Respected Seniors,
I need your help in the rationalization of Performance Appraisal Scores across all departments in my organization. I need this because there is always no comparison between two departments' performance, e.g. the rating given to a Finance professional by his or her Manager is not comparable to the rating given to a Marketing professional by his or her Manager. For increment purposes, we need to rationalize these scores at the organizational level so that everyone will get a comparable share of increments. I need a method/formula for calculating the same. I would request you to provide the same.
Thanks in advance.
Best Regards,
Sunil More
Assistant Manager
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
1I need your help in the rationalization of Performance Appraisal Scores across all departments in my organization. I need this because there is always no comparison between two departments' performance, e.g. the rating given to a Finance professional by his or her Manager is not comparable to the rating given to a Marketing professional by his or her Manager. For increment purposes, we need to rationalize these scores at the organizational level so that everyone will get a comparable share of increments. I need a method/formula for calculating the same. I would request you to provide the same.
Thanks in advance.
Best Regards,
Sunil More
Assistant Manager
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi!
In order to address the issue, you may consider implementing the bell curve system in the Performance Management System (PMS). You can instruct all Heads of Departments (HOD) to adhere to the following rating distribution:
- Below Average (Nil): 5%
- Average (5%): 25%
- Good (8%): 40%
- Very Good (10%): 20%
- Outstanding (15%): 10%
By adhering to the above distribution, the organization's overall performance level across all departments would be standardized.
Best regards,
Pradipta
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In order to address the issue, you may consider implementing the bell curve system in the Performance Management System (PMS). You can instruct all Heads of Departments (HOD) to adhere to the following rating distribution:
- Below Average (Nil): 5%
- Average (5%): 25%
- Good (8%): 40%
- Very Good (10%): 20%
- Outstanding (15%): 10%
By adhering to the above distribution, the organization's overall performance level across all departments would be standardized.
Best regards,
Pradipta
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Yes! Please try to implement it from different departmental levels; otherwise, at the organizational level, it is very difficult to restructure. If you ask the Head of Department (HOD) to maintain the guidelines from their own department, your job will be easier, and there will be no uproar after releasing the increment letters.
Best Regards,
Pradipta
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Best Regards,
Pradipta
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
thanks Pradipta. Do you mean to say that mentioned bell curve parameters should be implemented in every dept and then overall rationalization should be done? Best Regards Sunil More
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello Pradipta,
I have the following doubts:
1. What is the significance of percentage numbers mentioned in brackets and outside brackets?
2. If the average score of FIN professionals is 65 and for Marketing is 85, but both are high fliers in their respective departments, then how will we rationalize the scores? As a threshold score of 85 will give, say, a 20% increment, while 65 will only give a 5% increment. Additionally, the respective scores are results of an internal measurement tool used in their respective departments, which is not standardized across all departments.
Sunil More
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have the following doubts:
1. What is the significance of percentage numbers mentioned in brackets and outside brackets?
2. If the average score of FIN professionals is 65 and for Marketing is 85, but both are high fliers in their respective departments, then how will we rationalize the scores? As a threshold score of 85 will give, say, a 20% increment, while 65 will only give a 5% increment. Additionally, the respective scores are results of an internal measurement tool used in their respective departments, which is not standardized across all departments.
Sunil More
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Sunil,
Please note the following:
1) Within brackets means the % of increment you will give to the individual. Outside brackets means the % of the population in the department whose assessment is under review.
2) This is up to the HOD who rates their employees.
You may give the following guidelines (example only) to HOD before circulating the PMS form:
i) Overall Ratings
The rating system is as given below:
a) Not meeting the job requirement - Poor - Below 35 marks
b) Needs improvement to meet job requirement - Average - 36 to 50 marks
c) Meeting job requirement - Good - Above 50 to 70
d) Existing job requirement - V.Good - Above 70 to 85
e) Significantly exceeding job requirement - Outstanding - Above 85
ii) Rating Scale:
1 - Poor
2 - Average
3 - Good
4 - Very Good
5 - Excellent/Outstanding
I would like to mention here that you can introduce hundreds of performance monitoring systems, but to carry out a good performance-linked appraisal system, you have to educate the HODs.
