Methods and goals of personnel assessment: how to turn employees from a tool into the brain center of the company. Assessing the effectiveness of the organization’s personnel The internal environment of Maslotorg CJSC includes

Assessment of labor results is one of the functions of personnel management aimed at determining the level of efficiency of work performance.

Assessment of labor results is an integral part of the business assessment of personnel, along with the assessment of their professional behavior and personal qualities, and consists of determining the compliance of the employee’s work results with the set goals, planned indicators, and regulatory requirements.

The indicators of the final results of workers’ work, as well as its content, are influenced by a combination of various factors

Classification of factors taken into account when assessing job performance

Factors	Contents of factors
Natural biological	Gender Age Health status Mental abilities Physical abilities Climate Geographical environment Seasonality, etc.
Socio-economic	State of the economy State requirements, restrictions and laws in the field of labor and wages Qualification of workers Labor motivation Standard of living Level of social security, etc.
Technical and organizational	Nature of tasks to be solved Complexity of work State of organization of production and labor Working conditions (sanitary, hygienic, ergonomic, aesthetic, etc.) Volume and quality of information received Level of use of scientific and technical achievements, etc.
Socio-psychological	Attitude to work Psychophysiological state of the employee Moral climate in the team, etc.
Market	Development of a multi-structured economy Development of entrepreneurship Level and volume of privatization Incorporation of organizations Competition Independent choice of wage system Price liberalization Inflation Bankruptcy Unemployment, etc.

Assessment of labor results of different categories of workers (managers, specialists, other employees, workers) differs in their tasks, significance, indicators or characteristics, and the complexity of identifying results.

Evaluation of the work results of managers and specialists characterizes their ability to directly influence the activities of any production or management level. In the most general form, the result of the work of a management employee is characterized by the level or degree of achievement of the management goal at the lowest cost.

The result of the leader's work, as a rule, is expressed through the results of production, economic and other activities of the organization or divisions (for example, fulfillment of the profit plan, growth in the number of clients, etc.), as well as through the socio-economic working conditions of subordinate employees (for example, the level of payment labor, staff motivation, etc.).

The result of the work of specialists is determined based on the volume, completeness, quality, and timeliness of fulfillment of the official duties assigned to them.

In practice, when assessing the performance of managers and specialists, along with quantitative indicators, i.e. direct, indirect ones are also used, characterizing factors influencing the achievement of results. These performance factors include:

Efficiency of work

Tension, work intensity

Complexity of work, quality of work, etc.

In contrast to direct indicators of labor results, indirect assessments characterize the employee’s activities according to criteria that correspond to ideal ideas about how job duties and functions that form the basis of a given position should be performed, and what qualities should be demonstrated in this regard.

Evaluation of workers' results is carried out quite simply, since the quantitative and qualitative results of their work are expressed in the quantity of products produced and their quality. The result of their work is assessed by comparison with the planned task.

The performance assessment procedure will be effective if the following mandatory conditions are met:

1. establishing clear “standards” of labor results for each position (workplace) and criteria for its evaluation;

2. development of a procedure for assessing labor results (when, how often and who conducts the assessment, assessment methods);

3. providing complete and reliable information to the appraiser about the employee’s labor results;

4. discussion of the assessment results with the employee;

5. making a decision based on the assessment results and documenting the assessment.

Various methods are used to evaluate labor results:

