[The following article appears in the Spring 1995 edition of
_The_Public_Sector_Network_News-, pages 9 and 10.]

              TEAM-BASED PERFORMANCE RATINGS

     While everyone seems to be jumping on the let's-put-
together-a-team-to-look-at bandwagon, and everyone also has a
step-by-step approach in place to ensure success of that project,
there is still a bigger issue. How can we really evaluate the
success of a team over the long haul? If we agree with W. Edwards
Deming that individual performance appraisals are not the
ultimate way to go, then how can we accomplish team-based
performance appraisals?
     Most governmental agencies currently have in place a system
to appraise the individual performance of their employees. It
usually is some form of supervisor-directed or joint supervisor-
employee system looking at a number of broad area of the
employee's performance and determining whether or not the
employee was successful, and, sometimes, to what degree.
Occasionally, specific performance objectives are included in the
process. But what happens when you now have teams working
together, or even self-directed work teams that don't have a
direct supervisor "controlling" their actions? Do you still need
to evaluate the level of success of those teams?
     The answer, in most cases, certainly is yes. But exactly how
you evaluate their success is more difficult than the simple
process followed by supervisor and employee. The dynamics are
different because you have many people involved. You have a team
composed of anywhere from four to 12 members, you have a
better-defined set of customers for that team, and you still have
someone at the management level who is ultimately interested in,
and probably responsible for, the team's success.
     What comes out of this bigger cast of characters is the
realization that in order to evaluate the team's performance, you
will need to use more than just one form or instrument to measure
all the aspects. You will need, in the current jargon, to look at
360 degree feedback. Unfortunately, the only systems anywhere in
the market are designed to look at how well a team followed a
specific quality process in order to solve a problem or improve a
system. The systems available don't look at year-long
performance. So modification is needed.
     There is only one good reference available on the subject--a
book by Richard Y. Chang, Gloria E. Bader, and Audrey E. Bloom
titled Measuring Team Performance, published in 1994 by Richard
Chang Associates. It does a good job establishing a way to
measure success, but it still does not look at everything needed.
There are, however, two tools in the book I found very useful,
with some modification. They are the reproducible forms for a
Team Success Survey and a Peer Feedback Survey. Both cover most
of the aspects I feel are important, and only slight revisions
and additions are necessary to make them more useful.
     The areas that still need addressing are customer input and
management input. I developed a Team Customer Survey to gather
feedback from customers and used the Team Success Story as a tool
for managers/team sponsors to also evaluate the team success. I
also included a Team Member Participation Assessment, which can
be used as an optional tool when there may be differences in the
level of participation among the members of the team and the team
exists in a system where incentive awards are given to the team
for their performance.
     The entire system, then, consists of a Team Success Survey,
which is completed by each team member and the manager/sponsor; a
Team Customer Survey, completed by all, or a representative
sample of the team's customers; a Team Member Peer Evaluation,
which each team member completes on all other team members; a
Team Performance Objectives form, which the team completes
together; and a Team Member Participation Assessment, which each
team member completes. While having so many instruments may seem
a bit much, it is necessary to use them all in order to complete
the full picture of the team's performance. Each instrument only
takes a short time to complete by itself, and the entire process
is relatively short. The most time-consuming piece is the Team
Customer Survey.
     So who decides which instruments to use, or should all of
them apply? This may depend on the level of autonomy given to the
team. I believe that most teams should determine the makeup of
their evaluation. The team should select, at the very least, the
relative importance of each assessment tool. Agency management
may decide which tools to include, or that determination can be a
joint team-management decision. At the start of each year, the
team should meet with its manager/sponsor and select the tools to
be used, determine the measurable objectives that the team will
work to accomplish, and set the importance of each tool in the
overall picture. This is very similar to the performance planning
process now followed in most governmental agencies between
individual employees and their supervisors.
     The success of this system is dependent on the openness and
participation of both the team members and the manager/sponsor of
each team. In an atmosphere where teams are encouraged and valued
for their capabilities, this team-based performance rating system
will work well. If teams are just thrown together because
everyone else is doing it, then there likely will be misuses, and
this system will become just another way that employees perceive
the "system" doesn't work.

For more information, contact: 
Ken Doby Technical & Consulting Services Division 
State Personnel Dept. 
1313 Sherman St., Room 115 
Denver, CO 80203 
Phone (303) 866-4264