Evaluasi Manajemen Kinerja (Tatap Muka 13)

HAL-HAL yang Dievaluasi Keahlian (Skills)/Kemampuan (Abilities)/Kebutuhan (Needs)/Kendala (Traits of Individuals) Berkaitan dengan Kebijakan dan Budaya yang terdapat dalam Organisasi Pencapaian dan Output (Result in Outcomes)

Kewenangan Evaluasi Superior Only Subordinate(s) Peers/Co-workers Self Customers Others Subordinates All Stakeholders

Metode Pendekatan Review indikator internal industry atau organisasi sejenis (Consistent indicators across industry or similar organizations) Perbandingan seluruh indikator dalam ruang lingkup organisasi (Comparison of indicators over time in organization) Perbandingan indikator dengan standard industri (Comparisons with pre-determined standard)

Pendekatan Utama Comparative Attribute Behavioral

Permasalahan dan Kendala dalam Evaluasi dan Pengukuran Controllability Motivational impact “Fallout” Role Modeling Impact Reliability Relevance Control

Periode Evaluasi Probation Period Tahunan/Periodically/Annually (tanggal ulang tahun, tanggal penugasan) Semi-Periodik (Semi-annually) Timbulnya Kejadian (For Cause) Rutinitas dan Kelangsungan (On-going) Kebutuhan (As needed)

Metode Penilaian Kinerja Traditional Management-by-Objective Assessment Center Peer Review Panel Critical Events Upward Feedback 360 Degree

Tehnik Evaluasi Manajemen Kinerja Essay (open-ended) Management by Objective Ranking Paired Comparisons Forced Choice Forced Distribution Ratings: Checklist & Scales Behaviorally Anchored Ratings (BARS) Critical Incidents

Essay Technique Deskripsi kualitas dan kuantitas kinerja karyawan dalam 1 periode Deskripsi kekuatan dan kelemahan karyawan & manajemen. Pola dan analisis dekripsi karyawan yang potensial bagi organisasi. Kemampuan leadership yang diperlukan dalam pelaksanaan tugas Aktivitas yang direkomendasikan bagi pengembangan karyawan

Morgan Stanley’s Essay System Consider objectives identified in prior year’s Summary as well as this year’s objectives. Evaluation: Strengths Comments 1. 2. 3. Development Areas Comments

Management-By-Objective (Examples) Tingkat kontribusi karyawan dalam pencapaian keuntungan organisasi ditunjukkan dengan penurunan biaya di tingkat departement sebesar 3.5%. Sistem rekrutment karyawan memerlukan evaluasi tingkat eektivitasnya dalam satu periode tertentu (1 tahun)

Ranking (Example) Manajer melakukan ranking seluruh karyawan dari kriteria terbaik sampai dengan terburuk, dengan didasarkan pada: Performance Total Karyawan Kriteria Khusus (seperti komunikasi, customer relation skills, dll).

Paired Comparisons (Example) Rank each employee grouping overall or on a characteristic: Employee A and Employee B Employee B and Employee C Employee A and Employee C Employee C and Employee D Employee D and Employee A Employee D and Employee B etc.

Forced Distribution (Example) Pace each of the employees in your department in the following categories based upon overall or specific category performance: Top 10 percent: 10-49 percent: 50 – 89 percent: Bottom 10 percent: Outstanding: Average: Good: Below Average: Unacceptable:

General Electric’s Distribution The Vitality Curve PROMOTABILITY High Medium Limited Top Performers 10% Highly Valued 70% Least Effective 20%

Ratings Example (Checklists) Program Auditor: _____ 1. Unable to separate important from irrelevant data. _____ 2. Omits important info from summaries. _____ 3. Cross-references to improve reporting. _____ 4. Produces summaries which lead to good reports. _____ 5. Requires excessive instruction to produce work. _____ 6. Unable to reduce data to manageable form. _____ 7. Communicates well with peers on reports. _____ 8. Fails to meet deadlines. _____ 9. Provides detailed, professional work. _____ 10. Protects confidentiality of information.

