Supervisors - Goals and Objectives Method
Measuring performance using goals and objectives seeks to measure employee
performance by examining the extent to which predetermined work
goals, special projects and key work duties have been met. Objectives are based off of agency
performance measures and subsequent departmental goals. Objectives
and strategies are cascaded down and communicated to employees where job
specific goals, special projects and key work duties are established
jointly with the supervisor.
Once a goal, special project or key work duty is agreed upon, critical skills sets
(i.e. competencies),
training programs, conferences, mentors etc., are identified to help
employees self-audit; that is, to manage their goals and developed
critical competencies needed to achieve the objectives. The EPDS is
designed to help facilitate, identify, catalogue and specify employee
strengths. It is also a tool to help promote development in areas
of weaknesses.
Although employees "self-audit", the EPDS is a co-managed system where supervisors and employees are expected to monitor goal progress and personal development together.
Advantages
-
The EPDS approach overcomes some of the problems that arise as a result of assuming the employee traits needed for job success. Instead traits are reliably identified and communicated within the competency framework using qualitative and/or qualitative measures.
-
Instead of assuming traits, goal-based measures are defined, agreed upon method and concentrate on actual outcomes.
-
If the employee meets or exceeds the set objectives, then he or she has demonstrated an acceptable level of job performance. Employees are judged according to real outcomes connected to divisional/agency performance measures, and not on their potential for success, or on someone's subjective opinion of their abilities.
-
The guiding principle of the EPDS approach is that goal-based results can be observed, whereas the traits and attributes of employees (which may or may not contribute to performance) must be guessed at or inferred. Instead, traits and attributes are identified as critical skill-sets need to achieve stated goals.
-
A goal-based method recognizes the fact that it is difficult to neatly dissect all the complex and varied elements that go to make up employee performance.
-
Goal-based advocates claim that the performance of employees cannot be broken up into so many constituent parts - as one might take apart an engine to study it. But put all the parts together and the performance may be directly observed and measured.
Disadvantages
-
Goal-based methods of performance assessment can give employees a satisfying sense of autonomy and achievement. But on the downside, they can lead to unrealistic expectations about what can and cannot be reasonably accomplished. -
Supervisors and employees must have very good "reality checking" skills to use goal-based performance assessment methods. They will need these skills during the initial stage of objective setting, and for the purposes of self-auditing and self-monitoring.
-
Unfortunately, research studies have shown repeatedly that human beings tend to lack the skills needed to do their own "reality checking". Nor are these skills easily conveyed by training. Reality itself is an intensely personal experience, prone to all forms of perceptual bias.
-
One of the strengths of the goal-based method is the clarity of purpose that flows from a set of well-articulated objectives. But this can be a source of weakness also. It has become very apparent that the modern organization must be flexible to survive. Objectives, by their very nature, tend to impose a certain rigidity.
-
Of course, the obvious answer is to make the objectives more fluid and yielding. But the penalty for fluidity is loss of clarity. Variable objectives may cause employee confusion. It is also possible that fluid objectives may be distorted to disguise or justify failures in performance.