Method name	Brief description of the method
Management by Objectives (most common)	Based on an assessment of the employee’s achievement of goals set jointly by the manager and his subordinate for a specific period of time. Provides for a systematic discussion of achieved and unachieved goals. Requires quantification of goals and time frames for their achievement. Expensive method. Used to evaluate managers and specialists
Graphic rating scale method	It is based on giving an appropriate rating (from 4 to 0) to each character trait of the employee being evaluated: quantity of work, quality of work, initiative, cooperation, reliability, etc. The rating corresponds to the rating. To increase the effectiveness of the rating scale, more clearly delineated descriptions of the completeness of manifestation of a particular character trait are compiled
Forced choice	It is based on the selection of the most characteristic characteristics for a given employee corresponding to effective and ineffective work (for example, “works a lot”, “does not expect problems”, etc.). Based on the point scale, the efficiency index is calculated. Used by management, colleagues, subordinates to evaluate employee performance
Descriptive method	The appraiser describes the advantages and disadvantages of the employee’s behavior according to the criteria: quantity of work, quality of work, knowledge of work, personal qualities, initiative, etc. using a graphic rating scale, using pre-compiled work performance standards
Critical Situation Assessment Method	It is based on the use of a list of descriptions of the “correct” and “incorrect” behavior of an employee in individual situations, the so-called decisive situations. The appraiser maintains a journal in which these descriptions are categorized according to the nature of the work. Used in evaluations made by management rather than by peers or subordinates
Method of questionnaires and comparative questionnaires	Includes a set of questions or descriptions of employee behavior. The appraiser puts a mark next to the description of the character trait that, in his opinion, is inherent in the employee, otherwise leaves an empty space. The sum of the marks gives the overall rating of the employee's profile. Used for evaluation by management, peers and subordinates
Behavior rating scale method	It is based on the use of decisive situations (5-6), from which characteristics of labor productivity are derived (from 6 to 10). The evaluator reads the description of a criterion (for example, engineering competence) in the rating questionnaire and puts a mark on the scale in accordance with the qualifications of the evaluator. An expensive and labor-intensive method, but accessible and understandable to workers
Behavior Observation Scale Method	Similar to the previous one, but instead of determining the employee’s behavior in a decisive situation of the current time, the appraiser records on the scale the number of cases when the employee behaved in one specific way or another previously. The method is labor-intensive and requires material costs

Why do you need staff performance assessment?

Assessing personnel effectiveness allows you to understand how effective employees are in their jobs, whether they use their full potential, as well as how management decisions, external factors and the market situation affect labor productivity.

There are two groups of indicators that are used to evaluate personnel performance: qualitative and quantitative.

How to evaluate staff efficiency using quantitative indicators

Turnover per employee

One of the quantitative indicators for assessing personnel efficiency is turnover per employee (Rb). To calculate, use the formula: O bs = O bp: S rch, where: O bs – turnover per employee, rub.; About bp – the organization’s turnover for the period, or gross income received from the sale of work, services, goods, rubles; C r – average number of employees for the same period, people. Turnover per person is an indicator that characterizes labor productivity. So, if the organization’s turnover for the quarter amounted to 150,000,000 rubles. with an average payroll of 500 people, per employee on average it will be: 150,000,000 rubles: 500 people. = 300,000 rub.

Volume of production or services provided per 1 rub.

Another indicator of personnel efficiency is the volume of production or services provided per 1 ruble spent from the wage fund. To calculate, use the formula: About pr = About sq: 3 sq,

O pr – volume of production or services provided per 1 ruble;

About quarter – volume of production or services provided for the quarter;

Q3 – employee salaries for the quarter.

So, if the salary of employees for the quarter amounted to 30,000,000 rubles, for 1 ruble spent from the payroll. produced products:

RUB 150,000,000: RUB 30,000,000 = 5 rub.

Thus, for every ruble that the company spent on employee salaries, it received 5 rubles, and its net income was 4 rubles.

These two indicators can also be used to evaluate the performance of individual employees. In this case, to analyze the effectiveness of personnel, compare individual indicators with the average values calculated for a separate structural unit or position. In addition, industry averages can be used for comparison if such statistics are kept and databases are regularly updated.

How to calculate personnel efficiency based on the cost of human resources

A company's human resource is both an expense and an asset. Therefore, it should be assessed in two ways.

Estimation of OSR as an expense item

O srR = (FOT + I n + O az: S rch) × P, where: About sr – the estimated cost of the employee as an expense item;

Payroll – employee’s salary;

Oaz – general administrative costs;

Срч – average number of employees for the billing period;

P – billing period. If we consider the value of a human resource as a company asset, it should be calculated using the formula:

Valuation of srA as a company asset

O srA = (FOT × G kpr + I n) × P,

О сА – the estimated value of the employee as a company asset;

Payroll – employee’s salary;

I n – the organization’s investment in an employee, that is, additional costs for training, development, and retention of an employee;

P – billing period;

G KPR - goodwill of an employee's personnel potential - a coefficient that reflects the real, market, individual value of an employee not as a staff unit, but as a specific person who knows how to perform certain functions, solve certain problems.

