PRIORITY INFORMATION
[001] This patent application does not take priority from any application.
TECHNICAL FIELD
[002] The present subject matter described herein, in general, relates to, evaluating performance, and more particularly relates to system and method for evaluating the performance based on qualitative and quantitative parameters.
BACKGROUND
[003] It is to be noted that performance evaluation of individuals is key factor in the growth of an organization. The performance evaluation not only contributes in improving the quality of work input, but also inspires and motivates each individual to make them more engaged and profitable for the organization. Though the performance evaluation significantly assists in the growth of the organization, it also backfires if the performance is not evaluated in a standardized manner for each individual contributing in the growth of the organization. It has been observed that many organizations measure the performance of their employees based on traditional approach which includes assigning a task list to each employee and ranking the performance of each employee against other peer group employees based upon completion of each of the tasks in the task list. In traditional approach, the performance may be evaluated based on time spent for the completion of each task. Further it may be not be possible, in the tradition approach, to compare the performance of an individual working in one project with the performance of another individual working in other project. The traditional approach, thus, creates havoc amongst the employees as the evaluation may not be standardized for two employees working on the same engagement and thus may hinder in the overall growth of the organization.
SUMMARY
[004] Before the present systems and methods, are described, it is to be understood that this application is not limited to the particular systems, and methodologies described, as there can be multiple possible embodiments which are not expressly illustrated in the present
3
disclosures. It is also to be understood that the terminology used in the description is for the purpose of describing the particular versions or embodiments only, and is not intended to limit the scope of the present application. This summary is provided to introduce concepts related to systems and methods for evaluating performance of an individual in an organization and the concepts are further described below in the detailed description. This summary is not intended to identify essential features of the claimed subject matter nor is it intended for use in determining or limiting the scope of the claimed subject matter.
[005] In one implementation, a system for evaluating performance of an individual in an organization is disclosed. In one aspect, the system may comprise a processor and a memory coupled to the processor. The processor may execute a plurality of modules stored in the memory. The plurality of modules may comprise a weight assigning module, a quantitative score computation module, a qualitative score computation module, and a score aggregation module. The weight assigning module may assign a weight for quantitative tasks and qualitative tasks based on a level of an individual in an organization. The quantitative score computation module may compute a cumulative quantitative score. In one aspect, in order to compute the cumulative quantitative score, initially, a predefined time period may be allocated to the individual for completing each quantitative task of the quantitative tasks. Further, a quantitative rating may be received, from an evaluator, for each quantitative task based on one or more predefined factors. Furthermore, a quantitative score may be computed for each quantitative task based on the predefined time period allocated, the quantitative rating defined and the weight for the quantitative tasks. Thereafter, the cumulative quantitative score may be determined based upon the quantitative score of each quantitative task. The qualitative score computation module may compute a cumulative qualitative score. In one aspect, in order to compute the cumulative qualitative score, initially, a count of the qualitative tasks may be determined. Further, a grade for each qualitative task may be received, from the evaluator, based on the one or more predefined factors. Furthermore, a qualitative rating may be assigned to each qualitative task based on the grade. Furthermore, a qualitative score may be computed for each qualitative task based on the count, the qualitative rating and the weight for the qualitative tasks. The qualitative score computation module may further determine the cumulative qualitative score based upon the qualitative score of each qualitative task. The score aggregation module may aggregate the cumulative quantitative score and the cumulative qualitative score in order to obtain a total score of the individual, thereby evaluating the performance of the individual.
4
[006] In another implementation, a method for evaluating performance of an individual of in organization is disclosed. In order to evaluate the performance, initially, a weight for quantitative tasks and qualitative tasks may be assigned based on a level of an individual in an organization. Further, a cumulative quantitative score may be computed. In one aspect, in order to compute the cumulative quantitative score, initially a predefined time period may be allocated to the individual for completing each quantitative task of the quantitative tasks. Further, a quantitative rating may be received, from an evaluator, for each quantitative task based on one or more predefined factors. Furthermore, a quantitative score may be computed for each quantitative task based on the predefined time period allocated, the quantitative rating defined, and the weight for the quantitative tasks. Thereafter, the cumulative quantitative score may be determined based upon the quantitative score of each quantitative task. Further, a cumulative qualitative may be computed. In one aspect, in order to compute the cumulative qualitative score, initially, a count of the qualitative tasks may be determined. Further, a grade for each qualitative task may be received, from the evaluator, based on the one or more predefined factors. Furthermore, a qualitative rating may be assigned to each qualitative task based on the grade. Furthermore, a qualitative score may be computed for each qualitative task based on the count, the qualitative rating, and the weight for the qualitative tasks. Based upon the qualitative score of each qualitative task, the cumulative qualitative score may be determined. Subsequent to the determination of the cumulative quantitative score and the cumulative qualitative score, the cumulative quantitative score and the cumulative qualitative score may be aggregated in order to obtain a total score of the individual, thereby evaluating the performance of the individual. In one aspect, the aforementioned method for evaluating the performance of the individual in the organization is performed by a processor using programmed instructions stored in a memory.
