Some of these problems can be dealt with by constructing smaller and "tighter" comparison sets-for example, sales personnel might be evaluated only relative to others servicing similar types of customers; professional service workers are compared relative to others in the same experience cohort and practice area; research groups are compared only to other groups that deal with similar scientific problems. Of course, using smaller groups can exacerbate the third problem listed above. And constructing smaller and tighter comparison sets often means restricting comparisons to other individuals (or groups) inside the specific firm or specific business unit of the firm; we'll see some potential problems with this below.
In theory, these difficulties can also be addressed by handicapping the relative performance measures: To compensate for their relative disadvantages, we might give "extra credit" to: the sales manager working in an area relatively less well covered by national advertising; the research group working on a subject less prone to developing patents; the salesperson with the smaller market area; and individuals stuck in a group with an exceptional star performer. In practice, however, handicapping is a fragile and contentious process. The basis for the handicapping scheme may be disputed: The salesmen assigned to the larger and potentially more fruitful territory will point out that sales take time and effort, and she has to work harder. Or she may argue that the size of her territory is partially of her own making, as she has built up its clients. leia todo o artigo
