Checking – Part 2

 

Key Performance Factors

Introduction

1  of these notes defined checking (the measurement of something and a comparison of the result of the measurement with a standard), listed five stages in checking, and discussed the two major processes in checking (measuring and evaluating).

2 The notes listed the four inevitable activities involved in all checking and discussed some important ideas in measurement.

3 The Part 1 notes then discussed why check something, when to check, who should check, and who should receive the check.

4 These notes (Part Two) discuss what to check. Then the evaluation part of the checking process and cover purpose, the need for Subordinates to accept, and when they discuss – who should know of the check first and checking to controlling.

What to Check

Check a Plan and/or a Result

5 People can check on (a) a plan to achieve an (end) objective and/or (b) the results achieved with respect to an end objective or any stage along the way.

Continue reading

Prepare a Standard Layout for Reports – or, at least, some Aspects of Reports

1 An Organisation which has a standard layout for reports will help Report Writers, Typists, and Readers.

2 Report Writers can use a standard layout as a framework to help them decide how to arrange their evidence and ideas. The standard layout help Typists to know how to lay out each report once they receive general in­structions. Readers of Reports with a standard layout will know where to look to find particular types of information. Thus all three classes of people will save their time if a standard layout exists and people use it.

The following link gives –

Return to top of page

Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Training

A Meaning for Evaluation

1 These notes defines evaluation as - the measurement of something and a comparison of the result of the measurement with a standard.

2 Appendix A explains some of the significant words of this definition.

Four Inevitable Activities of Evaluating

3 The following identifies four activities which must occur wherever evaluation takes place.

(a) Decide on a factor (or factors) to evaluate something. The stage of choosing a factor equals choosing a (measurement) scale since the concept of a factor implies some measurement. The factor exists or it does not exist (an example of a classification scale).*

(b) Identify a standard – on the scale chosen. Sometimes the Evalua­tor will select a point, sometimes a band. Sometimes someone else will have already chosen a standard and will expect the Evaluator to use that standard.

(c) Measure performance. Measuring performance involves some tricky problems. (The  notes “Introduction to Measurement” discusses some of the problems involved.)

(d) Compare performance with standard. This activity involves draw­ing a conclusion – once someone relates the performance on the scale with the standard on the same scale.

Errors can occur in any One of the Inevitable Activities

4 The four inevitable activities occur in any evaluation. Many people do not realise that they exist. Although it seems quite obvious when someone points them out, often people do not analyse the evaluation process system­atically.

5 Something can go wrong with any one of the activities listed and then, a wrong evaluation can occur.

Continue reading

Definition – Evaluating

Evaluating – Any activity which tries to (a) measure the performance of something and (b) compare the performance with a standard.

Notes

Activity

1 The definition describes evaluating as an activity which includes the activities of measuring and comparing.

Tries

2 This activity tries to achieve a comparison and a measurement. This definition calls the achievement, an evaluation i.e. successful evalu­ating. However the definition does not necessarily define a wise or good evaluation.

Measure

3 This definition uses the following definition of a measurement the assessment of the class, magnitude, or quantity of anything.

Performance

4 The activity of measuring relates to a something – usually the per­formance of something.

5 Examples. Measure the distance of something, the time to do something, the number of something, the class (eg. col­our) of something.

Continue reading

Definition – Evaluation

Evaluation – the conclusion drawn from comparing a result with a standard.

Notes

Result

1 A measurement of performance or a something produces a result i.e. a point or band on a scale.

Standard

2 This definition uses the following definition of a standard – a point on, or part of, a scale which someone believes will help evaluate progress toward an objective.

Evaluating and Evaluation

3 The process of evaluating – if successful – leads to an evaluation. However an evaluation will not necessarily rate as a good or wise evaluation.

4 Example. A poor evaluation will exist if it uses a wrong measurement and/or a poor standard.

Return to top of page

Definition – Standard

1 Standard – a point or band on a scale which someone believes will help evaluate progress toward an objective.

Notes

“A Scale”

2 A standard must involve something which people (or something) can measure i.e. they (or some instrument) measures something by comparing it with a scale. Once someone or something has carried out a measure­ment, someone or something can check if the measurement equals the relevant standard – on the same scale.

