While scholars have been studying performance management and appraisal issues for decades, one very basic question has eluded them, as well as practitioners – what should organisations really measure: employee traits, behaviours, or outcomes? Clearly, each has its own pros and cons, and measuring the right thing(s) is critical to effective management. So, which of these should organisations measure?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

? It could be argued that traits are all that need to be measured, since an individual
cannot possibly perform a job appropriately unless he/she has the right trait(s).
So, for example, an individual who is not conscientious is not likely to complete
his or her tasks properly, or on time.
? On the other hand, as many have argued, having the traits does not mean much, if
the employee does not demonstrate the right behaviours. So, this group argues,
that what we should really be measuring are the employee’s behaviours, such as
quantity and quality of work.
? Ironically, managers often seem to be concerned only with an employee’s results,
and thus measure only the outcomes. This makes sense, since managers are often
evaluated only based on targets and achievements, and since organisations are
primarily concerned with the bottom line. The problem with this approach is that
it encourages employees to cut corners and, sometimes, use unethical means to
achieve the results. Over the last decade or so, we have seen numerous examples
of this – where individuals at all levels have engaged in unethical, and often
illegal, behaviour to achieve the numbers.
? Clearly, it is critical that organisations use a judicious mix of all three – traits,
behaviours and outcomes – this can help ensure that organisations have the right
people doing the right things the right way, to achieve desired goals.