[007] In yet another implementation, non-transitory computer readable medium embodying a program executable in a computing device for evaluating performance of an individual in an organization is disclosed. The program may comprise a program code for assigning a weight for quantitative tasks and qualitative tasks based on a level of an individual in. The program may comprise a program code for computing a cumulative quantitative score for the quantitative tasks. In one aspect, in order to compute the cumulative quantitative score, initially a predefined time period may be allocated to the individual for completing each quantitative task of the quantitative tasks. Further, a quantitative rating may be received, from an evaluator, quantitative rating for each quantitative task based on one or
5
more predefined factors. Furthermore, a quantitative score may be computed for each quantitative task based on the predefined time period allocated, the quantitative rating defined, and the weight for the quantitative tasks. Thereafter, the cumulative quantitative score may be determined based upon the quantitative score of each quantitative task. The program may comprise a program code for computing a cumulative qualitative score for the qualitative tasks. In one aspect, in order to compute the cumulative qualitative score, initially, a count of the qualitative tasks may be determined. Further, a grade may be received, from the evaluator, for each qualitative task based on the one or more predefined factors. Furthermore, a qualitative rating may be assigned to each qualitative task based on the grade. Furthermore, a qualitative score may be computed for each qualitative task based on the count, the qualitative rating, and the weight for the qualitative tasks, and determining the cumulative qualitative score based upon the qualitative score of each qualitative task. The program may comprise a program code for aggregating the cumulative quantitative score and the cumulative qualitative score in order to obtain a total score of the individual, thereby evaluating the performance of the individual.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[008] The foregoing detailed description of embodiments is better understood when read in conjunction with the appended drawings. For the purpose of illustrating the disclosure, example constructions of the disclosure is shown in the present document; however, the disclosure is not limited to the specific methods and apparatus disclosed in the document and the drawings.
[009] The detailed description is given with reference to the accompanying figures. In the figures, the left-most digit(s) of a reference number identifies the figure in which the reference number first appears. The same numbers are used throughout the drawings to refer like features and components.
[0010] Figure 1 illustrates a network implementation of a system for evaluating performance of an individual in an organization, in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
[0011] Figure 2 illustrates the system, in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
6
[0012] Figure 3 illustrates a method for evaluating performance of the individual in the organization, in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
[0013] Figure 4 illustrates a method for computing the cumulative quantitative score for the quantitative tasks, in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter
[0014] Figure 5 illustrates a method for computing the cumulative qualitative score for the qualitative tasks, in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0015] Some embodiments of this disclosure, illustrating all its features, will now be discussed in detail. The words "comprising," "having," "containing," and "including," and other forms thereof, are intended to be equivalent in meaning and be open ended in that an item or items following any one of these words is not meant to be an exhaustive listing of such item or items, or meant to be limited to only the listed item or items. It must also be noted that as used herein and in the appended claims, the singular forms "a," "an," and "the" include plural references unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. Although any systems and methods similar or equivalent to those described herein can be used in the practice or testing of embodiments of the present disclosure, the exemplary, systems and methods are now described. The disclosed embodiments are merely exemplary of the disclosure, which may be embodied in various forms.
[0016] Various modifications to the embodiment will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art and the generic principles herein may be applied to other embodiments. However, one of ordinary skill in the art will readily recognize that the present disclosure is not intended to be limited to the embodiments illustrated, but is to be accorded the widest scope consistent with the principles and features described herein.
[0017] The present system and method facilitates to evaluate the performance of each employee, also hereinafter referred to as an individual throughout the specification, across the organization based on a standardized approach. In the standardized approach, the performance may be evaluated based on a task list assigned to each individual. Further the task list comprises quantitative tasks as well as qualitative tasks that are assigned to the individual of any level. In one embodiment, the level may dependent on the designation of the individual working in the organization. The level may be one of Level 1, Level 2, Level
7
3, and Level 4. Upon assigning the quantitative tasks and the qualitative tasks, a weight may be assigned to the quantitative tasks and the qualitative tasks based on the level of the individual.