To calculate this coefficient, use the formula:

G kpr = I prib + I st + K pp,

And profit – the profit index of the employee’s personnel potential is determined by the formula:

And profit = Profit: E prv;

Ist is the index of the cost of the employee’s personnel potential, determined by the formula:

I st = Total personnel costs: E prv. Take data on profit and general personnel costs from the organization’s balance sheet; E prv is the equivalent of an employee’s full working time, determined by the formula:

E prv = (number of working days per year × 8 hours per day) – vacation (in hours) – holidays (number of hours) – absence for personal reasons (illness) (in hours);

KPP - the coefficient of personal prospects - is calculated based on data on the employee’s education, his experience and age using the formula:

K PP = O y.obra. × (1 + C: 4 + W t: 18),

O u.arr. – assessment of the level of education, which is usually accepted: 0.15 – for persons with incomplete secondary education;

0.60 – for persons with secondary education;

0.75 – for persons with secondary technical and incomplete higher education;

1.00 – for persons with higher education in their specialty;

C – work experience in the specialty.

In t – age. In accordance with the recommendations of the Labor Research Institute, it is divided by 18, since it has been established that the influence of age on labor productivity is 18 times less than the influence of education. In this case, the upper age limit for men is 55 years, and for women – 50.

An example of calculating the estimated value of an employee as a company asset:

In 2016, the Alpha organization employed 290 people. Of these, 17 employees have higher professional education, 1 has incomplete higher education, 93 have specialized secondary education and 179 have general secondary education.

The average work experience in the specialty is 9.5 years, the average age is 48 years.

The organization's annual payroll in 2016 amounted to 14,618,200 rubles.

The profit reflected in the accounting records was:

in 2016 – RUB 1,246,300;

in 2017 – RUB 1,231,760.

General personnel costs:

in 2016 – RUB 15,988,040;

in 2015 – RUB 5,302,500.

Investments in personnel in 2016 amounted to RUB 16,200.

The employee's full-time equivalent was:

in 2016 – 1824 hours;

in 2015 – 1870 hours.

Then for all employees of the organization this indicator is:

in 2016 – 1824 hours × 290 people. = 528,960 h;

in 2017 – 1870 hours × 99 people. = 185 130 hours

Since the indicators used for the analysis are heterogeneous (profit, the equivalent of an employee’s full working time), then, bringing them to a common measure, we obtain:

And profit = (1246.3 thousand rubles × 528,960 hours): (1231.76 thousand rubles × 185,130 hours) = 2.89.

Similarly, East = (15,988.04 thousand rubles × 528,960 hours): (5302.5 thousand rubles × 185,130 hours) = 8.62.

Professional prospects coefficient: K pp = (17 × 1 + 94 × 0.75 + 179 × 0.6): 290 × (1 + 9.5: 4 + 48: 18) = 4.06.

G kpr = I prib + I st + K pp = 2.89 + 8.62 + 4.06 = 15.57.

Thus, the estimated value of the employee as an asset of the Alpha company was:

O cA = (14,618.2 thousand rubles × 15.57 + 16.2 thousand rubles) × 1 = 227,612.57 thousand rubles.

For other quantitative indicators of the effectiveness of personnel management processes, see the table.

How to calculate personnel efficiency based on qualitative characteristics

Qualitative assessment of personnel - obtaining characteristics of the physical and psychological potential of employees; the amount of professional knowledge and skills they have; personal qualities that determine their ability to do creative and productive work. When assessing the effectiveness of personnel based on qualitative characteristics, the following indicators are taken into account:

professional qualifications and competence;
general intellectual and creative level, ability to learn and perceive innovations;
ability to adapt to changing conditions;
knowledge of related professions and specialties;
degree of responsibility;
personal qualities;
existing achievements in work;
initiative;
job satisfaction;
focus on results.

Each company has its own set of these characteristics; their choice is influenced by the purposes of the assessment, the specifics of production, corporate culture, and the characteristics of the position held.

Example of staff performance assessment

Criteria for evaluation The Alpha company conducts annual assessments of all employees. To reflect all the skills, talents and development plans of employees on a single panel, a special matrix was created in Excel. This matrix made it possible to combine and structure employee assessments according to nine competencies:

knowledge of basic corporate norms;
following the principles of kaizen;
success of business communications;
technical literacy;
management culture;
process development;
marketing and customer relations;
project management;
Knowledge of accounting principles, legal issues and basic documentation.

At the same time, each competency is divided into main functions, which allows for a more in-depth analysis. For example, the Marketing and Customer Relations dimension includes:

research of clients and competitors, justification of the economic feasibility of the product, plan for its introduction, construction of a regional network;
GR – holding meetings in ministries, involving authorities and unions, speaking at conferences and forums, analyzing and identifying customer needs;
sales – selection of clients, preparation of dossiers and letters, selection of recipients, preparation of a commercial proposal and its promotion to the decision maker;
promotion in the media - preparing press releases, texts for the website, articles for target media, establishing contacts with journalists of target media, etc.;
advertising and presentation products - placement of non-commercial materials in the media, creation of films and multimedia products;
Internet promotion – organization of direct advertising, statistics analysis, SEO, mailings.

