1. Performance Measures Criteria Criteria used to evaluate Performance Management Systems:
Strategic Congruence
Extent to which performance mgt systems elicits job performance that is congruent with org strategy, goals and culture.
Critical Success Factors
Validity
Extent to which a performance measure assess all relevant aspects of performance
Not Deficient or Contaminated
Reliability
Consistency of a performance measure
3 types:
Interrater – 2 individuals give the same evaluations of the person’s job performance
Internal Consistency
Test-retest reliability – reliability over time

2. Performance Measures Criteria Criteria used to evaluate Performance Management Systems:
4. Acceptability
Refers to whether the people who use a performance measure accept it.
Based on “perceived fairness”:
Procedural – how it is done (ex. Employee participation on development of system)
Interpersonal fairness – feedback (timely and complete)
Outcome fairness – communication of outcomes (evaluation standards, expectations, rewards)
5. Specificity
Extent to which a performance measure tells employees what is expected of them and how they can meet these expectations.

3. Approaches to measuring performance

4. The Comparative Approach
Ranking
Simple Ranking
Alternation Ranking
Forced Distribution
Entails putting certain percentages of employees into predetermined categories
Forces managers to evaluate based on Job-related criteria rather than to be lenient.
Paired Comparison
Requires managers to compare every employee with every other employee in the work group
# of times employee gets favorable decision = Employee’s Performance Score
Comparison of an individual’s performance with others
Seeks to develop ranking of individuals within a group

5. The Comparative Approach
Evaluating the Comparative Approach:
Effective tool in differentiating employee performance
Eliminates problems of liniency
Common failure to be linked with to strategic goals of the organization due to:
Subjective nature of ratings
Validity and reliability depend on raters themselves
Multiple evaluations can be done to reduce bias
Lacks Specificity (for feedback purposes)
Low Acceptability
employee performance related to employee in group/ team rather than measured against an absolute standard of excellence.