Hello, fellow Gurus:
I'm hoping that perhaps one of you might have an answer to this question for me.
I have been presented with an Employee rating system, but it's like nothing I've seen or worked with previously.
Here are the classifications and Employee rating scales as they were presented to me:
1. High Potential, High Contribution
2. High Potential, Solid Contribution
3. High Potential, Low Contribution
4. Solid Potential, High Contribution
5. Solid Potential, Solid Contribution
6. Hold in Position, Low Contribution
7. Optimally Placed, High Contribution
8. Continue in Position, Solid Contribution
9. Low Potential, Low Contribution
Does this system appear similar to anything you've used for assessment previously? Does anyone recognize the pattern as a proprietary system?
If so, what were the pitfalls to rating employees with this set of attributes?
Finally, if you've used this system, could you please let me know how the assessments were distributed; i.e., how can you quantify the difference between a High Potential/Solid Contribution and a Solid Potential/High Contribution?
I'm all ears. Thanks for your feedback, group!
Alan Guinn, Managing Director
The Guinn Consultancy Group, Inc.
From United States, Bluff City
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
5I'm hoping that perhaps one of you might have an answer to this question for me.
I have been presented with an Employee rating system, but it's like nothing I've seen or worked with previously.
Here are the classifications and Employee rating scales as they were presented to me:
1. High Potential, High Contribution
2. High Potential, Solid Contribution
3. High Potential, Low Contribution
4. Solid Potential, High Contribution
5. Solid Potential, Solid Contribution
6. Hold in Position, Low Contribution
7. Optimally Placed, High Contribution
8. Continue in Position, Solid Contribution
9. Low Potential, Low Contribution
Does this system appear similar to anything you've used for assessment previously? Does anyone recognize the pattern as a proprietary system?
If so, what were the pitfalls to rating employees with this set of attributes?
Finally, if you've used this system, could you please let me know how the assessments were distributed; i.e., how can you quantify the difference between a High Potential/Solid Contribution and a Solid Potential/High Contribution?
I'm all ears. Thanks for your feedback, group!
Alan Guinn, Managing Director
The Guinn Consultancy Group, Inc.
From United States, Bluff City
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Alan,
This is a 3x3 matrix for potential and performance. You would need to define what ratings would go where in this matrix. After employees have been rated on their performance and potential, they should be plotted on this matrix.
Typically, the following actions could be taken for employees in these quadrants:
1. High Potential, High Contribution (promote - fast track)
2. High Potential, Solid Contribution (promote)
3. High Potential, Low Contribution (do not promote, provide targeted training and give a warning, or put in another job)
4. Solid Potential, High Contribution (Promote)
5. Solid Potential, Solid Contribution (provide development)
6. Hold in Position, Low Contribution (do not promote, provide development and give a warning, or put in another job)
7. Optimally Placed, High Contribution (keep in place)
8. Continue in Position, Solid Contribution (keep in place)
9. Low Potential, Low Contribution (ask to leave)
The difference between 2 and 4 shall be incentives. Typically, incentives are performance-driven; therefore, more incentive shall be provided to employees in 4 than those in 2.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
From China, Shenzhen
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This is a 3x3 matrix for potential and performance. You would need to define what ratings would go where in this matrix. After employees have been rated on their performance and potential, they should be plotted on this matrix.
Typically, the following actions could be taken for employees in these quadrants:
1. High Potential, High Contribution (promote - fast track)
2. High Potential, Solid Contribution (promote)
3. High Potential, Low Contribution (do not promote, provide targeted training and give a warning, or put in another job)
4. Solid Potential, High Contribution (Promote)
5. Solid Potential, Solid Contribution (provide development)
6. Hold in Position, Low Contribution (do not promote, provide development and give a warning, or put in another job)
7. Optimally Placed, High Contribution (keep in place)
8. Continue in Position, Solid Contribution (keep in place)
9. Low Potential, Low Contribution (ask to leave)
The difference between 2 and 4 shall be incentives. Typically, incentives are performance-driven; therefore, more incentive shall be provided to employees in 4 than those in 2.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
From China, Shenzhen
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Alan,
I know this question was posted almost 3 weeks ago. I had done this exercise with a couple of clients almost 14 years ago in 90/91. It is not hard to set up, but the sales/marketing managers struggle to run it, update it, and maintain it. The clients need the consultants most of the time.
Also, doing the 3x3 matrix is more difficult and time-consuming, as the sales managers have to be in the field most of the time. I have tackled the situation with a 2x2 matrix, and it works well/easy to handle. I am going to print the write-up below.