Thus, the Excel matrix combines assessments of nine competencies, which are divided into five to seven functions each. Evaluation procedure Each employee once a year analyzes his work and social life over the past year and enters scores for each competency in points from 0 to 5 in the certification form in Excel. In doing so, he uses the scale:

0 – I don’t know;
1 – I know the theoretical part;
2 – I have initial experience, I perform simple operations;
3 – I confidently perform operations, including complex ones;
4 – I confidently carry out all operations, train colleagues, develop new competencies;
5 – everything listed in rating 4, plus I teach to clients.

Then the manager evaluates the results of the work of his subordinates: the percentage and timeliness of fulfillment of weekly, quarterly and annual plans for individual employee performance parameters and each competency. To do this, he also evaluates, in a range from 0 to 5 points, each function of each competency that is presented in the matrix. After the employee and manager have filled out the matrix, the program builds a graph that reflects all the employee’s competencies. This allows you to visually obtain the results of the assessment, which simplifies the overall assessment of the employee’s performance and the choice of the direction of his development.

TO Complex personnel assessment, including both diagnostics of the personal qualities of candidates when selecting for the “growth reserve”, and analysis of labor results, characteristics of the labor behavior of employees, is used today by few structures: only at some enterprises certain types of assessment are used (most often when selecting applicants for vacant positions). workplaces).

In our opinion, this is explained by the incompetence of some managers who classify personnel management issues as secondary issues that do not affect the competitiveness of the enterprise; a small number of managers and specialists possessing modern knowledge and assessment techniques; discreditation in the eyes of managers of comprehensive personnel assessment as a result of unsystematic use of its fragments; relatively large expenditures of time and money on the assessment procedure in comparison with other methods of personnel management.

Comprehensive personnel assessment is aimed at obtaining economic (achieving high economic indicators) and social (coordination and implementation of the interests of the subjects and objects of assessment) effect. Before proceeding directly to the analysis of its effectiveness, it is necessary to highlight the essential features of the object of study, namely, the assessment of the organization’s personnel. In general terms, such an assessment is a multi-stage, sequential process of studying the individual qualities, abilities, behavior and performance of an employee. Only a systematic assessment can satisfy the requirements of high efficiency.

The personnel assessment system combines two groups of components, determined by the internal structure (the set of interrelated elements created or attracted by the system itself and ensuring the achievement of its goals) and the external environment (the set of elements through which the scheme interacts with the external environment).

The first group includes the actual involved subjects and objects of assessment, a set of reference and actual indicators, assessment criteria, selected methods and means, etc.

To the second group:

input of the assessment system - personnel, potential subjects of assessment, modern technologies and methods, equipment and machinery for assessment, incoming documents, etc.;
output of the assessment system - the results of the assessment; documents containing information about the assessment and areas of its use; oral and written information, etc.;
communication with the external environment - information and documentary flows between the assessment system and the external environment to coordinate actions (communication can be direct and reverse: direct - transfer of assessment results to the employee; reverse - information about his reaction, proposals for conducting the assessment, its improvement, etc.) d.).

The external environment should be distinguished from the external environment of the assessment system, i.e. factors or elements in which it is located and with which it has direct or indirect connections. The external assessment environment, in our opinion, must be considered depending on the systems of which it is an element or subsystem.

Accordingly, we can distinguish:

the immediate external environment or microenvironment - that part of the environment with which the assessment system is in direct interaction and on which the content and effectiveness of the assessment depend (the immediate environment is the personnel management system);
macroenvironment - part of the environment that indirectly or indirectly, through the personnel management system, affects the specifics of the assessment system.

The macroenvironment, in turn, is divided into intraorganizational and external, consisting of elements of the “target environment of the organization.” The main factors of the intra-organizational environment include the enterprise development strategy, the stage of its life cycle, intra-company culture, leading management methods and styles, etc. Factors in the target environment that have the greatest impact on personnel assessment are the state of the labor market, the sectoral and professional structure of labor supply and demand, personnel policies in the field of hiring, attracting and evaluating competing enterprises, social and labor values and norms existing in society, etc. .d.

