The Article & Link of IRRICA.COM

Terminology and Meta Model of PAS PDF Print E-mail
Written by Angela Tan, Taiwan   
Friday, 30 September 2011 18:59

 

 

 

Performance Appraisal Terminology and Meta Model

There is much variety in performance management processes. Industry, occupation, company size, and the level and type of employee being appraised, as well as company culture and management philosophy are among the range of factors that can shape the level of formality and the specific composition of an employee performance management process. While EPM processes and appraisal formats vary widely, HR-XML's EPMResult specification is designed to be sufficiently flexible to accommodate a wide variety of implementation patterns -- from simple appraisals, to those with ratings across multiple dimensions and involving multiple raters.

The meta-model shown in Figure below “Performance Appraisal Meta Model” shows some of the possible components of performance result and how they rate to one another. These high-level components are explained in the paragraphs that follow.

 

Performance Appraisal Meta Model

Figure 15.1. Performance Appraisal Meta Model

 

 

  • Objective Plan.  Employee performance management (EPM) systems and various project management systems can be generators of individual objective plans. These plans can vary detail, but some may specify specific metrics with which to measure achievement against an objective. Objectives can be logically grouped with a broad objective containing sub-objectives.

  • Objective Result.  Objective results can include results set against metrics set out in an objective plan as well as ratings with respect to the achievement of objectives. Like objective targets set out in an objective plan, objective results can include ratings/measures on the achievement of sub-objectives that roll-up in to an overall rating or measure for an objective category.

  • Competency Ratings.  Employees are usually rated with respect to competencies required for the effective performance of the positions/roles they hold. Competencies (and ratings thereof) can be grouped so that some competencies are referenced as a component of a broader competency group or category. Rather than rate competencies directly, raters sometimes are asked to evaluate "behavioral indicators" of a competency -- the observable activities/behavior of an employee that evidence a competency. There also may be different categories of competency ratings. For instance, one section of an appraisal may pertain to "skills" whereas another may pertain to "mission and values".

  • Overall RatingFor compensation purposes, for ranking top performers within job categories, and to provide a boiled-down indicator of an employee's effectiveness, an overall rating (a numeric or descriptive rating) usually is an output of a performance management process. In some cases, the overall rating is a mathematic computation based on a roll-up of ratings for objectives.

  • Development Plan. A development plan/goal may be set when appraisal identifies a gap between the employee's competencies and position requirements or when new competencies or increased proficiency is required for a new role.

  • Position Competency Model.  Competency ratings, and to an extent objectives, stem from either a formal or implied profile or model of position requirements. This profile for the position is referred to as a "position competency model." See PositionCompetencyModel noun.

  • Remuneration Recommendation. This is the communication of a recommended pay increase or adjustment on the based on the results of a performance management process. The remuneration recommendation contains the employee's overall rating, ratings/results against objectives, plus a recommended pay increase or incentive payout. Typically, the supervisor of the employee being rated would generate the remuneration recommendation and that supervisor's manager would be the one to act upon it (approve, amend, etc.).

Performance Appraisal Terminology

  • Multi-Rater Assessments / 360 Degree Reviews. A multi-rater review is a process under which an employee is evaluated by more than one person. An example of a multi-rater review approach is "360 degree" review. Under a 360 degree review, an employee receives feedback from a range of stakeholders, including peers, subordinates, supervisors, and customers. Note that 360 degree reviews are more commonly used for developmental and feedback purposes than for performance appraisal. The EPMResult noun includes structures intended to support multi-rater and simple review processes.

  • Stack Ranking. A "stack rank" refers to a unique cardinal position for each person within a designated comparison group. "Stack ranking" also sometimes is referred to as "forced ranking". Within HR-XML's data model, a stack rank is an optional component within "Overall Rating"

 

Last Updated on Thursday, 03 November 2011 17:50
 
Under Copyright © 2017 www.irrica.com. All Right Reserved By IRRICA Software Team. IRRICA.com is the Web Site provided in all of Software Engineering Development(SED) and all of Enhanced Business Implementation(EBI) for Enterprise Software Industry World.
For more information, please issued your enquiry at e-mail: office@irrica.com