Matriz de Desempeño vs Potencial de las Personas en el Trabajo Matrix. Performance vs Individual Potential at Work

estion del GOn how to measure performance, in this blog I have already explained , so I will explain how to measure the human capability at work.

Respecto a cómo medir el desempeño, en éste blog lo ya he explicado, por lo que explicaré cómo medir el potencial.

Human Capability At Work / Potencial de las Personas en el Trabajo

It is mainly related to three factors /Está relacionado principalmente a tres  factores:

  1. Complejidad del  Procesamiento Mental (CPM): A mayor complejidad del procesamiento mental de la persona,  mayor es su potencial. Existe al menos cuatro niveles de procesamiento mental (de Menor a Mayor):
Complexity of Mental Processing (CPM Complexity of Mental Processing (CPM): The greater complexity of mental processing of the person, the greater its potential. There are at least four levels of mental processing (Low to High): The greater complexity of mental processing of the person, the greater its potential. There are at least four levels of mental processing (Low to High ) 
  1. Procesamiento Declarativo.
  2. Proceso Acumulativo.
  3. En Serie.
  4. En Paralelo, éste último es el de mayor complejidad  e.g. Una persona con éste CPM expone su posición examinando una cantidad de otras posiciones / opiniones también posibles. Las posibles líneas de pensamiento las mantiene en paralelo y es capaz de conectarlas entre sí. Es decir,  es capaz de encontrar elementos en común  en la diversidad. Construye un juicio a partir de múltiples puntos de vistas.

2. Valores: La confianza y seguridad mutua, sinceridad,  ganas de hacer las cosas, lo que se conoce como predisposición positiva. Todos hemos sido testigo de que estos valores están presentes en las personas que destacan.  Una persona con estos valores siempre va a aprender y será un talento, obviamente en la medida que adquiera experiencia y conocimientos (madurez).

Values: Trust and mutual security. Sincerity, The will to do things, what is known as positive bias. We've all seen that these values are present in people who stand out. A person with these values will always be a learning and talent obviously far also gain experience and knowledge.

3. Conductas No Disruptivas: Las personas que por arrogancia o psicopatías tienen conductas disruptivas, no pueden armar equipos o llevar una sana convivencia con sus compañeros. Lamentablemente estas personas suelen ser como  un cáncer  dentro de una organización. Una alternativa es mantenerlas en trabajos aislados (por ejemplo encargarles estudios o tareas especializadas) pero  nunca dejar que ellos lideren o tengan responsabilidad sobre otras personas.  Al contrario las personas que se adaptan, no difunden rumores, trabajan en equipo, empoderan, son  generosos con su conocimientos, lideran, son quienes prosperan y agregan valor para sí y la organización.

No disruptive behavior : People who have psychopathic or arrogance have  disruptive behavior, cannot build teams neither a healthy coexistence with their peers. These personalities: Unfortunately often like a cancer within a organization . An alternative is to keep them in work Isolated (FOR EXAMPLE Studies position) on But never let them lead or have responsibility for others. Unlike people who adapt, no spread rumors , work in teams, empowering , generous child with his knowledge, leading son who thrive and add value for themselves and the organization s interesados les dejo mi mail: martin.torres@inovagestion.cl

(source: Jaques & Cason).

Compelling Performance Appraisal

 

People are reluctant to have a performance review driven by  esoteric methods or arbitrary data. On the contrary, if the methodology is accepted objective and reliable by  workers or colleagues, performance evaluation it is taken as a way to give them recognition for their achievements, which impacts positively on the commitment.

A very good tool for measuring individual performance is the use of Dashboards or Scorecard(1) made with quantitative performance indicators. (1) The term Scorecard belongs to Balanced Scorecard authors Norton & Kaplan.

I use Norton and Kaplan methodology to build HR dashboards with objective, relevant and measurable indicators.

Example of an Individual HR Scorecard

Ideally designed dashboards for managers with relevant indicators for business. I mean they are related to the success or business result. These indicators must be quantifiable and objective, i.e., that its measurement NOT depend on who is measuring, so that people are safe that its assessment is not subject to arbitrary or prejudiced by his (her) supervisor. In addition, the scorecard performance, specific indicators should consider both specif  and group measures. The latter, I recommend it because what is really important in a company are its key processes, i.e. sales, customer service, quality control, to name the most obvious. Therefore it is important that those involved in these processes share performance indicators, although in different magnitudes. In these processes concur a collective effort of the organization, for example the commercial department, collections, treasury, accounting, sales management, marketing, quality control, etc.

Keep it simple and concentrate on what matters

With this design, a medium sized company , 100 to 150 people , no need to create and manage a hundred indicators for performance management system . This approach has the added advantage of providing a system in which the company is measured with common goals which encourages coordination and communication between areas of the company. And involve  people in organization strategy. If you do not, your company is in serious problem.

Performance Management: Help motivate or to frustrate people?

 

Usually companies apply performance management tools based on subjective indicators, or they use ambiguous scales for measurement (e.g. “lower than expected”; “meets expected”, “good”; “outstanding”). With this, the objectivity is lost, because there is not an unique meaning for words like “good” or “excellent”. This is relevant because objectivity and credibility are important requirements for a performance management system.

The workers avoid to attend the performance interview, as they perceive that it does not add value, and they feel that it is a stressful situation, negative to their work environment and engagement. As a result, the leaders of the organization show reluctant to apply performance evaluation.

How can we avoid falling into this situation?

Unfortunately there is no single recipe or solution to this problem, since this is a result of several factors; which will be identified in order of importance:

  1. Lack off an organizational measure culture.
  2. Ambiguous mission statements or without objectives
  3. Supervisors not assuming their coach role.

If you want read more , please Like the article