When evaluating the performance of employees in teams, there needs to be a clear understanding of what is being evaluated. This process includes clarifying the elements of evaluating, choosing a ranking system, and determining specific aspects of an individual's or a team's performance that are being appraised.

Creation Process

Various opinions exist about how to measure, rank, and evaluate performance. A seven step process for creating performance standards for teams, that gives some direction when first deciding on the areas that are to be evaluated, includes the following: (1) reviewing existing organizational measure; (2) defining what is going to measured; (3) identifying individual team member accomplishments that support the team; (4) weighing the accomplishments; (5) developing team and individual performance measures; (6) developing team and individual performance standards; and (7) deciding how to track performance (Zigon, 1998).

To work well, the team must agree on its standards of excellence. Team members and the leader must define and agree upon what the team's standards of excellence are. The standards of excellence should take several aspects of the team into account. The clarity and appropriateness of team goals and charter are very important. It is also important that the team's goals link to the organizational goals. The team needs to discuss whether or not and how well the team's work is being done, and finally analyze how well the members work together as a team (Rees, 1999).

Several factors need to be considered in developing team standards. The goals and the direction the team will take must be clear to all associates. Team members need to participate in setting performance standards, periodic team performance reviews should be scheduled, and reviews should be conducted by the team leader and then discussed at team meetings (1999). As discussed later, however, other sources recommend that the entire team participate in the review process rather than just the team leader appraising each member.

Performance Elements

Performance appraisals include different elements: looking at work assignments, responsibilities, or dimensions of work completed by individuals, teams, and/or the whole organization. "A critical element is a work assignment or responsibility of such importance that unacceptable performance on the element would result in a determination that an employee's overall performance is unacceptable" (OPM, 1997). Individual performance for which the employee can be held accountable must be addressed by critical elements such as the employee completing his/her fair share of the work in a way that affects the team's performance positively, that he/she follows the rules set by the team, he/she learns and shares new skills and knowledge with the team, and that he/she has ideas for improving the teams performance (1997). "A non-critical element can be a dimension or aspect of individual, team, or organizational performance, that is used in assigning a summary level." Non-critical elements can be assigned more weight than critical elements, depending on previous arrangements made and the importance of a certain aspect for a specific job. The National Achieves and Records Administration (NARA) describe some examples for the elements. On the non-critical element, everyone needs to be familiar with the standards set, desired levels for customer satisfaction, and required work performance; the standards that measure the teams ability to build consensus, resolve conflicts, solve problems, cooperate, lead itself, and make recommendations for its developmental needs; and the standards that require the team to develop a plan for how well it will improve/maintain its accuracy rate (OPM, 1999). An additional performance element "addresses a dimension or aspect of individual, team or organizational performance not used in determining summary levels, but used various other purposes, such as setting goals, providing feedback on individual or group performance, and recognizing individual or group achievements" (OPM, 1999).

Performance Measures

When measuring employees' and teams' performances, it is important that everyone is familiar with what aspects of the job are being measured. Quality of work, job knowledge and skills, work performance, adaptability and flexibility, customer relations, dependability and reliability, initiative, interpersonal relations, and teamwork are a few aspects being measured (Ramsey, 1994). "Some aspects of job performance are easy enough to quantify: attendance, amount of work done, meeting deadlines, meeting present goal, and so forth. These details are measurable and can be addressed through what are sometimes called "SMART" goals; Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timed" (Toropov, 1999). A wide variety of skills can be measured depending on the company, team, and type of work that is being done. Some "professional" skills include quantity of work/productivity, job knowledge, work habits, cost effectiveness, organizational skills, and accomplishment of goals/sales goals/quotas/etc. The "personal" skills are quality of work, creativity, interpersonal skills, team work/cooperation, decision-making skills, problem solving skills, dependability, adaptively, flexibility, accountability, and deceptiveness to criticism. Keeping in mind that all these factors help evaluators and evaluates know what is being measured, a clearly defined job description is the most important part of a successful working employee and team (Toropov, 1999). The Forests Division of Temple-Inland Forest Products Corp. suggests eight to ten "key performance areas" (aspects) that focus on major result areas should be used for appraisal purposes (Sorenson, 1992).

In putting together what aspects of the job are going to be measured, and whether they are going to be affecting the team as a whole or as individuals, it is important that the team works together developing its own performance factors as well as acceptable standards. This process will cause the team to be less resistant once the evaluation takes place (Harrington-Mackin, 1994). Once the time of the performance appraisal has come, Toropov recommends the employees ask themselves questions like "What were the employees major accomplishments during the time frame of the evaluation?" "How well did the employee meet both professional and personal goals established in the previous evaluation?" "What goals were not met?" and "What are the employees strengths and weaknesses?" to help them determine the ranking. He suggests the employees should "review the quantity and quality of work done since the last review; discover and discuss trends that may be found in these areas of quantity and quality; and review and evaluate progress made toward goals set in the prior review period" (Boyett and Boyett, 1998). A basic form which asks questions like "What do you consider I do well when we work together?" and "What do you think reduces my effectiveness?" can help employees think about the ranking they are going to give their team member (Bell, 1994).

