What Are Qualitative Indicators?

A qualitative index refers to an evaluation index that cannot be directly quantified but needs to be quantified through other means. For educational thoughts, teaching attitudes, and extra-curricular tutoring that are difficult to make quantitative assessments, generally, fuzzy level evaluation can be performed first, and then quantified. The disadvantage is that it is easy to bring in subjective factors of the evaluator, and the discrimination and reliability of the index are poor, which will inevitably affect the objectivity of the evaluation. ^[1]

Qualitative indicators

due to

In order for qualitative indicators to be evaluated more accurately, such generalities and ambiguities must be minimized. A very natural way of thinking is to "divide down", find out the important aspects of a large qualitative index and can conduct specific assessments, and then develop specific measurable assessment standards for each aspect. Therefore, the general idea of formulating the assessment criteria for qualitative indicators is: first, further refine the qualitative indicators into multiple assessable aspects, that is, the assessment dimension; second, for each assessable dimension, try to use data and facts to formulate clear and Specific assessment criteria.

Step 1: Develop the evaluation dimensions of qualitative indicators, and determine the weight of each dimension according to the degree of importance.

The inspection of a qualitative work is nothing more than five angles of time, quality, quantity, cost and risk. This provides a valuable way of thinking for us to determine the assessment dimension of qualitative indicators.

We can set the assessment dimensions of qualitative indicators from these perspectives.

For example: assessment dimension time quality quantity cost risk

Examples of assessment dimensions

Plan completion rate, time limit, timeliness, completion time, approval time, start time, end time and other key results of evaluation results, inspection results, complaints, satisfaction, accuracy, achievement rate, completion, pass rate, turnover times, Rates, effects, etc., hours, times, number of people, items, quotas, and other expenses, budget achievement rate, and other error rates, number of errors, etc.

What needs to be emphasized is that the assessment dimension should be a key link or an important aspect that reflects the completion of qualitative indicators, or the main aspect of the appraisers' job requirements for the appraisers, which should fully reflect the performance of the appraisers. In addition, the assessment dimension should be the result of agreement between the assessor and the assessee.

After determining the assessment dimensions, the weights of each dimension should also be set according to the importance of each dimension.

For example: An important task of a company's R & D manager during an assessment period is to establish a company's R & D management system. Then the assessment of this work is obviously only a qualitative assessment. Using the above method, after discussions between the two parties in the assessment, it was decided to examine the completion of this qualitative indicator from the three most important aspects, as shown in the following table:

Qualitative index assessment dimension item weight

R & D management system establishment status evaluation plan completion status 20%

Evaluation of "R & D Management System" 40%

Implementation of operation effect evaluation 40%

The determination of the assessment dimension divides a qualitative index into several important aspects and examines them separately, so that the assessment of the qualitative index is refined, which reduces the generality and ambiguity of the overall assessment of the qualitative index; it also makes the examinee clear the superior The main aspect of their job requirements is to allow them to allocate their time and energy reasonably to carry out their work.

Step 2: Set specific assessment standards for each assessment dimension.

After the assessment dimension is determined, it is necessary to formulate corresponding assessment methods and establish corresponding assessment standards for each assessment dimension, so that the assessment is operable, and at the same time, the impact of subjective factors on the score is minimized.

There are three ways to formulate the assessment standards: grade description method, expected description method and key event method.

Method 1: Hierarchical Description

The grade description method is a method of grading the work results or the performance of the work, and specifically and clearly defining the data or facts at each level, so as to evaluate the actual work completion of the assessees.

Hierarchical description is suitable for assessing tasks that are frequently or repeatedly performed, because it is possible to clearly describe the differences in levels with data or facts. In the specific operation, it is recommended to be divided into five levels: "Excellent", "Good", "General", "Passing" and "Failing". In order to simplify the operation, only the "passing standards" and "good standards" can be specified , According to the progressive relationship between the various levels, to distinguish the five levels.

