How to reduce the error of performance evaluation

1, halo effect error

When evaluating the work of the appraisee, the evaluator infers other characteristics because of one characteristic of the appraisee, resulting in "one good, one good and one poor", which is called halo effect deviation.

2. The primary effect or recency effect deviation.

When the evaluation period is long, if the evaluator does not observe and record regularly, it may be greatly influenced by the first impression or the earliest impression, that is, the first cause effect is biased; Or the impression of long-term events is relatively light, but the impression of recent events is relatively deep, resulting in recency effect's deviation.

3. Stereotype prejudice

When evaluators judge a person according to group perception, this kind of evaluation bias is called stereotype bias. ? For example, when evaluating performance, the evaluator may be biased against the evaluated due to age, gender, race, religion, education and other reasons.

4. Middle deviation

Evaluators give extremely close scores to most of the evaluated people, regardless of their differences in work performance, which leads to deviation. The main reason may be that the appraiser is unwilling to offend people or avoid disputes, or he is not very clear about the performance of his subordinates, so he has to take a medium rating.

5. Too wide or too strict and biased

Evaluators may lack understanding of various evaluation factors and external environment, or give too high or too low evaluation to all evaluators for personal reasons, resulting in too wide or too strict and biased.

6. Emotional effect deviation

Due to the influence of emotional factors between the assessed and the assessed, the evaluation deviation is called emotional effect deviation. Emotional effect deviation is the most common and difficult to prevent in evaluation. Because the appraisee's values, personality and work style are similar to his own or other emotional factors, the appraiser often overestimates or underestimates the appraisee.

7. Projection effect deviation

When evaluators lack enough information to judge others, they tend to attribute their own characteristics to the evaluated person, resulting in evaluation bias, that is, projection effect bias. If the evaluator is a person who is not serious and responsible, he often thinks that others will not be serious and responsible; When the evaluator is an honest person, he may think that others are also honest.

8. Contrast effect deviation

Evaluators often compare the same or similar things they come into contact with, which leads to evaluation bias, that is, contrast effect bias.

If the evaluation index is not clear, or when the relative comparison rating method is adopted, the former evaluated object looks excellent in all aspects, then by contrast, it may bring adverse effects to the latter evaluated object.

? Second, countermeasures to avoid mistakes

1, select the correct evaluation method.

At present, there are eight evaluation methods commonly used in enterprises: ranking method (including direct ranking method and alternating ranking method), forced distribution method, pairwise comparison method, icon degree evaluation method, behavior anchor grade evaluation method, critical event method, description table method and target management method. These eight evaluation methods are all influenced by the evaluator's prejudice.

As can be seen from the table, the behavior anchor grade evaluation method and the target management method may well avoid all kinds of errors (continuing the content of a page on the Internet), while the icon degree method and the description table method are more likely to produce all kinds of errors. In fact, each method has its own advantages and disadvantages. Although behavior anchor grade evaluation method and target management method can avoid all kinds of mistakes well, the design and implementation cost of behavior anchor grade evaluation method is relatively high; There are also some shortcomings in the target management method, such as the difficulty in determining the target and the high capital cost and time cost of designing the target system. Although the graphic scale evaluation method and the description table method are prone to various errors, the graphic scale evaluation method has the characteristics of comprehensiveness, quantification and comparability. Descriptive notation is still popular because of its simplicity.

When selecting evaluation methods, two or more evaluation methods should be used comprehensively according to the evaluation purpose to achieve complementarity. Of course, an important factor that needs to be considered is that when selecting the evaluation method, we should consider the actual situation of the enterprise, the suitability of the evaluation method and whether the evaluation method conforms to the principle of economy.

2. Education and training of evaluators

All the above deviations are caused by the appraiser's subjective reasons. First of all, it is necessary to let the evaluator know the reasons for the deviation, and the educational evaluator should avoid personal subjectivity in the evaluation, insist on seeking truth from facts and proceed from reality.

Secondly, to achieve a more accurate evaluation, it is necessary to make the evaluator realize the importance of evaluation, understand the purpose of evaluation, understand the decomposition basis of evaluation content and dimension, and the exact meaning of evaluation criteria.

Through training and education, improve the ability of the chief appraiser-supervisor to collect appraiser information, form the habit of collecting appraiser information frequently and keeping records, and prevent errors such as halo effect, first cause effect and recency effect caused by appraiser's long-term forgetting.

Finally, through various types of training, the evaluator's ability to observe the performance of the evaluated person and judge according to relevant information is improved.

3. Diversity of evaluators

Some enterprises include supervisors, colleagues, examinees themselves, subordinates and customers, which is a popular 360-degree evaluation at present. 360-degree evaluation is indeed a good way to reduce evaluation error and improve evaluation accuracy. However, the process of 360-degree evaluation is complicated, and the resource consumption is also relatively large; For some enterprises or some positions, it is difficult to implement 360-degree evaluation, especially for external customers who are not enthusiastic about participating in the evaluation. But appraisers should be diversified as far as possible to reduce the deviation caused by one supervisor.

Diversified appraisers should choose several appraisers who know appraisers best. It should be noted that the evaluation results of different appraisers should be given different weight coefficients, and then the evaluation results of each appraiser should be weighted and averaged. Generally speaking, supervisors are most familiar with their subordinates' work, and are usually familiar with the contents of the evaluation. They have the opportunity to observe their work and understand their work ability and attitude. Therefore, when implementing multiple evaluations, supervisors are generally given a higher weight coefficient.

On the diversification of appraisers, it is necessary to hire external personnel experts or special appraisal institutions to help enterprises evaluate employees. External personnel experts or specialized appraisal agencies have special skills and experience, and all five people are interested, so it is unlikely to be biased. The disadvantage of hiring experts or specialized agencies to participate in the evaluation is that the cost is high, and experts or specialized evaluation agencies are not necessarily good at the evaluated majors.

4. Review the results of performance evaluation and establish a smooth channel for employees' complaints.

After the evaluation, in order to prevent possible mistakes in the evaluation, the evaluation results should also be rechecked. The review can be carried out in many ways, such as statistical analysis of the evaluation results of various departments or units to check whether there is any deviation; Through the questionnaire survey, the satisfaction of the investigators with the evaluation results, the rationality of the evaluation system, the problems existing in the design and implementation of the evaluation system, etc. The root cause of the error was found.

Allow employees to view the evaluation results. When employees have doubts about the evaluation results, they should provide employees with smooth channels of appeal and minimize possible mistakes through good communication.