This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the ConceptDraw site you are agreeing to our Use of Site Cookies.
"Subjective performance evaluation allows the use of a subtler, more balanced assessment of employee performance, and is typically used for more complex jobs where comprehensive objective measures are difficult to specify and/ or measure. Whilst often the only feasible method, the attendant problems with subjective performance evaluation have resulted in a variety of incentive structures and supervisory schemes. One problem, for example, is that supervisors may under-report performance in order to save on wages, if they are in some way residual claimants, or perhaps rewarded on the basis of cost savings. This tendency is of course to some extent offset by the danger of retaliation and/ or demotivation of the employee, if the supervisor is responsible for that employee’s output. ...
Another problem relates to what is known as the "compression of ratings". Two related influences—centrality bias, and leniency bias—have been documented ... The former results from supervisors being reluctant to distinguish critically between workers (perhaps for fear of destroying team spirit), while the latter derives from supervisors being averse to offering poor ratings to subordinates, especially where these ratings are used to determine pay, not least because bad evaluations may be demotivating rather than motivating. However, these biases introduce noise into the relationship between pay and effort, reducing the incentive effect of performance-related pay. ... this is the reason for the common separation of evaluations and pay, with evaluations primarily used to allocate training.
Finally, while the problem of compression of ratings originates on the supervisor-side, related effects occur when workers actively attempt to influence the appraisals supervisors give, either by influencing the performance information going to the supervisor: multitasking (focussing on the more visibly productive activities...), or by working “too hard” to signal worker quality or create a good impression...; or by influencing the evaluation of it, e.g., by "currying influence"... or by outright bribery..." [Principal–agent problem. Wikipedia]
The example "Person demotivated by evaluation - Fault tree analysis diagram" was created using the ConceptDraw PRO diagramming and vector drawing software extended with the Fault Tree Analysis Diagrams solution from the Engineering area of ConceptDraw Solution Park.
FTA diagram
FTA diagram, undeveloped event, inhibit gate, event, conditional event, basic event, basic initiating fault, failure event, OR gate, AND gate,

How To Create Root Cause Analysis Diagram Using ConceptDraw Office

Root Cause Analysis diagram is used to analyze the root causes of factors that influence the problem. If the certain factor is the root cause, this mean that its vanishing will help to prevent the further recurrence of the problem. Root Cause diagram helps to identify the root causes for a factor and then propose possible corrective actions. A diagram is constructed separately for each high priority factor. The ability to create a RCA tree diagram from a mind map is supported by the ConceptDraw Seven Management and Planning Tools solution.

mind map, mindmap Education Mind Maps

mind map, mindmap
This solution extends ConceptDraw MINDMAP software with scientific and educational mind maps for educational documents, presentations, and websites.