Assessment as a system has its own structure, including many components that are in certain relationships, and its content (a set of objects and subjects of assessment as carriers of individual specific qualities, interests, needs), as well as technologies and methods, a description of a set of specific competencies, etc. . In other words, the content of the assessment system shows what components are included in it, what quality they are and what their essence is.

An analysis of the activities of organizations allows us to conclude that the principles of systematically constructing personnel assessment are often ignored: when choosing types and methods of assessment, only individual factors are taken into account; the assessment being implemented is not combined with other elements of the personnel management system, as well as with the enterprise development strategy. There is also a contradiction in the goals, methods, and assessment indicators, and their inconsistency with the specifics of the object and subject.

Therefore, it is so important to master the methodology and methodology for determining the effectiveness of personnel assessment. Currently, the effectiveness of any socio-economic system is assessed using either cost-based models (and is calculated as the ratio of results to costs) or non-cost models (defined as the ratio of results to needs, goals, etc.).

Adhering to the principle of economic efficiency in relation to the personnel assessment system is only partially possible (not all results and costs are quantifiable; there is no strict correlation between costs and effects, etc.), and the use of the term "efficiency" assumes that , in addition to the traditional proportion in value form, there are others. Therefore, it seems advisable to move on to combining complementary forms of expressing efficiency and carry out analysis from target, need and economic positions.

Need efficiency expresses the degree to which needs are reflected in a goal and (or) as a result. That is, if the targets of the personnel assessment system take into account the needs of the subjects and objects of assessment, and also the needs of all its elements are realized in the results of the system’s operation, then it can be considered effective.

The need form is associated with the concept of social efficiency, which is ensured by the implementation of systemic measures aimed at meeting socio-economic expectations, and involves an analysis of the degree to which staff needs are met.

The assessment system is a multi-element formation, therefore, when analyzing its effectiveness, it is necessary to take into account the needs and interests of structural components: subjects (for example, managers) and objects (in particular, individuals), personnel management systems, organizations, and the external environment.

The effectiveness of the system can be assessed, firstly, from the standpoint of the needs of the enterprise financing it. In this case, the assessment of the result, correlated with the costs incurred, comes to the fore. Secondly, from the perspective of the personnel management service, when quantitative and qualitative indicators are important, characterizing the scale of the work performed, the impact of the assessment results on the development and functioning of the entire personnel management system. Thirdly, from the perspective of individual workers and managers. From the employee's point of view, performance evaluation will be based on the degree to which personally significant goals, objectives and needs are achieved. For managers, the effect of improving labor results and methods of managing subordinates is important. Fourthly, from the position of indirect consumers of services (for example, a region). In this case, the effectiveness of the assessment is determined from the perspective of the implementation of regional social and economic tasks (reducing tension in the labor market, regulating demand and supply for professions, etc.).

Based on an analysis of the degree to which the interests of the four named groups are realized, the effectiveness of the assessment system is determined, but the problem of choosing the priority of needs and their optimal combination may arise.

Need efficiency is closely related to goal efficiency: all other things being equal, a system whose goal reflects the needs of the objects and subjects of assessment will be more effective.

The final goal of the assessment may be the construction of a system that would promptly respond to the dynamics of personnel and enterprise management tasks and contribute to obtaining a socio-economic effect in managing the human potential of the organization. The benchmark for the system's output state, for example, may be obtaining the most complete and reliable characteristics of the subjects being assessed or increasing the validity of management decisions regarding the subject on the basis of an adequate and detailed assessment of it. Goals can be very different, and their formulation depends on the role that the enterprise management assigns to the personnel management system and its assessment.

The economic efficiency of the system (characteristic of the degree of actual implementation of objective opportunities to achieve the maximum useful result at given or minimum costs) is assessed using the traditional comparison of all the effects obtained (economic, social, psychological, etc.) with the costs incurred for the construction and development of the system.

The general patterns of functioning of assessment systems at various enterprises are the gradualness of capital investments in assessment, the "deferred\\" nature of obtaining its results. Economic efficiency can only be determined locally. For example, in a department, a current assessment of employee performance is introduced, linked to their incentives, and after a short period of time, changes in labor productivity indicators are assessed, correlated with the costs incurred to carry out the assessment.

An obstacle to determining the cost-effectiveness of personnel assessment is also the difficulty of measuring effect indicators, ensuring their representativeness and quantitative certainty. Despite the relative ease of subjective judgments about effectiveness, objective assessments based on quantitative data are more preferable. Identifying effectiveness with that part of it that can be directly measured can lead to the identification of high or low effectiveness, without saying anything about the actual effectiveness of the personnel assessment system. Descriptive indicators will reflect the qualitative side of the results.

