Well, my friend, you are right to a great extent. Performance appraisal systems mostly carry bias in their scaling procedure as the boss conducts it. However, there are some different trends now through which you can overcome this bias problem and make the evaluation process clear. This can be done by setting Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and objectives for your subordinates or for every person working in an organization. By conducting mid-year reviews or at the end of the year, you can easily gauge what he/she should receive after evaluation. Does that make sense?

My question is, how do you set these KPIs or objectives? Although I am working under a highly educated lady and know each and every single detail.

Cheerio,
AdaM

The way I look at it is this: the subordinates work under a kind of 'management environment' that their managers provide. If the environment is bad, then how can the subordinate perform? And on top of it, the manager (who is providing the management environment) is evaluating the subordinate! It's crazy.

Shouldn't the effect of management be taken into account as far as subordinates' performance goes? Of course. Who should appraise the manager? The subordinate, because his performance is directly impacted by the manager's behavior/leadership. If not, what's the manager there for? In fact, most organizations treat the manager's job as a policing job (check for compliance) as opposed to adding value to the subordinate. That's why most managers behave as dictators...their jobs are that of policemen, not leaders. No wonder so many people quit jobs because of bad managers. No matter what you do or appraisal process you have, as long as subordinates aren't allowed to vote for the leaders/evaluate them, we will have terrible bosses, and therefore terrible productivity. Read the case study on NASA/shuttle disasters that's provided in the article on changethis.com, and you will know what I mean.

Dear Kumar,

Let me tell you one thing: objects vary from place to place or environment to environment, but that doesn't mean you can change the whole concept. What I'm trying to establish here is that we, South Asian people, often "look good, do nothing, and pin others," especially when we have power. However, we don't see Performance Appraisal as a system for determining how well an individual employee has performed during a period of time.

Now here's the problem: if someone is performing with their heart and soul without any prior record, then most likely, he or she will get rewarded based on the whim of their boss. But if every task is clearly outlined and recorded for the employee to follow, the superior can't easily manipulate the subordinate, as the employee has a documented record of what was asked and what was done according to the manager's requests.

In our case, working in a large conglomerate, managers hold significant power and can easily manipulate their subordinates, leaving the impression of a slay-monster. To overcome this issue, we have implemented a known KPI system in the appraisal process for assessing subordinates. KPIs carry greater weight compared to core/professional competencies. Simultaneously, we have granted subordinates various rights to provide evidence that can genuinely support their evaluation. They can also challenge any treatment they perceive as unfair by presenting their KPI results set at the beginning of the year.

Does this make sense now? However, all these aspects are dependent on the environment in which you work. If you find yourself among goofies, then perhaps it's time to explore other opportunities.

Cheerio,

AdaM