INDEX

Introduction 3

Theoretical framework 4

1. Performance evaluation method 4

2. Results-based performance evaluation methods 5

2.1. Participatory evaluation method by EPPO objectives 5

2.1.1. Definition of the EPPO method 5

2.2. Stages of performance evaluation through the application of the

EPPO method 6

2.3. Features of the EPPO method 7

2.4. Benefits of the EPPO method for the company 8

2.5. Advantages of the EPPO method 9

2.6. Disadvantages of the EPPO method 9

2.7. Design of the EPPO performance evaluation system 10

Conclusions 13

recommendations 14

Bibliography fifteen

Annexes: fifteen

1. Group dynamics 16

2. Practical application of the method 18

a. Descriptive Phrases Method Format 19

3. Triptych twenty

INTRODUCTION
1
 One type of problem that has occurred in organizations for some time is the poor or

no performance that workers present when fulfilling tasks in each position, which does

not allow the administrative or operational management of the organization to be

handled correctly.(Peña & Vega, 2014) .

Thus, the Performance Evaluation becomes a fundamental tool within organizations,

since this allows companies to know the weaknesses and strengths of the staff, and is a

way to measure the performance of the TTHH.

This tool has allowed organizations to carry out correct Human Talent Management,

as it helps determine the evolution of the worker with respect to their work and

therefore results can be obtained that help make certain decisions about personnel.

(Appelius & Vargas, 2007) .

Among the great advantages that this tool has, such as, for example, keeping

managers and directors aware of the TTHH situation, something that is highly relevant

is that it allows obtaining feedback and directing the organization towards work

excellence.

The best way to implement a Performance Evaluation method is by evaluating the

actions of each employee, the performance of their activities, the achievement of goals

and the results they achieve, to later evaluate them and reward or provide feedback as

the case may be.

2
 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

1. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION METHOD

Chiavenato (2011) states that performance evaluation is

a process used to judge or estimate the value, excellence

and competencies of each person and mainly the

contribution that each person makes to the organization's

business.

Dessler (2009) refers to performance evaluation as a procedure that includes:

 The establishment of labor standards,

 The evaluation of the actual performance of employees in relation to established

standards,

 Inform collaborators in order to motivate them to overcome errors framed in their

performance or failure to do so so that they continue contributing at a good level.

It helps establish goals and train employees to then evaluate and reward them.

Currently, it is a process that varies between various organizations and is considered a

dynamic process that includes the evaluated employee and his or her manager.

3
2. RESULTS-BASED PERFORMANCE EVALUATION METHODS

Results-based methods, as their name indicates, evaluate the achievements of

employees, the results they obtain in their work, their defenders claim that they are more

objective than other methods and give more authority to employees, the observation of

results, as it assumes less subjectivity, which is why it may be less open to bias or

subjective opinion, whether for or against, of the evaluators (Alles, 2006).

2.1. PARTICIPATORY EVALUATION METHOD BY EPPO OBJECTIVES

2.1.1. Definition of the EPPO method

It is an advanced performance management system in which employees and the

manager participate, the technique of intense relationship and proactive vision is

adopted, in which the old management by objectives resurfaces (Arias, 2016).

Chiavenato (2011) presents participatory evaluation by objectives (EPPO) as a

performance management system with the active participation of employees and their

managers. This method adopts an intense relationship and proactive vision. It reemerges

from the old administration by objectives (APO), but now without the traumas that

caused autocracy and the continuous state of tension and qualification of those involved.

4
With this new method, the participation of collaborators is democratic, participatory,

inclusive and motivating.

2.2. Stages of performance evaluation through the application of the EPPO

method

1. The agreed objectives form:

The objectives are set jointly, becoming a negotiation between the employee

and the employer, where the resources and means necessary to achieve what is

proposed are defined, and in this way there is no pressure that these are imposed

and the employee does not feel motivated. nor benefited. At this stage there

must be a strong and convincing incentive to boost performance towards the

intended goals.