Each person who is asked to evaluate a member at Johnsonville Foods has to go through a two-hour training session on appraising employees in order to be able to make a qualified judgment. These training sessions usually last two hours and include information on which aspects of work are to be evaluated. It takes a lot of time to provide the examples in training and filling out the evaluation forms afterwards. The training includes video-s and role-plays, so that once training is finished, the evaluators have a good feel for what they are doing. Some members have to fill out six or more evaluation forms (Glaub, 2000).

Alfa Laval Separation, a heavy industrial equipment manufacturer based in Warminster, Pennsylvania, states that it is best to set high performance standards that challenge the team members and by not receiving a "fully successful" rating every evaluation period, leaves room for improvement. However, the standards should not be so high that members feel that they cannot improve their performance or receive a superior ranking (Joy, 1997).

Ranking Performance

Most companies use a ranking system to evaluate how individuals and the team performed on the job during the period being evaluated. The ranking is very important because it shows where improvement and training is needed and what areas of the job are already accomplished. The department of Energy's in Savannah River Operations Office uses standards such as "fully successful" and "outstanding" to evaluate their members. The "fully successful" standard requires that

"each team member participates fully in team activities, needing only minimal feedback to remain focused on supporting the team's mission. [And] the individual provides assistance to other team members in areas outside regularly assigned duties when asked. To be rated Outstanding, the team member not only fully participates in team activities, but also develops and drives team initiatives and takes responsibility for ensuring the team's success. The individual far surpasses the fully successful level of assistance provided to other team members by volunteering to help where needed without having to be asked (Rees, 1999)."

To be rated "met requirements," the team member must affect the team's performance goals in a positive way, complete his or her share of the work, and comply with the general rules of the team. A team member rated "met" is an average participant of the team.

At Alfa Laval Separation, the employees are ranked on a scale from A to F; A being excellent and F being extremely poor (Joy, 1997). Temple-Inland Forest Products Corporation ranks its employees from 1 to 4; 1 meaning "needs improvement" and 4 meaning "consistently exceeds requirements" (Sorensen, 1992). It is also very important that in addition to appraising each other, team members provide constructive feedback to support their rating and let the evaluated know where his or here strengths and weaknesses are. Bell says that explanations as " She does good work" or "He lets us down a lot" are not acceptable as constructive feedback. The team members have to give examples or statistics to back up their rating, such as "Quality assurance has only logged two defects against her all year," or "He has been absent 12 days this year" (Bell, 1994). As one can see on the sample performance form in the Appendix, Johnsonville Foods also not only asks its members and internal customers to rank the employee, but requires them to give a concrete example for the rating given (Glaub, 2000).

Performance Criteria

For the performance system to be effective, it has to recognize and reward what the organization values. Once the organization agrees on the extend to which each team and individual performance should be measured, and what module to use for the evaluation process (further described in the subsequent section Performance Assessment Approaches), it has to define which areas of the occupation are most valued and need to be ranked. The evaluation of individual contribution to the workplace can include several or all of the following aspects, more aspects can be added if the organization or team deems it necessary:

1. Interpersonal relations - how the team member uses interpersonal skills to maintain good relationships with teammates, managers, other teams, and supportive personal. Also, the level of interdependence, managing skills, and participative decision-making the team member has.

2. Ability to deal with people - how the team member uses problem-solving and analytical skills, conflict resolution, and collaborates and shows collective effort.

3. Team Participation - whether the team member leads and participates constructively, encourages others, and volunteers for various tasks. Likewise, the level of support for the team process, commitment, and leadership the team member contributes.

4. Oral communication - if the team member uses open, honest, and direct communication, and tries to improve communication skills within the team trough giving and receiving feedback.

It can also be taken into account if the team member initiates ideas, participates in planning and goal setting, and accepts change and risk taking. Furthermore, credibility and trust are important, and the work process and procedures, as well as the written communication are part of the individual contribution to the team (Harrington-Mackin, 1994; OPM, 1998).

The evaluation for the team's performance may be based on the subsequent aspects:

1. Team Mission - each team member knows, understands, and works toward the goal of the team and the company. This aspect also includes level of activity in establishing quality, efficiency, and speed of the team.

2. Clearly defined roles - each team member understands their duties and knows who is responsible for specific issues and tasks.

3. Open and honest communication - the team members provide each other with honest feedback, express their opinions openly, and recognize what each member has to contribute with attention and respect. The team is also resolves conflicts through hearing different points of view.

4. Effective meetings - meetings are planned and each member is prepared and pays full attention. In addition, the team has a facilitator who keeps the meeting focused and moving, minutes are taken, and at the end, an agenda for the next meeting is set, as well as a 1-minute evaluation of the current meeting is conducted.

5. Decision making procedures - the team agrees on how decisions will be made and follows these guidelines.

6. Customer service - the team meets or exceeds customer expectations. At least 50% of the customers -external and internal- are satisfied with the team's work, however, it should be every team's goal to satisfy 85% or more of the customers. Other important aspects of the team's performance are how well the team as a whole knows their work process, the quantity of work, and the quality of work (Harrington-Mackin, 1994; OPM, 1998).

Employees and superiors need to know what is being evaluated and how it is done, in order to make a judgment about performance. Understanding the elements, the ranking system, and the specific aspects of an individual's or a team's performance that are being appraised is important for a team to function well and for an organization to be successful.