There are always differences in annual wage adjustments and bonuses based on employee evaluations. Employee evaluations aim to increase employee motivation and provide fair treatment, but this is easier said than done and often results in a flood of employee complaints. This time, let's consider what points should be considered in the evaluation system.

[Difference between annual wage adjustment and bonus evaluation]

Evaluation serves as a standard for determining what a company values. In general, wages reflect ability and bonuses reflect performance, so the evaluation points should be different. If you simply rate each person on a five-point scale or give them a score out of 10, the overall evaluation is influenced by subjective impressions and makes it difficult to convey the company's message. You should consider each evaluation method, explain it to your employees in advance, and then conduct the evaluation after making efforts to receive a high evaluation. Employees may think that it is unfair to suddenly change the evaluation method and conduct evaluations. Explaining the change in evaluation methods before the start of the year and telling them, ``This is how we will evaluate you, and we hope you all will do your best to achieve it,'' will also motivate employees. Bonuses are generally evaluated based on goal achievement and contribution to activities other than set goals. The calculation formula is set based on the difficulty of the goal and the weight of how much time will be spent on it. It is also necessary to evaluate whether employees are properly performing their daily tasks. Wages, on the other hand, are often evaluated based on what skills are required and how well the skills meet standards. Practitioners tend to place emphasis on specialized skills and knowledge, while organizational executives tend to consider management ability in addition to specialized skills and knowledge.

[To avoid subjective evaluation as much as possible]

If the evaluation item is the company's message, the evaluation method represents fairness. Rather than a subjective atmosphere, we set clear standards and judge whether the standards are met 100%. 100% is easy to judge objectively, but 80% or 70% tends to be very subjective. Therefore, it is necessary to compile competency standards for each position and job from the perspective of ``what you can do.'' It is easier to be objective if you compare the ability standards for the position in question, the ability standards one rank below, and the ability standards for the current position, and determine whether the current situation exceeds 50% of the difference. In reality, for example, when calculating salary increases and bonuses on a five-point scale, more than 80% of employees often end up in the middle. Even if you understand the theory that you should conduct clear evaluations and give big or small raises, you still worry about things like ``I don't want people to dislike me,'' ``I'm afraid people will get angry,'' and ``What will I do if I quit?'' Therefore, it may be necessary to allocate a number of people for each evaluation. A is 5%, B is 15%, C is 60%, D is 15%, E is 5%, and so on. It is easier to make adjustments for departments with a large number of people, but when there are only a few people, the only option is to be flexible. On the other hand, departments with fewer people tend to be responsible for a wide range of tasks, and the need for that person tends to increase, which often results in the phenomenon of consistently high evaluations. Unfair evaluations tend to cause dissatisfaction among employees, so it is necessary to check trends, including the past five years.