2. The personal commitment to achieve the objectives that were formulated

together:

The evaluated person must give their full acceptance and personal

commitment to the objectives. In some cases it is celebrated with a formal or

psychological contract that represents the agreed agreement.

3. The manager's acceptance regarding the allocation of resources and means

necessary to achieve the objects:

Once the objectives have been set and personal commitment established, the

resources and means to achieve them effectively are defined. These resources

and means can be material, human or investments in training and development

of the evaluated person.

5
 4. Performance:

It is the personal strategy that each individual chooses with total freedom and

autonomy to achieve the formulated objectives. The manager can provide

guidance rather than command or control.

5. Constant monitoring of results and their comparison with objectives:

It is the constant monitoring of the achievement of objectives with a

quantitative basis that provides an objective and clear idea of how things are

going and the effort of the evaluated person. It is convenient for the person

evaluated to evaluate himself to compare the results with the established

objectives.

6. Intensive feedback and continuous joint evaluation:

The person evaluated must have a clear perception and notion of how it

works to evaluate the effort/result achieved and draw conclusions. There must

be a lot of feedback and communication support.

2.3. Characteristics

 It is democratic, participatory, involving and motivating.

 Performance management system with the active participation of employees

and their manager.

 Adopt an intense relationship and proactive vision.

 Reemerges from the old administration by objectives (APO).

 Central focus on the results and objectives achieved.

6
2.4. Benefits of the EPPO method for the company.

The benefits of the Participatory Evaluation Method by Objectives (EPPO) are:

 The company specifies the objectives that it wants to achieve in each area with a

fixed period of time and with the participation of the collaborator, in this way a

commitment of responsibility is obtained, detailing the activities to be carried

out for each objective.

 The manager evaluates the collaborators for each planned objective and checks

the degree of compliance with them, and those that have not been achieved to be

carried out efficiently, give them the correct orientation and improve them.

 Know the aspects in which employees are failing, to provide them with the

corresponding training.

 Teamwork of collaborators, for the joint fulfillment of the objectives of each

area.

 Provide the necessary guidance to increase and improve learning for each job.

 Obtain information about the processes developed by each area and be able to

distribute and improve the functions of collaborators.

 Provide all the necessary resources that each collaborator requires, to meet the

objectives.

 The manager can evaluate results achieved and general factors such as employee

initiative, quality of work, courtesy, good manners and the correct use of the

uniform with industrial safety implements.

7
  The employee was able to learn about his strengths, his boss's expectations, and

the areas he needs to improve.

 Feedback with the ideas of both the collaborator and the immediate boss, to be

able to develop new objectives in order to meet them effectively.

2.5. Advantages

 Improvements in administration thanks to results-oriented planning.

 Greater personal commitment to shared objectives.

 High levels of objectivity.

 It is personalized, considering functions by position.

 The evaluator becomes a trainer – facilitator.

 It develops communication between manager and collaborator.

 Precision of organizational functions and structures and of the delegation of

authority in line with the expected results of the people who perform the

respective functions.

 Development of efficient controls, which allows measuring results and taking

corrective actions.

 Enhances the initiative in the person evaluated.

 The evaluation does not focus on the analysis of the person but on their

achievements.

2.6. Disadvantages

 The difficulty of setting verifiable goals

 Requires specific training in the evaluator

8
  Setting goals takes a long time

 For any evaluation, standards or norms are required that in some things do not

exist in the company, it is considered a stumbling block in the evaluation

method.

 Basing the evaluation on the subjective judgment of the department head takes

away credibility from the system.

2.7. Design of the EPPO performance evaluation system.

It consists of setting objectives by the boss and subordinate, reaching an agreement

through the establishment of consensual objectives formulated jointly to be met within a

certain time. The definition of objectives is an important step to clarify the expectations

that were placed on the collaborator, what he must keep in mind regarding his

performance ( William, 2013).

In this way, the collaborator will be aware of the scope that the company expects

from him, granting him all the necessary resources to fulfill it. This will specify the

activities to be carried out and will have the complete support of the boss to be able to

carry them out.