Sales Force Profiling
No two salespeople are alike. Hence, it is necessary to have the flexibility in managing the salespeople, each salesperson according to his or her needs and merits. You can appraise the sales team using the process as listed in the following pages.
Managing Sales Force Composition
No two people are alike. Yet some marketing and sales managers treat salespeople as though they were homogeneous in terms of skills, abilities, aptitudes, motivations, and effectiveness. Consequently, management often employs the same, or relatively similar incentives, compensation programs, training programs, and supervisory tools for all its salespeople. A failure to recognize salespeople's inherent differences may well lead to a less productive sales force than would result if differences were recognized.
Obviously, it is not for an administrator to cater to the idiosyncrasies of each salesperson. However, it is possible to group salespeople who are similar on some set of dimensions (for example, reward orientation, stage in career, job tenure, level of performance/achievement, age) and manage them differently than salespeople in other groups. For example, a sales force can be segmented into several groupings with each receiving different motivation, communication, and administrative treatments. Through sales force segmentation, the performance level of each group will be improved. Also, salespeople have a career cycle during which they pass through decline based upon their levels of achievement and job tenure. Thus, sales personnel can be categorized based on their stage in the career cycle, and those in one stage can be managed differently from those in the others.
An important concern of sales management is the relative allocation of salespeople to several groups. In other words, what kind of balance does management want to attain in the sales force (for example, few trainees and many veterans, many trainees and few veterans) in order to achieve organizational and marketing department objectives, describes a process that can be used to assess the status of a sales force's current composition, to form an ideal sales force mix, and to prescribe the required managerial actions. The sales force performance consists of four quadrants in which salespeople can be classified based upon their achieved level of performance and their growth potential.
Both the performance axis and the potential axis are continuous along which a salesperson can be placed. Performance refers to current total performance. This would vary across sales forces and across industries. For example, the salient performance characteristics of some sales jobs may include the number of sales calls, number of closed sales, total sales volume, and profit contribution per salesperson; the performance characteristics of other sales jobs, however, may include the above dimensions, as well as customer goodwill, product installation skill, customer service, and the number of product demonstrations. Thus, it is upon incumbent management to clearly define what it considers to be total performance.
Potential refers to the level of improvement and growth a salesperson is likely to experience. In other words, has the salesperson under consideration topped off his/her still-growing terms of performance? Determine the potential of a salesperson using various techniques like the Assessment Center, etc.
When the performance level and potential of each salesperson are jointly considered, a basis emerges for evaluating the current sales forces composition and determining the necessary managerial action. Although there are many possible combinations, classification of salespeople into four performance/potential categories can be used to illustrate the sales force performance diagnosis.
High!
Quadrant 2 Quadrant 4
Low Perf/High Potent High Perf/High Potent
Quadrant 1 Quadrant 3
Low Perf/Low Potent High Perf/Low Potent
Low Performance High
--------------------------
Low Potential/Low Performance:
Salespeople who combine low potential and low levels of performance are considered problems. Problems are salespeople who may, at the extreme, cost the organization more money than they are bringing in. More likely, the firm incurs the opportunity cost of realizing lower sales than would be possible with a higher quality performer. The problems might be senior salespeople who are watching the industry pass them by or a relatively new salesperson who lacks ability but was hired because of poor recruitment and selection or was poorly trained. A key characteristic of the problems is that improvement is very difficult for them.
Salesperson with Problem
---------------------------------------------------
High Potential/Low Performance:
Salespeople who have high potential but are performing at a relatively low level are new sales trainees or those just out of their training program, who have just received territorial responsibilities. Management will probably spend much time with these people in both formal and informal training sessions. Management obviously should help these growth prospects develop into productive and successful sales personnel.
Salesperson with Growth Potential
---------------------------------------------------
High Potential/High Performance:
Salespeople who are performing at a high level and are expected to improve are the leaders of the sales force. They are salespeople who have been out of the training program long enough to have achieved a high-performance level but are still growing in skill. Management finds it economically rewarding to spend time with the leaders to facilitate their growth and improvement. One-on-one counseling, curbstone conferences, on-the-spot coaching, as well as continued formal training, probably will be used selectively with this group.
Salesperson with Leadership Potential
---------------------------------------------------
Low Potential/High Performance:
Salespeople who are solid performers but who will probably not improve much in the future are the mature performers. They are primarily senior salespeople who are performing well but are unlikely, and probably unwilling, to attempt to increase their sales efforts substantially. Because they are performing at a satisfactory level, management spends little time with them. Mature performers generate a greater contribution to the company than it costs to keep them in the field.