[0018] Subsequent to the assignment of the weight to the quantitative tasks and the qualitative tasks, a cumulative quantitative score may be computed for the quantitative tasks. The cumulative quantitative score may be computed based on various quantitative parameters including, but not limited to, a predefined time period allocated for completing each quantitative task, a quantitative rating received, from a performance evaluator, corresponding to each quantitative task, and the weight assigned to the quantitative tasks. Similarly, a cumulative qualitative score may be computed for the qualitative tasks. The cumulative qualitative score may be computed based on various qualitative parameters including, but not limited to, a count of the qualitative tasks, a qualitative rating received, from the performance evaluator, corresponding to each qualitative task, and the weight assigned to the qualitative tasks.
[0019] Once the cumulative quantitative score and the cumulative qualitative score are computed, the cumulative quantitative score and the cumulative qualitative score may be aggregated to obtain a total score of the individual. The total score, thus obtained, facilitates in evaluating the performance of the individual for each of the tasks in the task list assigned to the individual. Thus the performance evaluator (including a manager or a team head) evaluates the performance of each individual in standardize manner even though different individuals may be assigned with different task lists. The total score obtained by each individual, based on the aforementioned methodology, facilitates to evaluate the performance of each individual in the standardized manner. This helps in creating transparency between a manager, a team leader and individuals. In other words, the present system and method facilitates transparency where the individuals get to know their performance based upon the rating provided by the manager and the manager may have a holistic view of the individuals based upon the tasks performed by each individual.
[0020] While aspects of described system and method for evaluating performance of an individual in an organization and may be implemented in any number of different computing systems, environments, and/or configurations, the embodiments are described in the context of the following exemplary system.
8
[0021] Referring now to Figure 1, a network implementation 100 of a system 102 for evaluating performance of an individual in an organization is disclosed. In one aspect, in order to evaluate the performance, initially, the system 102 assigns a weight for quantitative tasks and qualitative tasks based on a level of an individual in an organization. The system 102 further computes a cumulative quantitative score. In one aspect, the cumulative quantitative score may be computed by, initially, allocating a predefined time period to the individual for completing each quantitative task of the quantitative tasks. Further, a quantitative rating may be received for each quantitative task based on one or more predefined factors. Furthermore, a quantitative score may be computed for each quantitative task based on the predefined time period allocated, the quantitative rating defined, and the weight for the quantitative tasks. Furthermore, the cumulative quantitative score may be determined based upon the quantitative score of each quantitative task. The system 102 further computes a cumulative qualitative score. In one aspect, the cumulative qualitative score may be computed by, initially, determining a count of the qualitative tasks. Further, a grade for each qualitative task may be received based on the one or more predefined factors. Furthermore, a qualitative rating may be assigned to each qualitative task based on the grade. Furthermore, a qualitative score may be computed for each qualitative task based on the count, the qualitative rating, and the weight for the qualitative tasks. Thereafter, the system 102 determines the cumulative qualitative score based upon the qualitative score of each qualitative task. The system 102 further aggregates the cumulative quantitative score and the cumulative qualitative score in order to obtain a total score of the individual, thereby evaluating the performance of the individual.
[0022] Although the present disclosure is explained considering that the system 102 is implemented on a server, it may be understood that the system 102 may also be implemented in a variety of computing systems, such as a laptop computer, a desktop computer, a notebook, a workstation, a mainframe computer, a server, a network server, a cloud-based computing environment. It will be understood that the system 102 may be accessed by multiple users through one or more user devices 104-1, 104-2…104-N, collectively referred to as user 104 or stakeholders, hereinafter, or applications residing on the user devices 104. Examples of the user devices 104 may include, but are not limited to, a portable computer, a personal digital assistant, a handheld device, and a workstation. The user devices 104 are communicatively coupled to the system 102 through a network 106.
9
[0023] In one implementation, the network 106 may be a wireless network, a wired network or a combination thereof. The network 106 can be implemented as one of the different types of networks, such as intranet, local area network (LAN), wide area network (WAN), the internet, and the like. The network 106 may either be a dedicated network or a shared network. The shared network represents an association of the different types of networks that use a variety of protocols, for example, Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP), Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP), Wireless Application Protocol (WAP), and the like, to communicate with one another. Further the network 106 may include a variety of network devices, including routers, bridges, servers, computing devices, storage devices, and the like.