9
 The cycle of participatory evaluation by objectives consists of defining objectives

and responsibilities, developing performance standards, evaluating performance and,

again, redefining objectives, and so on (Chiavenato, 2011).

Finally, after the agreed time to meet the agreed objectives, the boss will carry out an

evaluation to measure the degree of effectiveness that the employee demonstrated in

fulfilling them and in this way measure the benefits that the company obtains and make

the pertinent changes in the objectives. agreed objectives for a new evaluation period.

EVALUATION FORM

1. CONSENSUS OBJECTIVES FORM

The collaborator reaches a daily production of 850 kilos of

OBJECTIVE 1 assembled products, complying with all the activities of the
process

EXCELLENT Meets the programmed objectives and goals (equal to 100%)

Maintains a minimum acceptable level of productivity (reaches

WELL
75% - 99.99%)

They obtain results lower than the minimum acceptable

REGULAR
productivity (reaches 50% - 75%)

Productivity does not allow the needs of the position to be covered

BAD
(it does not reach 50%)

10
11
2. EVALUATION FORMAT

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Collaborator name: Juan Cajamarca

Post: Operator

Area/department: Production

Mark with an x the rating given to the collaborator according to each objective met
between Excellent, Good, Average or Bad.

QUALIFICATION RESOURCES

YEA
AIM EXCELLENT WELL REGULAR BAD NO
H
Obj. 1 x x

Obj. 2 x x

Obj. 3 x x

TOTAL 2 1 3

12
CONCLUSIONS

Performance evaluation is a dynamic process as it has several methods to carry it out

in an organization, which serve as a valuable tool for evaluators and allow evaluated

people to identify their performance at work, thus achieving improvement equally. the

results of the company and the future performance of people.

It is concluded that results-based methods, as their name indicates, evaluate the

achievements of employees, the results they obtain in their work, their defenders claim

that they are more objective than other methods and grant more authority to employees.

The EPPO Participatory Objective Evaluation Method requires an adapted version of

the performance evaluation process, characterized by a consensus between the

objectives, resources, means and mechanisms of perfection in the way the work is

carried out between the employer and the worker.

The EPPO Performance Evaluation Method is a great tool, because in addition to

opening communication channels in the organization, it also develops collaboration

between employees and managers, it is personalized and does not focus on the analysis

of the person, but on their achievements. .

The participatory evaluation method by objectives is a very dynamic and democratic

evaluation method for organizations, since it also turns out to be a great tool to improve

the work environment among the organization's collaborators, this being a motivational

method for workers who can be participants in its evaluation.

RECOMMENDATIONS

13
 It is important that organizations carry out a thorough analysis to determine the

performance evaluation methodology that they will apply to their collaborators so that

substantial benefits are achieved not only for the organization but for all the people who

work in it and above all. all ensuring that the chosen methodology is aligned with the

organizational objectives.

In this method, it is recommended to eliminate situations that cause autocracy and

the continuous state of tension and qualification of those involved. With this new

method, the participation of collaborators must be democratic, participatory, inclusive

and motivating.

Promote the use of the EPPO Method, because by integrating work personnel, their

work performance would increase exponentially, interpersonal relationships are

strengthened at all hierarchical levels and the organizational climate improves.

It is important that the evaluator is clear about the advantages and disadvantages of

the application and implementation of the participatory evaluation method by objectives

and correlates it with other performance evaluation methods so that he can choose the

method that best suits the needs of the organization and of his collaborators.

It is necessary that for the implementation of this method, strategies are used that

improve effective communication between the evaluator and the worker, since as it is a

method where the most important thing is the consensus between the parties, the

exchange of information is the first step to obtain of a good application result.