3 If the measurement discloses that something has reached the stan­dard, then it shows progress toward an objective. If the measure does not reach the standard, it suggests less progress toward any objective connected with the standard.

“Someone believes will help evaluate progress toward an objective”

4 People who use a standard believe that if a people (or something) reach or achieve the standard, it will help them (or it) to achieve other objectives.

5 Examples. (a) If Mary heats an iron bar to a specific temperature (the standard) it will – Break less easily i.e. achieve greater strength.   (b) If Peter can do fifty push ups (a standard) he will – Play football better.

Continue reading

Distinction between Objective and Standard

A Meaning for Objective and Standard

1 Objective – A future result which someone believes someone should try to achieve.

2 Standard – A point or band on a scale that will help someone evaluate progress (or lack of it) toward an objective  .

A Relationship between Objective and Standard

3 From the above definitions, the following relationship exists – A standard plus an intention by someone to achieve the standard becomes an objective  fir that person .

4 Thus a standard would become an objective when someone believes that someone, not necessarily, themselves should try to achieve that par­ticular standard.

5 Thus a point on a scale can exist (standard) but no-one tries to achieve that point or no-one believes that anyone else should try to achieve it. In such a case the standard does not also fall into the category of an objective.

Continue reading

Framework – Evaluation: Four Inevitable Activities

1 The following four inevitable activities must occur in evaluating anything.

(a) Select a Scale

(b) Measure Performance

(c) Set a Standard

(d) Compare Performance Measurement with the Standard

Application

2 In evaluating anything, something can go wrong with any one of the four activities. A Manager can:

(a) select the wrong scale (e.g. measure a Sales Representative’s performance by sales as opposed to profitable sales).

(b)  measure performance incorrectly (e.g. sales to the Representative’s territory wrongly allocated to a different Representative.)

(c)  select an inappropriate standard and therefore make a decision which rests on an incorrect evaluation (e.g. three large factories close down in the Representative’s sales territory and no new ones open and the Company uses the same standard as the previous year).

(d) make some error in comparing the performance measure with the standard.

3 All too often people evaluate something without realising one or more of the inevitable activities involved.

4 A thorough recall and understanding of this framework will help to (a) analyse errors/weaknesses in evaluating and (b) plan better evaluations.

Return to top of page

Evaluation of People

Introduction

1 These notes describe evaluation, its processes, and its important elements. They identify the common objectives of evaluation and consider various types of evaluations, particularly formal ones. These notes also consider the difficult problems of measuring aspects of people and determining which aspects to measure, together with methods of reducing some inaccuracies in many of the methods.

2 They also consider why two people evaluate the same person differently and who people should evaluate, together with actions which should follow evaluation.

A Definition of Evaluation

3 These notes define an evaluation as – the Conclustion drawn from comparing a Result (or a Measurement) with a Standard

4 Evaluation occurs as the second part of the checking process and must involve-

(a) a scale, common to both the performance result and the standard.

(b) a result* – the measurement of performance (i.e. a point, or band, on a scale.

(c) a standard – a point on, or part of, a scale which someone believes will help evaluate progress toward an objective.

5 People should note that a measurement of performance will not evaluate anything. Continue reading

Introduction to Measurement

Introduction

1 Managers should understand the underlying structure of measurement in order to appreciate the limitations of the measuring devices they have. These notes define  measurement and scales. They discuss four major types of scales and various properties which help to distinguish other types of scales. They consider Rating and Ranking, together with the advantages of one as opposed to the other, and suggest when to use each of them.

2 The use of objects as a basis for classification introduces the concept of input-output scales which helps to show the further complexity of scales. They warn people about the danger of giving qualitative scales quantitative values and measuring scales which give the impression of evaluation.

Managers should understand the Underlying Bases of Measurement

3 All Managers have to measure things in order to carry out the checking part of Managing; i.e. they have to find out: (a) what a person (or process, or machine, etc.) has done; and/or (b) the present state of a person (product, machine, etc.).

4 Managers will accept that they measure things and performances but few understand the underlying structure and bases of measuring. They only half realise the problems they face in measuring, especially since they have to use many vague and inaccurate measuring devices.

5 Managers must find better methods of measurement if they intend to improve their Managing. An understanding of the structure underlying measurement should help Managers realise this point and help to achieve better measuring methods.

Continue reading