[0024] Referring now to Figure 2, the system 102 is illustrated in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter. In one embodiment, the system 102 may include at least one processor 202, an input/output (I/O) interface 204, and a memory 206. The at least one processor 202 may be implemented as one or more microprocessors, microcomputers, microcontrollers, digital signal processors, central processing units, state machines, logic circuitries, and/or any devices that manipulate signals based on operational instructions. Among other capabilities, the at least one processor 202 is configured to fetch and execute computer-readable instructions stored in the memory 206.
[0025] The I/O interface 204 may include a variety of software and hardware interfaces, for example, a web interface, a graphical user interface, and the like. The I/O interface 204 may allow the system 102 to interact with the user directly or through the user devices 104. Further, the I/O interface 204 may enable the system 102 to communicate with other computing devices, such as web servers and external data servers (not shown). The I/O interface 204 can facilitate multiple communications within a wide variety of networks and protocol types, including wired networks, for example, LAN, cable, etc., and wireless networks, such as WLAN, cellular, or satellite. The I/O interface 204 may include one or more ports for connecting a number of devices to one another or to another server.
[0026] The memory 206 may include any computer-readable medium or computer program product known in the art including, for example, volatile memory, such as static random access memory (SRAM) and dynamic random access memory (DRAM), and/or non-volatile memory, such as read only memory (ROM), erasable programmable ROM, flash memories, hard disks, optical disks, and magnetic tapes. The memory 206 may include modules 208 and data 210.
10
[0027] The modules 208 include routines, programs, objects, components, data structures, etc., which perform particular tasks or implement particular abstract data types. In one implementation, the modules 208 may include a weight assigning module 212, a quantitative score computation module 214, a qualitative score computation module 216, a score aggregation module 218 and other modules 220. The other modules 220 may include programs or coded instructions that supplement applications and functions of the system 102. The modules 208 described herein may be implemented as software modules that may be executed in the cloud-based computing environment of the system 102.
[0028] The data 210, amongst other things, serves as a repository for storing data processed, received, and generated by one or more of the modules 208. The data 210 may also include a system database 222 and other data 224. The other data 224 may include data generated as a result of the execution of one or more modules in the other modules 218.
[0029] As there are challenges observed in the existing art, the challenges necessitate the need for evaluating performance of an individual in an organization in a standardized manner. In order to evaluate the performance, a performance evaluator, hereinafter referred to as a user evaluating the performance of an individual, may use the client device 104 to access the system 102 via the I/O interface 204. The user may register him/her using the I/O interface 204 in order to use the system 102. In one aspect, the user may access the I/O interface 204 of the system 102. The system 102 may employ the weight assigning module 212, the quantitative score computation module 214, the qualitative score computation module 216, and the score aggregation module 218. The detail functioning of the modules as described below.
[0030] In order to evaluate the performance in the standardized manner for each individual, a task list may be assigned to each individual. The task list, assigned, may comprise quantitative tasks as well as qualitative tasks that are assigned to each individual of any level. In one aspect, the level may be dependent on the designation of the individual working in the organization. In one example, the level of an individual may be one of Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, and Level 4. Upon assigning the quantitative tasks and the qualitative tasks, the weight assigning module 212 may assign a weight for the quantitative tasks and the qualitative tasks based on the level of the individual. It may be understood that the weight assigning module 212 may assign the weight upon referring to a mapping table stored in a system database 222. The mapping table comprises a predefined mapping of the level, of the individual, with the quantitative tasks and the qualitative tasks. The mapping of the level with
11
the quantitative tasks and the qualitative tasks is shown in table 1 mentioned below in accordance with an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure:
Level of Individual
Weight of Quantitative Tasks
Weight of Qualitative Tasks
Level 1
70%
30%
Level 2
60%
40%
Level 3
50%
50%
Level 4
50%
50%
[0031] It may be understood from the table 1 that if the level of the individual is Level 1, then the weight assigned to the quantitative tasks and the qualitative tasks are 70% and 30% respectively. Similarly if the level of the individual is Level 2 then the weight assigned to the quantitative tasks and the qualitative tasks are 60% and 40% respectively.
