More than ever organizations are looking to set SMART goals and conduct performance appraisals honestly. But does HONESTY itself gives accurate results?

1. Can Be Deceptive
Employee Appraisal
Scores

2. GoalsRM
Copyright 2013 | Saigun Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 2
An Introduction
The one positive thing recession has done for organizations is shifting the focus to
what really matters when analyzing employee performance.
“I think Steve
is a great
guy.”
“Look at
John’s sales
performance
report. It says
he is doing a
great job.”
IT DOESN’T WORK ANYMORE IT’S THE NEW WAY
More than ever organizations are looking to set S A T
and conduct performance appraisals honestly.

3. An Example
3Copyright 2013 | Saigun Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Consider the case of three managers in the same department of an organization in
Year 2007. The performance of the teams of these managers was at par with
marginal differences.
Ram Sonia Johnson
 One of the youngest
managers, hails from
Generation Y
 He is very optimistic
and looks for positive
side of the employees
 He believes in
motivating by carrots
 She is in the middle of
her career
 She has high career
prospects in the
company and looking
for promotion in 1-2
years
 She likes to play safe
 He is an ex-government
employee
 For him discipline and
loyalty come foremost
 He cannot tolerate any
deviation from policies
and authorities
 He believes in the stick

4. Copyright 2013 | Saigun Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 4
How they score their employees:
Ram
Name Scores
Meera 10
Scott 7
Sunil 8
Tim 6
Nita 9
Peterson 6
John 5
Rob 7
Mukesh 8
Sarah 9
Sonia
Name Scores
Amar 5
Steve 6
Phillip 5
Lacey 7
Edwards 5
Mary 6
Kate 7
Seema 6
Peter 8
Ramesh 5
Johnson
Name Scores
Mohan 7
Lada 6
Harris 5
Adam 4
Mike 6
Jackson 4
Reema 5
Sheela 4
Lucy 5
Olang 7
Here are the scores given by each of them to their team members on the scale 1- 10:

5. What Human Resources will see:
5Copyright 2013 | Saigun Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
If HR looks at the employee scores and rank performance according to the scores
obtained in the appraisals, the following picture will emerge:
Top Performers Mediocre Performers Bottom Performers
Meera 10 Rob 7 Lucy 5
Nita 9 Scott 7 Reema 5
Sarah 9 Lada 6 Harris 5
Mukesh 8 Peterson 6 John 5
Peter 8 Seema 6 Edwards 5
Sunil 8 Tim 6 Phillips 5
Mohan 7 Mike 6 Ramesh 5
Olang 7 Steve 6 Adam 4
Kate 7 Mary 6 Sheela 4
Lacey 7 Amar 5 Jackson 4

6. Copyright 2013 | Saigun Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 6
What Human Resources will Infer:
 Most of the top performers are from Ram’s Team.
 Most of the bottom performers are from Johnson’s Team.
 The best of Sonia and Johnson are nowhere near Ram’s team members.
 Ram has no bottom performer.

7. Is Johnson such an effective manager that he can drive
results even with mediocre and bottom performers?
Is Ram performing because he has got all top performers?
The Real Questions should be:
7Copyright 2013 | Saigun Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Seeing as each manager’s team as a whole performed on par with one another,
the real questions that should be asked are:
?
?

8. Copyright 2013 | Saigun Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 8
Observations on the Appraisal Tables:
» Employee appraisal scores as is doesn’t provide accurate information
» Clear existence of personal biases/nuances in scores
» Not prudent to make succession, compensation or pink-slip decisions
What can be done?

9. Relative Grading
Normalization of Appraisal Scores
A Couple of Solutions
9Copyright 2013 | Saigun Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
There are two processes that can help remove the personal biases from
appraisal scores, they are:

10. Thank You
Copyright 2013 | Saigun Technologies
Pvt. Ltd.
www.empxtrack.com