Examples are as follows:

Qualitative index assessment dimension sub-item weight assessment criteria

R & D management system establishment status evaluation plan completion status 20%

Evaluation of "R & D Management System" 40%

Implementation of operation effect evaluation 40%

Pass below 60 points

60-69 points Fair

70-79 points are good

80-89 points

90-100 points

Passing standard: The system compiling basically meets the requirements for compiling the company's system; the content is comprehensive and standardized; after 3 times of modification, it was finally approved by the company management committee.

Good standards: The system compiles completely in compliance with the requirements of the company system; the content is rigorous, meticulous, standardized and reasonable, and considered carefully; the operability is strong; and it is approved by the company management committee once.

The grade description method through the specific definition of each level, so that there is a more objective basis in the assessment, to a certain extent, limit the appraisal of the randomness of the scorers. What's more important is that because the "passing standards" and "good standards" are clearly defined, the appraisers clarify the requirements of their superiors on their work and the direction of their efforts, which is conducive to the appraisers' continuous improvement of their performance Level.

Method 2: Expected description

The expectation description method is a method for the two parties to define the expected standards to be achieved in the work, and then to evaluate the performance of the assessees based on the actual completion of the assessees and the expected standards.

In actual work, sometimes there are some evaluations of new tasks or new jobs. At this time, the assessment parties often have no or few precedents to follow, and the assessment standards are often lacking in data and facts. In this case, the grade Descriptive methods are powerless. Therefore, it is recommended to use the expectation description method, that is, to provide the basis for evaluating the performance of the appraisal by the appraisal parties as clearly and clearly as possible.

E.g:

Qualitative index assessment dimension sub-item weight assessment criteria

R & D management system establishment status evaluation plan completion status 20%

Evaluation of "R & D Management System" 40%

Implementation of operation effect evaluation 40%

60 points below expectations

60-69 points meet expectations

70-79 points higher than expected

80-89 points are much higher than expected

90-100 points

Expected standards: Can effectively publicize relevant systems and procedures to relevant personnel through training, Q & A, etc .; can carry out the R & D management system in the company, and the trial operation is relatively smooth; can solve some problems in the trial operation process in time, The original plan was refined and improved according to the conditions in the trial operation. Through the trial operation, the company's R & D management work can be carried out in a more standardized and orderly manner, it can effectively promote the R & D work, and see preliminary results.

Although the prospective description method only describes one criterion, it is still better than no criterion, and can also limit the random score of the examiner to a certain extent. What's more important is that through the formulation of the expected standards, the appraisal clarified the expectations and requirements of the superior, which is undoubtedly very important when the subordinates face new jobs or new tasks.

Method 3: Key event method

The key event method is a method for assessing the performance of the assessees by formulating corresponding deduction points and extra points for key events at work.

The key event method is applicable to situations where the key events can fully reflect the work performance or performance of the appraised person. E.g:

Qualitative index assessment standards

Safety management work evaluation will deduct 20 points for each major safety accident, and 5 points for a general safety accident. A perfect score of 100 points, up to the point of deduction.

The above introduces the idea of how to evaluate the qualitative indicators and some specific operating methods for your reference. I believe that in your management practice, every manager will gradually find out some methods to effectively evaluate the qualitative indicators suitable for the situation of your company.

Finally, it must be emphasized that managers must clearly define the significance of qualitative index assessment standards. The formulation of assessment criteria for qualitative indicators, on the one hand, through the development of clear and specific assessment standards, makes the assessment of qualitative indicators as objective and fair as possible, easy to operate, and reduces disputes caused by assessment. On the other hand, the appraisers are also made aware of the requirements or expectations of their superiors for their work, so as to clarify the direction of their work efforts. Obviously, the latter is more significant for management. Because the assessment is not the purpose, but the means, the fundamental purpose of the assessment is to improve the performance level of the employees, and the appraisers fully understand the requirements or expectations of their superiors for their work, which will undoubtedly play a very important role in completing their work with high quality.