Performance Criterion

• Theoretical vs. actual criterion

– The criteria for different jobs may require different
assessment approaches. Examples:
Job Theoretical Criterion Actual
Criterion

Insurance sales Make satisfactory Count of policies sold

agent sales (objective)

Customers’ rating of
Waiter Serve customers well
satisfaction (subjective)

Audience response
(subjective)
Musician Play instruments well Counts of tickets sold;
standing ovation;
errors made (objective) 1
 Setting Performance Criteria
• Dynamic criteria
– Measures that reflect variability of performance over time
– Changes in job levels over time can
e.g. ifoccur because
productivity is of more
not stable
practice; additional training; or KSAOs until 12 change
required
months after training,
– If job performance criteria are static
trainees(e.g.,
shouldaccident
not be level),
the prediction is more accurate appraised
becauseright theafter
performance is
the training but wait till
more stable. the 12th month.
– If job performance criteria are dynamic (e.g., productivity),
important to decide what time-frame to measure the
criterion
– Performance appraisal systems that ignore extensive
variability within persons over time may cause real
problems in making appraisal decisions
2
 Individual Appraisal Methods
• Evaluating the employee without explicit reference to other
workers
• Graphic Rating Form
– Using a predetermined scale to rate the worker on
important job dimensions derived from job analysis
– Numerical and/or verbal rating as anchored on the scale
– Trait-oriented, e.g., ‘cooperativeness’; or tapping a general
What problem?
aspect of performance, e.g., ‘attendance’The adjective
labels and their
differentiations
are ambiguous

Source: Aamodt (2012)

3
 Comparative Appraisal Methods
• Involve some form of comparison of one worker’s
performance with that of others
• Ranking
– Ranking employees’ performance from best to worst
Why ranking?
– The relative rank is based on comparison rather
To forcethan any
absolute standard of performance differentiation

Performance Dimensions
Employee Knowledge Depend- Quality Total
ability
Abbey 1 1 1 1
Bob 2 3 2 2.33
Carol 3 2 3 2.67
David 4 5 4 4.33
Ellen 5 4 5 4.67
4