Browse Prior Art Database

Attributing the Depth of a Peer Relationship to Provide Higher Quality Real-Time Peer Feedback Results

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000242208D
Publication Date: 2015-Jun-26
Document File: 2 page(s) / 47K

Publishing Venue

The IP.com Prior Art Database

Abstract

Disclosed is a method for incorporating peer-based qualitative and quantitative feedback into a real-time employee performance review tool, and using the depth of a peer relationship to increase the accuracy of the data.

This text was extracted from a PDF file.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 52% of the total text.

Page 01 of 2

Attributing the Depth of a Peer Relationship to Provide Higher Quality Real-Time Peer Feedback Results

Many companies employ traditional hierarchical evaluation techniques, through which a manager periodically provides an employee with a performance evaluation. This approach is less frequently used, in favor of a more peer-based review process in

which people with whom the employee works provide input regarding the employee's performance. While this has advantages, it is very difficult to use without some basic process flow.

The novel contribution is a method for incorporating peer-based qualitative and quantitative feedback into a real-time review tool, and using the depth of a peer relationship to increase the accuracy of the data . The advantage of this system over known systems is its use of the peer relationship depth in calculating rankings. Current systems for peer ranking do not sufficiently indicate and consider the depth of the working relationships.

With the proposed system, a user enters into the tool the names of people with whom said user works. The user provides a value to indicate the depth of the relationship with each person. That value can be defined in various ways. One approach is to represent the value as a number with a range from zero (0)

to N

. The range does not matter, as long as all data is entered with the same well-defined range.

The tool then requests the following information from each peer:


Depth of relationship (0 to N). This provides a useful correlation. Ideally, both people in the peer relationship have the same definition of the depth of the relationship.


Ranking for each of a set of pre-defined categories, based on the associated job level. The ranking can also be a value from 0

to M

. As with the depth of relationship value, the range does not matter, as long as all data from all peers is entered with the same well-defined range.


Subjective data can also be attached to provide further insight. This could be as simple as notes attached to the ranking.

Either periodically or on-demand,...