Translated from 日本語 • View original Colorkrew's evaluation system is a little different from the usual. The most important feature is that you "choose by yourself" who evaluates you.
Essentially, this is a way of thinking that aims for a fair 360-degree evaluation, but I think that if you simply do a democratic 360-degree evaluation, the company's evaluation accuracy will fail, so I would like to write about it this time.
Evolution of Japan's Evaluation System
In Japan, seniority-based evaluation systems and personnel were considered mainstream until the bursting of the bubble. This model was very suitable for Japan, which has achieved rapid growth mainly in the manufacturing industry.
It is an era in which it is effective to work steadily on the premise that corporate growth is "accumulation of improvements" and that employees have a common background as Japanese. After the bursting of the bubble, many products reached maturity, and the market demanded more innovation.
As a result, the previous growth model of Japanese companies simply did not work in the world, and performance evaluation began to be incorporated into human resources. Currently, most companies are evaluated by target registration.
American Rating System
Since the 20th century, the world economy has always been led by Europe and the United States. Among them, the United States is a superpower and has been a driving force in innovation related to the evaluation system, so I would like to take a look at the evaluation system in the United States.
In the United States, it seems that more than half of the companies already adopted performance-based evaluations in the 1940s.
And MBO (Management by objectives), which is a goal registration that many companies in Japan have adopted, was proposed in 1954 by Peter Drucker, a master of management theory.
Later, Andy Globe, the third-generation CEO of Intel, advocated OKR (Objectives and Key Results), which was introduced by tech companies such as Google in the 2000s, and has become the mainstream of the evaluation system.
Movement to correct the excessive evaluation system
On the other hand, there is also a movement to abolish excessive evaluation in MBO and OKR.
With the idea of "no rating", it means to stop evaluating based on scores and ranks. No-rating sounds like "not evaluating", but in fact, we do evaluate human resources.
It is important to stop giving scores and ranks, and the rest is to change from relative evaluation to absolute evaluation.
Still, in the end, it is the boss who evaluates
We have seen the changes in the evaluation system so far, but there is one thing that has not changed.
That is, "the evaluation is done by the boss". I think it makes sense to some extent for the boss to evaluate it.
In that company, people who have been evaluated in the past become managers and bosses, so bosses tend to understand the company's values more than their subordinates.
Personnel and evaluation systems should be based on the company's values, and since the boss is a senior business person, if you choose an evaluation person, the boss will be a reasonable choice.
However, there is one problem that cannot be avoided.
The quality of the evaluation depends on the level of the boss
I have experience with it, but when my boss changes, my evaluation can change 180 degrees. This happens even though personal values do not change in an instant.
It is due to the fact that the evaluation depends on the personal judgment of the boss, whether good or bad. Judgment sounds good, but personal feelings, in layman's terms, likes and dislikes and preferences affect it.
The important thing in evaluation is convincing
I always think that it is ultimately difficult to evaluate people.
There **can be no perfection. ** I think that correct evaluation is no longer the domain of God. There is no right answer to the evaluation system.
It is necessary to think about various factors and brush them up, but the most important thing for me is "sense of satisfaction".
At Karakul, we recently took a questionnaire on human resource evaluation. Regarding the degree of satisfaction, 85% of employees answered that they were satisfied with their evaluation.
I think this is a high level, but 15% were "not convinced" or "not convinced at all", so I felt that there is still a long way to go before an evaluation system that everyone is satisfied with.
Caracul's Evaluation System
I have written several about the evaluation system of Karakul in the past, so if you are interested, I would like you to take a look at it.
▼About the evaluation system https://blog.colorkrew.com/super_flat08/
▼About the coach system https://blog.colorkrew.com/super_flat07/
How does a sense of satisfaction arise?
Why is Carakul's relatively "high sense of satisfaction in human resource evaluation" born? I think this is largely due to the fact that you choose your own evaluator. In a normal company, the boss, who is the evaluator, cannot choose himself, so that is the big difference.
In addition, the person himself can be present at the final evaluation and can give his or her own opinion if he thinks it is necessary. Coaches are also required to give feedback to everyone, including those who are not present at the final evaluation.
These are based on one of Karakul's values, "openness". I think that being able to see parts that cannot be seen in a normal company leads to a sense of satisfaction.
Limitations of 360-degree evaluation for choosing your own evaluator
I am often asked, "If you choose your own evaluator, don't you choose someone who is convenient for you?"
In conclusion, by "opening up the selected evaluator and all the contents of the evaluation", self-discipline will naturally work for everyone, and it does not seem to be a big problem. This may be what it means to not know until you try it.
Still, this mechanism has its limitations. It is...
It is difficult to raise a person with a higher grade
I feel a little sympathy for people with low grades and want to raise them.
As a result, everyone gradually moves closer to the central grade.
This is a phenomenon that often manifests group psychology.
The Role of Management
Karakul's personnel and evaluation system is operated with the participation of all members with liberal ideas. It is a major prerequisite that 90% of the personnel and evaluation system is operated by everyone. Without it, it will not be a convincing system.
However, there are actually several points where management should play an important role.
Selecting the person you want to raise to the highest grade first.
Never promote someone who does not share your values, even if you are highly skilled.
Reflect the value of occupations that change with the times in the evaluation
Adjust if you lose your balance
These are not decided by management and intervening on their own, but by influencing the personnel system operated by the entire team.
At Caracle, the place where the final decision on the evaluation is made is called the "personnel meeting", and here it is run mainly by the members of the management project, of whom I am the leader.
Needless to say, we will be as open as possible about what was discussed here.
▼ The SNS-type goal management tool "Goalous" operated by Colorkrew can visualize the activity process and effectively use it for evaluation.