[0032] Upon assigning the weight, the quantitative score computation module 214 may compute a cumulative quantitative score for the quantitative tasks. In order to compute the cumulative quantitative score, initially, a predefined time period may be allocated to the individual for completing each quantitative task of the quantitative tasks. In one embodiment, the predefined time period may be allocated in terms of percentage. For example, if there are ‘4’ (i.e. T1, T2, T3, and T4) quantitative tasks then the predefined time period allocated to each of T1, T2, T3, and T4 for completion are 20%, 40%, 30%, and 10% respectively. It is to be noted that the predefined time periods may be allocated such that the cumulative time period for completing each of the 4’ (i.e. T1, T2, T3, and T4) quantitative tasks is 100%.
[0033] Subsequent to the allocation of the predefined time period for each quantitative task, the quantitative score computation module 214 may receive a quantitative rating for each quantitative task. In one embodiment, the quantitative rating may be received from the user. The user may provide the quantitative rating based on one or more predefined factors. Examples of the one or more predefined factors may include, but not limited to, a time spent for competing each quantitative task, qualitative task and the level of the individual. The quantitative rating may be defined from a scale of 1 to 10. After receiving the quantitative rating, the quantitative score computation module 214 may further compute a quantitative score for each quantitative task. In one aspect, the quantitative score may be computed based on various quantitative parameters including the predefined time period allocated, the quantitative rating, and the weight for the quantitative tasks. In one
12
embodiment, the quantitative score computation module 214 may compute the quantitative score for each quantitative task based on the various quantitative parameters using a formula mentioned below:
[0034] Quantitative score = (%Allocation X (Quantitative rating x 10)) X %Weight assigned for the quantitative tasks …………………………………………………………..(1)
[0035] Once the quantitative score is computed for each quantitative task, the quantitative score computation module 214 may determine the cumulative quantitative score by aggregating the quantitative score of each quantitative task. Thus, in this manner, the quantitative score computation module 214 computes the cumulative quantitative score.
[0036] Similarly, the qualitative score computation module 216 may compute the cumulative qualitative score for the qualitative tasks. In order to compute the cumulative qualitative score, the qualitative score computation module 216 may, initially, determine a count of the qualitative tasks. The qualitative score computation module 216 may further receive a grade for each qualitative task. The grade may be received from the user based on the one or more predefined factors. In one aspect, the user may provide the grade as one of distinguished, exceptional, very good, average, and needs improvement for a qualitative task. Since the grade provided by the user may not be quantifiable, the qualitative score computation module 216 may refer to a grade-rating mapping table, stored in the system database 222, for assigning a qualitative rating to each qualitative task. In one aspect, the grade-rating mapping table comprises a predefined mapping of each grade with a rating. The predefined mapping of each grade with the rating is shown in a table 2 mentioned below:
Grade
Qualitative Rating
Distinguished
10
Exceptional
8
Very Good
6
Average
4
Needs Improvement
2
[0037] It is to be understood from the table 2 that if the grade provided by the user is ‘Distinguished’, the qualitative score computation module 216 assigns the qualitative rating
13
to Task ‘T1’ as ‘10’. Similarly, if the grade provided by the user is ‘Very Good’, the qualitative score computation module 216 assigns the qualitative rating to Task ‘T2’ as ‘6’. In this manner, the grade received from the user may be quantified upon referring to the grade-rating mapping table. Subsequently the qualitative score computation module 216 may compute a qualitative score for each qualitative task. In one aspect, the qualitative score may be computed based on various qualitative parameters including the count, the qualitative rating, and the weight assigned for the qualitative tasks. In one embodiment, the qualitative score computation module 216 may compute the qualitative score for each qualitative task based on the various qualitative parameters using the formula mentioned below:
[0038] Qualitative score = ((%Weight)/(Count of Qualitative tasks)) x (Qualitative rating x 10) …………………………………………………………………………………(2)
[0039] Once the qualitative score is computed for each qualitative task, the qualitative score computation module 216 may determine the cumulative qualitative score by aggregating the qualitative score of each qualitative task. Thus, in this manner, the qualitative score computation module 216 computes the cumulative qualitative score.
[0040] Upon determining the cumulative quantitative score and the cumulative qualitative score, the score aggregation module 218 may aggregate the cumulative quantitative score and the cumulative qualitative score in order to obtain a total score of the individual. In one aspect, the total score may be determined based on a below formulation:
[0041] Total Score = (Cumulative quantitative score + Cumulative qualitative score)………………………………………………………………………………………...(3)
[0042] Thus, based on the aforementioned methodology, the performance of the individual may be evaluated in the standardized manner irrespective of the level and type of tasks assigned to the individual.