REFERENCES

14
Alles, M. (2006). Performance by competencies. Ediciones Granica SA Third edition,

352p. Buenos Aires, Argentina. Retrieved on October 19, 2019, from

https://books.google.com.ec/books?

id=HYGSeoWISbYC&pg=PA32&dq=metodo+de+evaluacion+de+escalas+graf

icas&hl=es-

419&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwig_f3l6KjlAhUB26wKHWosAsEQ6AEISjAF#v

=onepage&q=method%20of%20evaluation%20of%20scales

%20graphics&f=true

Appelius, L., & Vargas, A. (2007). Performance evaluation methods. Austral University

of Chile. Retrieved from

http://cybertesis.uach.cl/tesis/uach/2007/fea646e/doc/fea646e.pdf

Arias, A. (July 14, 2016). SlideShare. Obtained from SlideShare:

https://es.slideshare.net/davort123/metodo-eppo

Chiavenato, I. (2011). Human resources management . Mc Graw Hill / Interamericana

Editores SA de CV Mexico City: Mexico.

Dessler, G. (2009), Human Resources Management . Mexico: Pearson Education, eleventh

edition.

Peña, J., and Vega, M. (2014). The EPPO method applied in the field of organizations

University of Azuay. Retrieved from

http://dspace.uazuay.edu.ec/bitstream/datos/3538/1/10229.pdf

William, B. (2013). Human Resources Administration , 7th edition. McGraw-Hill.

Mexico.

15
ANNEXE
S

16
 ANNEX Nº 1: GROUP DYNAMICS

DYNAMIC Nº 1: I have a train

Definition

It is about observing the body coordination of each participant

Objectives: Group cohesion, auditory concentration and body coordination

Participants: Group, class.

Development

The entire group will be asked to repeat and move their arms in the position as indicated

in the phrase “I have a train that goes up, that goes down, that goes to the left and that

goes to the right.” After repeating this, it is done again faster but now the participants

must move their arms in the opposite position to the one mentioned in the phrase.

DYNAMIC Nº 2: I recognize your animal

Definition

It is about recognizing a person by the sound they make of an animal.

Objectives: Group cohesion, auditory concentration, perception of others through

another channel, relaxation.

Participants: Group, class.

Materials

Handkerchiefs or bandages to cover the eyes.

17
Development

The entire group sitting in a circle. A person walks through the center with his eyes

closed, sitting on the knees of someone in the group. The person on whom he has sat

imitates the sound of an animal. If the one with her eyes closed recognizes her, they

change places. If not, continue the walk, sitting on another.

DYNAMICS Nº 3: Mental Agility

a) The group will be asked the following questions and they must answer them :

 What color are the clouds?

 What color is snow?

 what color is cotton?

 What do cows eat ? A: The correct answer should be water, not milk.

b) The group is asked to think about the following instructions:

 A country that starts with the letter D

 Any number and add 5 to it

 Multiply the result by 2

 Subtract 4

 Divide the result by 2

 From the result, subtract the number you started with.

Finally, they are asked to raise their hands who got the number 3 and the country

Denmark. The few people who didn't raise their hands are those who think differently

than everyone else.

18
 ANNEX Nº 2: PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF THE METHOD

EPPO METHOD WORKSHOP

Aim:

Verify and reinforce the knowledge acquired by class members after the theoretical
dissertation of the group in charge of the method.

Procedure :

1. Divide the class into work groups of 6 to 8 participants.

2. Give the groups an application kit, which will contain:

a. Agreed objectives form

b. Performance evaluation format

c. Teaching materials

3. Goals will be established that each of the teams must meet in a maximum time of 10
minutes.

4. Finally, each subgroup will have between 2 and 3 minutes to determine the
evaluation of one of the members' performance.

19
 ANNEX Nº 2a: FORMAT OF THE DESCRIPTIVE PHRASES METHOD

1. CONSENSUS OBJECTIVES FORM

OBJECTIVE 1

EXCELLENT
WELL
REGULAR
BAD

2. EVALUATION FORMAT

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Collaborator name:

Post:

Area/department:

Mark with an x the rating given to the collaborator according to each objective met
between Excellent, Good, Average or Bad.

QUALIFICATION RESOURCES

YEA
AIM EXCELLENT WELL REGULAR BAD NO
H
Obj. 1

Obj. 2

Obj. 3

TOTAL

20