The document discusses various performance dimensions and evaluation methods including the quantity and quality of work, interpersonal skills, and creativity. It outlines different sources for performance ratings, such as supervisors, peers, and self-assessments, and emphasizes the importance of effective evaluation timing and criteria. Additionally, it highlights the challenges of achieving reliability and validity in performance measurements.

1. Performance Dimensions
Quantity of work
Quality of work
Interpersonal skills
Judgment
Attitude
Cooperation
 knowledge
Managerial skills
Initiative
Problem solving
Creativity
Intelligence
etc…..

2. Graphic Rating Scales
(Category Ratings)
1 2 3 4 5
Poor Below Average Average Above Average Outstanding
(Unsatisfactory) (Fair) (Satisfactory) (Good)

3. GRAPHIC RATING SCALE

4. © 2008 Thomson/South-Western. All rights reserved. 11–4

5. Who Conducts rating
Supervisors rating
their employees
Employees rating
their superiors
Multisource
Outside sources
rating employees
Team members
rating each other
Employees rating
themselves
Sources of
Performance
Measurment

6. Who Evaluates, When, and How
Often
Most organizations
evaluate on an annual
basis
 Performance evaluations are
often scheduled for random
dates, such as the date of hire
 Alternatively, all employees
may be evaluated on or near a
single calendar date
 The evaluation can be at the
end of the task cycle

7. APPROACH FIT WITH
STRATEGY
VALIDITY
CRITERIA
RELIABILITY ACCEPTABILIT
Y
SPECIFICITY
Comparative Poor, unless
manager
takes time to
make link
Cab be high if
ratings are done
carefully
Depends on
rates, but
usually no
measure of
agreement
used
Moderate; easy
to develop and
use but
resistant to
normative
standard
Very low
Attribute Usually low;
requires
manager to
make link
Usually low; can
be fine if
developed
carefully
Usually low;
can be
improved
High; easy to
develop and use
Very low
Behavioral Can be quite
high
Usually high;
minimizes
contamination
and deficiency
Usually high Moderate;
difficult to
develop, but
accepted well
for use
Very high
Results Very high Usually high; can
be both
contaminated and
deficient
High; main
problem can
be test-retest
depends on
timing of
measure
High; usually
developed with
input from those
to be evaluated
High regarding
results, but low
regarding
behaviors
necessary to
achieve them
Quality Very high High, but can be
contaminated and
deficient
High High; usually
developed with
input from those to
be evaluated
High regarding
results, but low
regarding behaviors
necessary to achieve