For a complete and comprehensive analysis of the effectiveness of personnel assessment, one should simultaneously refer to its three forms. The integral expression of the system efficiency category can be presented in the following form:

If the goal of the personnel assessment system reflects the needs of all its subjects and objects, then the first ratio (need efficiency) turns out to be equal to one. Similarly, if the result fully realizes the goal, then the second ratio (target effectiveness) is equal to one. Under these conditions, we obtain the traditional expression of economic efficiency - a comparison of results and costs. That is, from the point of view of a comprehensive understanding of the essence of efficiency, the most productive system is the one that best satisfies needs at minimal (or given) costs.

The main idea of the described approach is that if there is efficiency that cannot be quantified in monetary terms and compared with costs, it is necessary to turn to the target and need forms of expressing efficiency.

The three-component efficiency model can be supplemented with another variety - commercial. This type meets the interests of the enterprise in a competitive environment, since it shows a payback period equal to the period of time from the start of financial investments in the personnel assessment system until the moment when the volume of investments is equal to the total volume of depreciation of net profit. The commercial effectiveness of personnel assessment is often difficult to quantify in precise terms. Both the costs of assessment and the profit from it are an inseparable element of the total costs of personnel and the total profit from the functioning of the personnel management system. However, it is necessary to make an approximate analysis of how long it takes to pay off investments in personnel assessment.

E = C/P · R/C · R/Z,

where E is the effectiveness of the personnel assessment system;
T - purpose of assessment;

Recently, the scope of application for the procedure for assessing employee productivity has been expanded - it began to be used not only for top managers. Assessing key performance indicators (KPIs of employees) has ceased to be a distinctive feature of foreign companies; practical examples can be found in different industries and for a variety of categories of employees, from marketers and business analysts, to financiers and economists.

The assessment of managers based on competencies is carried out by Alexey Shirokopoyas, Expert in the development and assessment of management competencies. Developer of educational and gaming programs. Founder of the project. 8-926-210-84-19. [email protected]

Typically, KPI-based incentive systems measure key performance indicators (KPIs of employees) because they are based on SMART criteria. Therefore, such motivation systems are convenient for application to employees employed in profit centers, where there are objective and, most importantly, measurable criteria: sales volumes, financial key performance indicators (KPIs of employees), deadlines, etc. - and work based on SMART -goals and objectives, has a specific result. However, not all types of work may have such goals and objectives. For example, how to evaluate process activities (which do not involve achieving a specific result), where there are no SMART tasks and those who are “remote” from the economic and operational processes of the company - “clerks”: secretary, call center operator, support system administrator, HR inspector, accountant, HR officer, etc.? These workers (back office) perform routine functions, and, unlike the work of managers, the work of “clerks” is difficult to evaluate. How to evaluate the quality of the work of this category of personnel?

Key performance indicators (KPIs of employees) - what should you pay attention to?

In this case, it is necessary to evaluate the performance of functions. To a large extent, this is only a qualitative assessment, and, as you know, a qualitative assessment is an expert assessment. The methodology proposed in the article helps to evaluate work from this aspect.

Every manager values in his employees the ability to do work quickly and efficiently. And he is saddened when these demands are not met. Often he has to put up with this and hope that he will someday find a better employee, but the same thing happens with a new employee. Why is this happening? To answer this question, let's delve into the nature of the parameters under consideration and their relationship.

What is "working speed"? From physics we know that speed is the ratio of the amount of work to the time it takes to complete it. This means that the manager evaluates his employee according to three parameters: the amount of work, the time it takes to complete it, and the quality of the work.

Thus, any activity can be assessed by three key performance indicators (KPIs of employees), let's call them the “triad of effectiveness” (see appendix):

Amount of work– production rate, share of excess production, additional assignments beyond the job description, etc.
Quality of work– compliance with technology, error-free, absence of customer complaints, defects, etc.
Work completion time– compliance with the deadline, early completion, exceeding deadlines, etc.

Moreover, each manager can decide for himself what kind of work he evaluates:

the number of operations by job function (for example, the function of a lawyer is the preparation of contracts, and the number of contracts is the number of operations in this function);
the scope of functions exceeds the standard, which is determined by the job description (for example, according to the standard, a lawyer must process at least 100 contracts monthly);
solving additional tasks, instructions from the manager beyond job functions (projects, one-time tasks, etc.).