Salesperson with Maturity
Sales Managerial Actions
The purpose of the sales force performance diagnosis is to assess the composition of the sales force, to prescribe what it should be, and to suggest what managerial actions will be necessary to achieve the desired balance.
To use the tool in the above manner requires that management ask the following three questions:
1. What is the present composition of the sales force (where are we?)
2. What sales force composition do we want (where do we want to go?)
3. How do we achieve the desired balance in the composition of the sales force (what managerial actions are necessary?)
Managerial Action to Take, Given the Present Sales Force Composition
Quadrant 1
1. Low potential/Low performance (problems).
Salespeople
Action:
- Terminate
- Move to another corporate position
- Retain
- Change supervisory approach
- Change motivational tools
Quadrant 2
2. High potential/Low performance (growth prospects).
Salespeople
Action:
- Terminate
- Change product responsibilities
- Accelerate training
- Use special supervisory tools
Quadrant 3
3. High potential/High performance (leaders).
Salespeople
Action:
- Terminate
- Change product responsibilities
- Accelerate training
- Use special supervisory tools
Quadrant 4
4. Low potential/High performance (mature performance).
Salespeople
Action:
- Change or modify position
- Change motivational tools
- Retrain
- Change supervisory tools
- Reallocate territories
Hope this is useful to you.
Regards,
Leo Lingham
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I know this question was posted almost 3 weeks ago. I had done this exercise with a couple of clients almost 14 years ago in 90/91. It is not hard to set up, but the sales/marketing managers struggle to run it, update it, and maintain it. The clients need the consultants most of the time.
Also, doing the 3x3 matrix is more difficult and time-consuming, as the sales managers have to be in the field most of the time. I have tackled the situation with a 2x2 matrix, and it works well/easy to handle. I am going to print the write-up below.
Sales Force Profiling
No two salespeople are alike. Hence, it is necessary to have the flexibility in managing the salespeople, each salesperson according to his or her needs and merits. You can appraise the sales team using the process as listed in the following pages.
Managing Sales Force Composition
No two people are alike. Yet some marketing and sales managers treat salespeople as though they were homogeneous in terms of skills, abilities, aptitudes, motivations, and effectiveness. Consequently, management often employs the same, or relatively similar incentives, compensation programs, training programs, and supervisory tools for all its salespeople. A failure to recognize salespeople's inherent differences may well lead to a less productive sales force than would result if differences were recognized.
Obviously, it is not for an administrator to cater to the idiosyncrasies of each salesperson. However, it is possible to group salespeople who are similar on some set of dimensions (for example, reward orientation, stage in career, job tenure, level of performance/achievement, age) and manage them differently than salespeople in other groups. For example, a sales force can be segmented into several groupings with each receiving different motivation, communication, and administrative treatments. Through sales force segmentation, the performance level of each group will be improved. Also, salespeople have a career cycle during which they pass through decline based upon their levels of achievement and job tenure. Thus, sales personnel can be categorized based on their stage in the career cycle, and those in one stage can be managed differently from those in the others.
An important concern of sales management is the relative allocation of salespeople to several groups. In other words, what kind of balance does management want to attain in the sales force (for example, few trainees and many veterans, many trainees and few veterans) in order to achieve organizational and marketing department objectives, describes a process that can be used to assess the status of a sales force's current composition, to form an ideal sales force mix, and to prescribe the required managerial actions. The sales force performance consists of four quadrants in which salespeople can be classified based upon their achieved level of performance and their growth potential.
Both the performance axis and the potential axis are continuous along which a salesperson can be placed. Performance refers to current total performance. This would vary across sales forces and across industries. For example, the salient performance characteristics of some sales jobs may include the number of sales calls, number of closed sales, total sales volume, and profit contribution per salesperson; the performance characteristics of other sales jobs, however, may include the above dimensions, as well as customer goodwill, product installation skill, customer service, and the number of product demonstrations. Thus, it is upon incumbent management to clearly define what it considers to be total performance.
Potential refers to the level of improvement and growth a salesperson is likely to experience. In other words, has the salesperson under consideration topped off his/her still-growing terms of performance? Determine the potential of a salesperson using various techniques like the Assessment Center, etc.
When the performance level and potential of each salesperson are jointly considered, a basis emerges for evaluating the current sales forces composition and determining the necessary managerial action. Although there are many possible combinations, classification of salespeople into four performance/potential categories can be used to illustrate the sales force performance diagnosis.
High!
