1. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Measuring Results and Behaviors: Overview  Measuring Results  Measuring Behaviors

2. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Measuring Results: Overview Accountabilities Objectives Performance Standards

3. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Key questions Where should each individual focus efforts? What are the expected objectives? How do we know how well the results were achieved?

4. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Accountabilities  Broad areas of a job for which employee is responsible for producing results

5. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Objectives  Statements of important and measurable outcomes

6. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Performance Standards  Yardstick used to evaluate how well employees have achieved objectives

7. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Determining Accountabilities  Collect information about job (Job Description)  Determine importance of task or cluster of tasks % of employee’s time spent performing task Impact on unit’s mission if performed inadequately Consequences of error

8. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Determining Objectives Purpose: to identify –Outcomes Limited number Highly important –When achieved dramatic impact on overall organization success

9. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Characteristics of Good Objectives Specific and Clear Challenging Agreed Upon Significant Prioritized Bound by Time Achievable Fully Communicated Flexible Limited in Number

10. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Determining Performance Standards Standards refer to aspects of performance objectives, such as: Quality –How well the objective is achieved Quantity –How much, how many, how often, at what cost Time –Due dates, schedule, cycle times, how quickly

11. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Standards must include: A verb The desired result A due date Some type of indicator –Quality and/or –Quantity

12. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Characteristics of Good Performance Standards Related to Position Concrete, Specific, Measurable Practical to Measure Meaningful Realistic and Achievable Reviewed Regularly

13. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Measuring Behaviors: Overview Identify competencies Identify indicators Choose measurement system

14. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Identify Competencies Measurable clusters of KSAs –Knowledges –Skills –Abilities That are critical in determining how results will be achieved

15. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Types of Competencies Differentiating –Distinguish between superior and average performance Threshold –Needed to perform to minimum standard

16. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Identify Indicators Observable behaviors Used to measure extent to which competencies are present – or not

17. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Necessary Components for Describing Competencies Definition Description of specific behaviors –When competency demonstrated –When competency not demonstrated Suggestions for developing the competency

18. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Choose Measurement System Comparative system –Compares employees with each other Absolute system –Compares employees with pre-specified performance standard

19. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Comparative Systems Simple rank order Alternation rank order Paired comparisons Forced distribution

20. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Advantages of Comparative Systems Easy to explain Straightforward Better control for biases and errors found in absolute systems –Leniency –Severity –Central tendency

21. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Disadvantages of Comparative Systems Rankings may not be specific enough for –Useful feedback –Protection from legal challenge No information on relative distance between employees Specific issues with forced distribution method

22. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Absolute Systems Essays Behavior checklists Critical incidents Graphic rating scales

23. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Essays Advantage: –Potential to provide detailed feedback Disadvantages: –Unstructured and may lack detail –Depends on supervisor writing skill –Lack of quantitative information; difficult to use in personnel decisions

24. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Behavior checklists Advantage: –Easy to use and understand Disadvantage: –Scale points used are often arbitrary –Difficult to get detailed and useful feedback

25. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Critical incidents Two kinds of measurement –Report of specific employee behavior Allows focus on specific behavior Very time-consuming –Examples of behavior illustrative of core competencies Easier to use Describes behavior desired

26. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Graphic rating scales Clear meaning for each response category Consistent interpretation by outside readers Supervisor and employee should have same understanding of rating

27. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Graphic rating scales: BARS improvement Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) –Use critical incidents as anchors –Involves multiple groups of employees in development Identify important job elements Describe critical incidents at various levels of performance Check for inter-rater reliability

28. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Measuring Performance Several types of methods Differ in terms of: –Practicality (time and effort) –Usefulness (quantifiable)

29. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Summary Measuring Results –Identify accountabilities –Set objectives –Determine standards of performance Measuring Behaviors –Identify competencies –Identify indicators –Choose measurement system