However, it is not so easy to “reconcile” speed and quality. Indeed, you can see that it is easy to implement only any two parameters of the “triad” and it is difficult to ensure that all tasks are completed on time, with high quality and in the required volume. It is difficult to balance such a system - and this is the responsibility of the manager.

Most often, the work is completed efficiently and on time, but perhaps this will not be the entire amount of work. Often an employee manages to complete all tasks, but either with a decrease in the quality of some of them, or with a violation of deadlines.

And management can completely forget about expectations of early completion of all tasks while maintaining excellent quality. Moreover, managers are accustomed to seeing an employee’s ability to complete an increased volume of tasks ahead of schedule and with excellent quality as signs of his insufficient workload, and not of talent. Is this what determines the modern personnel trend of “searching for talent”? The dream of employers about so-called talent is the dream of employees who are able to consistently fulfill these three criteria in full. Agree, there are not so many of them.

Taking into account tasks and functions in itself is a creative matter. They have different significance, which means they should have different weights. In addition, all key performance indicators (KPIs of employees) can have their own weight in the system (see Table 1), which is determined by the manager based on current tasks, characteristics of work, etc., thereby highlighting what is most important. For example, deadlines are important for the selection department, and quality is important for accounting.

The final grade is calculated as a weighted average of the grades. This is the sum of the products of the assessment for each of the key performance indicators (KPIs of employees) and its weight:

35% x 3 + 40% x 4 + 25% x 1 = 1.05 +1.6 + 0.25 = 2.9 (with a maximum of 4 points)
or
35% x 75% + 40% x 100% + 25% x 25% = 26.25% + 40% + 6.25% = 72.5%

The second option for calculating the final score of this technique is given in the Appendix.

It is worth repeating: naturally, such assessments are subject to subjectivity. If the amount of work can be determined, and the deadlines can be measured, then quality (in the absence of specialized measurements, for example, the number of customer complaints or the results of an assessment carried out using the mystery shopping technology) is assessed subjectively.

Key performance indicators (KPIs of employees) - what increases the objectivity of the methodology?

Firstly, evaluation criteria are formulated in a special way. This was not done by chance: after a month, the manager cannot always remember in detail which deadlines were violated and how many tasks the employee completed with proper quality. However, he developed a general, holistic picture of his subordinate’s work, written in “large strokes.” In the same “large strokes” he is asked to paint a “portrait of the employee’s effectiveness.”

Secondly, The objectivity of the technique is enhanced by the practice of its application. More than ten years of experience in using the methodology shows that efficiency is high when it is completed by both the manager and the employee himself. They then discuss their results, and this has an important meaning:

the employee remembers his tasks better, but the manager may forget something or confuse something, because he has several subordinates;
the manager has his own view on quality issues, while the employee tends to forgive himself for minor “sins”;
A manager may often view missing deadlines as poor quality work, confusing the two, while an employee may take pride in doing quality work while neglecting the value of meeting deadlines or scope.

Third, Due to these effects, both sides strive to reach an agreement, which, as satirists formulated, is “the product of the non-resistance of the parties.” Since the main practical application of this method is the ability to regulate the monthly or quarterly premium (see Table 2), it is precisely this circumstance that makes the technique valuable, because agreement leads to fairness, and this is more important than the accuracy of measurements, and motivates more than mathematically accurate and sometimes impersonal calculation of points.

Fourthly, The objectivity of the methodology increases due to the “economy of scale” if it is applied in all departments of the company. This effect makes it possible to compare the result with objective data, and this is another powerful verification criterion and a source of correction of results. Thus, a senior manager, having received a complete picture of the company’s assessments (a set of assessments of the effectiveness of managers employed in profit centers and assessments of the effectiveness of employees of the company’s cost centers), can compare it with financial and other objective key performance indicators of the employee (KPI of employees) of the organization’s effectiveness in in general. It may turn out that the overall assessment of all employees using the “Efficiency Triad” method will be overestimated compared to the objective key performance indicators (KPIs of employees) of the organization. Then the employer has the right, by his own authority, to introduce a correction when paying bonuses.

Table 2 shows that employee Danilin had a vacation in February, and in accordance with company policy, no bonus was awarded during this time. Shirokova has a tendency to increase efficiency. Other workers' performance has decreased.

Please note: fulfilling even 50% of the plan can be rewarded, especially since simultaneously three key performance indicators (KPIs of employees) of the “triad” are difficult to achieve, and two out of three can be high at the expense of the resource of the third. In this regard, any number less than 50% is also a definite achievement.

