Performance evaluation systems should be congruent with the strategy of the firm, helping to communicate that strategy clearly and forcefully to individuals and putting positive value on behaviors that reinforce the strategy. For example, a manufacturing firm whose strategy involves providing high levels of quality and after-sale service to customers should not reduce performance evaluation of salesmen to levels of Euros sold or new customers developed. Looking at reorder levels or surveyed measures of customer satisfaction may be much better. In the same context, a firm that emphasizes after-sale service may wish to slow down the pace of performance evaluation, so that a greater amount of relevant information can be brought to bear. Although the need for congruence between strategy and performance evaluation is obvious, it is not hard to find examples of organizations that fail to satisfy this simple desideratum.
When an organization changes its strategy, using performance evaluation to communicate the nature, importance, and the change to employees can be very effective. Technology and work organization enter in several ways. For guardian jobs, to differentiate between acceptable and unacceptably low performance, but fine distinctions should not be made among those whose performance is acceptable; Companies don't want to stimulate employees to gamble on getting slightly better performance if there is a risk that this will lead to a disaster. leia todo o artigo