Ratings Example: Scales Rate the employee’s behavior on the scale provided. Excellent Good Fair Poor N/A 4 3 2 1 ___ Reasoning ability 4 3 2 1 ___ Decisiveness in Decision-making 4 3 2 1 ___ Imagination & originality 4 3 2 1 ___ Ability to plan and control 4 3 2 1 ___ Cooperation with peers 4 3 2 1 ___ Cooperation with management 4 3 2 1 ___ Professionalism 4 3 2 1 ___ Interpersonal skills 4 3 2 1 ___

Citibank’s Performance Scorecard Measurements Below Par Par Above Par Standards Manager’s assessment Leadership, Ethics/Integrity Customer Interaction Community Involvement Contribution to Overall Business People Performance Teamwork Training & Development Employee Satisfaction Control Auditors’ standards Audit Legal Regulatory

Citibank’s Performance Scorecard Measurements Below Par Par Above Par Customer Satisfaction External company survey Goal of 80% Strategy Implementation Objective standards Households Cross-sell, splits, mergers Retail asset balances Market share Financial Objective stadards Revenue Expense Margin

Citibank’s Link to Compensation Ratings Bonus “Above Par” 30% “Par” 15% “Below Par” 0%

Overall Employee Rating: Microsoft’s PA System Overall Employee Rating: = Exceptional performance rarely achieved; precedent setting results 4.5 =Consistently exceeds all requirements & expectations work highly valued =Consistently exceeds position requirements and expectations; work often noteworthy 3.5 =Exceeds position requirements; successful in all objectives =Meets position requirements and expectations; meets most or all objectives; needs some development for quality 2.5 =Falls below performance standards and expectations; has performance deficiencies 1.0-2.0 =Does not meet minimum requirements in critical aspects of job

Microsoft: Adding Distribution to Rankings 4.0 + = 35% of employees 3.5 = 40% of employees 3.0 or lower = 25% of employees

Ratings Example: BARS Quantity of work Quality of work Judgment Indicate the appropriate level of performance on each factor: Quantity of work Quality of work Judgment Volume low & erratic Satisfactory steady volume Volume above expectations Results accurate and thorough Results generally inaccurate and not thorough Results always accurate; model work Systematic, analytical, good with complex problems Practical judgment, solves problems, difficulty with assessing relative value of factors Does not always show good judgment; problem analysis not always adequate

Microsoft Competency Toolkit FACTOR: Individual Excellence COMPETENCY: Intellectual Horsepower (is bright, intellectual sharp, learns quick) Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Structures basic info accurately; draws informed conclusions Analyzes & organizes complex info from specific content area, identifying key issues, assessing impact, drawing reasonable conclusions Analyzes, explains & draws logical conclusions based upon complex data from multiple content areas Rapidly identifies the significance of info & insightfully determines strategic action. With guidance, learns quickly on the job Learns new skills & ideas rapidly Rapidly learns & assimilates complex info involving unfamiliar situations & circumstances Rapidly learns new concepts & ideas; integrates & assimilates highly complex info across broad, multi-functional content areas Picks up new skills & understands ideas when structured Quickly adjusts thinking for new info or ideas Learns effectively from experience Is able to apply & explain logic related to problems

Microsoft Competency Toolkit FACTOR: Long-term Approach COMPETENCY: Developing people (provides job-relevant learning, developmental exercises, and feedback to enhance individual performance) Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Assigns challenging tasks and assignments that will help people develop their skills Takes time to learn about and understand direct reports; career goals Actively coaches direct reports how to get the most learning from their current assignments Holds managers accountable for developing people in their group/ organization Provides direction in correct performance of tasks and assignments Provides stretch jobs and assignments for direct reports to help them develop their skills Gives direct reports candid, thoughtful feedback on their strengths and weaknesses Identifies key people in his/her organization to assume high-level management responsibilities, and is an advocate for them when opportunities for advancement occur

Critical Incident Example Employee Name:___________________________________ Date of Incident:__________________ Type of Incident:___________________________________ Individuals Involved: Description of Incident: Outcome of Incident: Recommendations: Date Discussed with Employee:____________ Supervisor Signature:______________________________ Employee Signature: _____________________________

Focus Judgmental Developmental Time orientation Past performance Preparation for future performance Method Improving performance by changing behavior through rewards Improving performance by self- learning & personal growth Supervisor’s Role Judge who appraises Counselor who listens, helps, encourages & guides Subordinate’s Role Listener, reactor to, defender of past performance Actively involved in charting future plans