And maybe after continuous effort, one fine day you can implement the system. It is not a one-time job. It's a continuous exercise, and do try to get the involvement of all levels of employees in the process. PMS is a journey, not a one-time examination. Introduce it, develop it, continue it.
Regards,
Pradipta
Best Regards,
Pradipta
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Please note the following:
1) Within brackets means the % of increment you will give to the individual. Outside brackets means the % of the population in the department whose assessment is under review.
2) This is up to the HOD who rates their employees.
You may give the following guidelines (example only) to HOD before circulating the PMS form:
i) Overall Ratings
The rating system is as given below:
a) Not meeting the job requirement - Poor - Below 35 marks
b) Needs improvement to meet job requirement - Average - 36 to 50 marks
c) Meeting job requirement - Good - Above 50 to 70
d) Existing job requirement - V.Good - Above 70 to 85
e) Significantly exceeding job requirement - Outstanding - Above 85
ii) Rating Scale:
1 - Poor
2 - Average
3 - Good
4 - Very Good
5 - Excellent/Outstanding
I would like to mention here that you can introduce hundreds of performance monitoring systems, but to carry out a good performance-linked appraisal system, you have to educate the HODs.
And maybe after continuous effort, one fine day you can implement the system. It is not a one-time job. It's a continuous exercise, and do try to get the involvement of all levels of employees in the process. PMS is a journey, not a one-time examination. Introduce it, develop it, continue it.
Regards,
Pradipta
Best Regards,
Pradipta
From India
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Sunil,
I will further add to the bell curve system as it does not seem to be flawless (that way, no system is flawless). In this formula, all departments, on average, are rated equally, which is never a reality. Once you have received all the ratings, award points, for example, 1 point for poor performance, 3 for average, 5 for good, 7 for very good, and 9 for excellent, etc. This way, ratings get converted into points. Calculate the average rating for each department. Then ask the CEO to rate the overall performance of each department and award points out of 10.
Let us suppose the CEO gives 6 points to the Finance Department, whereas the average rating by the HOD is 5.75. If we increase the rating of every employee in the Finance Department by 6/5.75 so that the average becomes 6. I think this will make the bell curve system more accurate.
KKT
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I will further add to the bell curve system as it does not seem to be flawless (that way, no system is flawless). In this formula, all departments, on average, are rated equally, which is never a reality. Once you have received all the ratings, award points, for example, 1 point for poor performance, 3 for average, 5 for good, 7 for very good, and 9 for excellent, etc. This way, ratings get converted into points. Calculate the average rating for each department. Then ask the CEO to rate the overall performance of each department and award points out of 10.
Let us suppose the CEO gives 6 points to the Finance Department, whereas the average rating by the HOD is 5.75. If we increase the rating of every employee in the Finance Department by 6/5.75 so that the average becomes 6. I think this will make the bell curve system more accurate.
KKT
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Sunny,
If I am correct, you are trying to scale the scores into a comparable platform for the purpose of increments. I do not know how large your company is in terms of employee numbers, but if you are planning to compare them statistically, ensure that the groups you are comparing have no fewer than 30 individuals in each.
Identify the critical factors that influence the skewness of scores, such as the rater and department, and create groups based on them. Convert the scores into standard scores, compare the means, and neutralize the effect of extreme scores. By following these steps, you will make the scores somewhat comparable.
Arvind Singh
9213998535
Delhi
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If I am correct, you are trying to scale the scores into a comparable platform for the purpose of increments. I do not know how large your company is in terms of employee numbers, but if you are planning to compare them statistically, ensure that the groups you are comparing have no fewer than 30 individuals in each.
Identify the critical factors that influence the skewness of scores, such as the rater and department, and create groups based on them. Convert the scores into standard scores, compare the means, and neutralize the effect of extreme scores. By following these steps, you will make the scores somewhat comparable.
Arvind Singh
9213998535
Delhi
From India, New Delhi
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.
Performance Appraisal Form for Staff.doc