Key performance indicators (KPIs of employees) - systematic application of the method

The method can be applied cascade (where higher-level employees evaluate lower-level ones), throughout the entire organization and regardless of whether employees have “objective key performance indicators (KPIs of employees)” or not. The cascade application of the method gives the assessment systematicity and additional objectivity, especially when it comes to awarding bonuses.

And if, moreover, the method is used for a long time, then it acquires a number of useful properties. Let's look at them.

A superior manager, evaluating a subordinate, at the same time evaluates the activities of his department: after all, the results of a manager’s work consist of both his personal efforts and the efforts of his subordinates. The advantage of this method is that the superior manager has the opportunity to compare data and draw conclusions about the effectiveness of the manager and his subordinates, the department as a whole, and even the management style.

Thus, the figure shows that the subordinates of the head of department 1 have different skills (the “mini-diagrams” clearly show this): an engineer works slowly, but efficiently, a specialist works quickly, but not efficiently enough. A senior manager evaluates the work of the boss, and therefore the entire department 1, as follows: the department solves a large volume of problems with average quality and with some violation of deadlines. And a general analysis of the work of the entire department shows that the manager has an additional volume of tasks - in addition to those solved by his subordinates, and this may indicate problems with delegation. In addition, the boss’s activities somehow “degrade” the quality of the engineer’s work and “slow down” the specialist’s work. As a result, the timing and quality of the department’s work are not above average. The manager of department head 1 should perhaps think about his effectiveness as a manager.

The head of department 2 works quickly, but produces fewer cases than his subordinate. The leading specialist slowly completes a large amount of work. This means that this boss takes on those tasks that can be solved quickly, and the quality of his work cannot be called low. Obviously, everything is in order here with delegation, quality of work and meeting deadlines, and therefore with responsibility.

Analysis of productivity dynamics over time. It can be seen whether the employee's performance increases during the probationary period or decreases over the years. The most clear picture is created by comparing the dynamics of performance assessments with other factors. Thus, in addition to the comparison of the level of efficiency with the vacation period shown in Table 2, one can see signs of advancing “burnout”, which are especially noticeable against the backdrop of constant motivation, a drop or increase in efficiency associated with a change in management, the impact of corporate news on the productivity of employees or departments, and etc.
Analysis of the work style of an individual employee: a comparison of different parameters of the “triad” will show areas of his effectiveness and ineffectiveness. For example, one always works quickly, but not efficiently enough, while the other solves only part of the problems quickly and efficiently. From this, recommendations for the use of workers are born: the first should be placed in an area where speed is needed, and in relation to the second, one should also understand his motivation and interests in solving specific problems.
Comparing the ratings of employees makes it possible to judge their usefulness for the organization, and comparing the ratings of heads of departments allows us to make a rating of departments and managers. So, based on the results of the year, you can calculate average or total annual assessments and determine who is more effective and who is less and due to what factors: who is the “fastest” worker, who is the most “thorough”, who also performs the most tasks. In this case, the content of work and the employee’s affiliation with one or another department do not play a role.

So, despite the obvious subjectivity of the “Efficiency Triad” method, its useful properties are obvious:

the method is applicable to all positions, regardless of whether they are managerial or executive;
employee performance ratings can be accumulated and compared;
By accumulating assessments, you can track the dynamics of the work of individual employees and even departments, monitor the onset of burnout, and draw conclusions about their strengths and weaknesses;
by comparing the assessments of subordinates with the assessments of the manager, one can draw conclusions about the management style and identify areas of inefficiency in departments;
due to the standard approach, the methodology is easily implemented in document management systems (Lotus Notes, MS Outlook, etc.) and ERP (based on Oracle, SAP, Microsoft, etc.), widely used in the corporate world;
the method can become an addition or a common format for existing systems for assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of MBO, key performance indicators (KPIs of employees), and bring their data to a unified presentation.

And most importantly, this is not just another “precise tool”, but a way to mediate the dialogue between a manager and a subordinate on the issue of remuneration. After all, nothing reduces an employee’s motivation more than a lack of recognition and understanding of development paths. In such a dialogue, the employee can understand why his boss is dissatisfied and what he pays attention to. In other words, the method gives motivation a very important management effect - feedback to the subordinate about his work.

should be calculated to diagnose corporate problems. Key performance indicators of an employee allow you to take timely measures to improve the efficiency of his work.