Quadrant 2 Quadrant 4
Low Perf/High Potent High Perf/High Potent
Quadrant 1 Quadrant 3
Low Perf/Low Potent High Perf/Low Potent
Low Performance High
--------------------------
Low Potential/Low Performance:
Salespeople who combine low potential and low levels of performance are considered problems. Problems are salespeople who may, at the extreme, cost the organization more money than they are bringing in. More likely, the firm incurs the opportunity cost of realizing lower sales than would be possible with a higher quality performer. The problems might be senior salespeople who are watching the industry pass them by or a relatively new salesperson who lacks ability but was hired because of poor recruitment and selection or was poorly trained. A key characteristic of the problems is that improvement is very difficult for them.
Salesperson with Problem
---------------------------------------------------
High Potential/Low Performance:
Salespeople who have high potential but are performing at a relatively low level are new sales trainees or those just out of their training program, who have just received territorial responsibilities. Management will probably spend much time with these people in both formal and informal training sessions. Management obviously should help these growth prospects develop into productive and successful sales personnel.
Salesperson with Growth Potential
---------------------------------------------------
High Potential/High Performance:
Salespeople who are performing at a high level and are expected to improve are the leaders of the sales force. They are salespeople who have been out of the training program long enough to have achieved a high-performance level but are still growing in skill. Management finds it economically rewarding to spend time with the leaders to facilitate their growth and improvement. One-on-one counseling, curbstone conferences, on-the-spot coaching, as well as continued formal training, probably will be used selectively with this group.
Salesperson with Leadership Potential
---------------------------------------------------
Low Potential/High Performance:
Salespeople who are solid performers but who will probably not improve much in the future are the mature performers. They are primarily senior salespeople who are performing well but are unlikely, and probably unwilling, to attempt to increase their sales efforts substantially. Because they are performing at a satisfactory level, management spends little time with them. Mature performers generate a greater contribution to the company than it costs to keep them in the field.
Salesperson with Maturity
Sales Managerial Actions
The purpose of the sales force performance diagnosis is to assess the composition of the sales force, to prescribe what it should be, and to suggest what managerial actions will be necessary to achieve the desired balance.
To use the tool in the above manner requires that management ask the following three questions:
1. What is the present composition of the sales force (where are we?)
2. What sales force composition do we want (where do we want to go?)
3. How do we achieve the desired balance in the composition of the sales force (what managerial actions are necessary?)
Managerial Action to Take, Given the Present Sales Force Composition
Quadrant 1
1. Low potential/Low performance (problems).
Salespeople
Action:
- Terminate
- Move to another corporate position
- Retain
- Change supervisory approach
- Change motivational tools
Quadrant 2
2. High potential/Low performance (growth prospects).
Salespeople
Action:
- Terminate
- Change product responsibilities
- Accelerate training
- Use special supervisory tools
Quadrant 3
3. High potential/High performance (leaders).
Salespeople
Action:
- Terminate
- Change product responsibilities
- Accelerate training
- Use special supervisory tools
Quadrant 4
4. Low potential/High performance (mature performance).
Salespeople
Action:
- Change or modify position
- Change motivational tools
- Retrain
- Change supervisory tools
- Reallocate territories
Hope this is useful to you.
Regards,
Leo Lingham
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Leo,
Thanks for your reply. My initial response to this client was to advise them that there are significantly better rating systems out there, but in what could only be described as a political decision, the decision was made to use a rating index system "someone" had bought into. It's the age-old issue of the client believes "X" and the consultant knows "Y". You've encountered it countless times, as have I. After testing for understanding, you're left with utilizing persuasion to either drive the bus or realizing there will be no change made... in this case, unfortunately, the latter. I appreciate your input and analysis—concise and well-documented, as always. Best to you.
ag
From United States, Bluff City
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks for your reply. My initial response to this client was to advise them that there are significantly better rating systems out there, but in what could only be described as a political decision, the decision was made to use a rating index system "someone" had bought into. It's the age-old issue of the client believes "X" and the consultant knows "Y". You've encountered it countless times, as have I. After testing for understanding, you're left with utilizing persuasion to either drive the bus or realizing there will be no change made... in this case, unfortunately, the latter. I appreciate your input and analysis—concise and well-documented, as always. Best to you.
ag
From United States, Bluff City
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Sehma, should I pose a question regarding this article? While going through this article concerning performance and potential rating, I came across something that I need clarification on. In a 3x3 matrix, where "High potential and solid contribution" is mentioned, does "solid contribution" refer to Average or High?
I kindly request clarification on my queries as I need to prepare this exercise for my employees.
Regards,
Sehma
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I kindly request clarification on my queries as I need to prepare this exercise for my employees.
Regards,
Sehma
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
Employee Performance Evaluation Form.doc
Employee Performance Evaluation Form.pdf