[0043] In order to elucidate further, consider an example where the performance of an individual is evaluated based on the methodology as aforementioned. In this example, an individual ‘Emp1’ having a level ‘Level 2’ and working in an organization ‘Org1’. Further, consider the ‘Emp1’ is assigned with a task list ‘T1’ that includes quantitative tasks and qualitative tasks. The quantitative tasks includes ‘4’ quantitative tasks whereas the qualitative tasks includes ‘2’ qualitative tasks. Details of the quantitative tasks and the qualitative tasks are shown in the table 3 and 4 below respectively.
14
[0044] Table 3:
Tasks
%Allocation
Quantitative Rating
Change Management
20
10
Incidents - User Tickets
40
9
Migrations and Projects support
30
6
OJT to Academy Resource
10
8
[0045] Table 4:
Tasks
Grade
Qualitative Rating
Error free transactions
Distinguished
10
Communication skills
Exceptional
8
[0046] Based on the aforementioned methodology, a weight for the quantitative tasks and the qualitative tasks are assigned based on the level of ‘Emp1’. Since the level of ‘Emp1’ is ‘Level 2’, the weight assigning module 212 assigns the weight to the quantitative tasks and the qualitative tasks as 60% and 40% respectively, for example, referring to table 1.
[0047] Once the weight is assigned, the quantitative score computation module 214 computes the quantitative score. It may be observed from the table 3 that the user has been allocated a specific time period for completing each quantitative task. Out of the specific time period, ‘20%’, ‘40%’, ‘20%’, and ‘10%’ of the specific time period (also referred to as predefined time period) may be allocated to the quantitative tasks (i.e. ‘Change Management’, ‘Incidents - User Tickets’, ‘Migrations and Projects support’ and ‘OJT to Academy Resource' respectively). It must be understood that the aggregation of the predefined time period, allocated to each quantitative task, is the specific time period. Upon completion of the quantitative tasks, the quantitative score computation module 214 receives the quantitative rating from the user, corresponding to each quantitative task, based on a time spent for the completion of each quantitative task. In this case, the user has provided the quantitative rating as ‘10’, ‘9’, ‘6’, and ‘8’ to ‘Change Management’, ‘Incidents - User Tickets’, ‘Migrations and Projects support’ and ‘OJT to Academy Resource' respectively as shown in the table 3. Subsequent to the determination of the predefined time period allocated to each quantitative task, the quantitative rating defined for quantitative task, and the weight
15
for the quantitative tasks, the quantitative score computation module 214 computes the quantitative score for each quantitative task using the equation (1). Thus, the quantitative score for each quantitative task (‘Change Management’, ‘Incidents - User Tickets’, ‘Migrations and Projects support’ and ‘OJT to Academy Resource') is computed as ‘12’, ’21.6’, ’10.8’, and ‘4.8’ respectively. Further the quantitative score computation module 214 determines the cumulative quantitative score upon aggregating the quantitative score computed for each quantitative task. Therefore, in this example, the cumulative quantitative score is 49.2
[0048] Similarly, the qualitative score computation module 216 computes the qualitative score. It may be observed from the table 4 that ‘2’ qualitative tasks (i.e. ‘Error free transactions’ and ‘Communication skills’) have been assigned to ‘Emp1’. Further the qualitative score computation module 216 receives a grade for each qualitative task based on the one or more predefined factors. It may be understood from the table 4 that the user has provided the grade as ‘Distinguished’ and ‘Exceptional’ to ‘Error free transactions’ and ‘Communication skills’ respectively. Since the grade is not quantifiable for computing the qualitative score, the qualitative score computation module 216 assigns the qualitative rating to each qualitative task upon referring to the table 2 (grade-rating mapping table). The table 2 (grade-rating mapping table) comprises a predefined mapping of each grade with the qualitative rating. It is observed from the table 2 that the grades ‘Distinguished’ and ‘Exceptional’ are mapped with the qualitative rating ‘10’ and ‘8’ respectively. Therefore the qualitative score computation module 216 assigns the qualitative rating as ‘10’ and ‘8’ to ‘Distinguished’ and ‘Exceptional’ grades respectively. Further the qualitative score computation module 216 computes the qualitative score for each qualitative task using the equation (2). Thus, the qualitative score for each qualitative task (‘Error free transactions’ and ‘Communication skills’) is computed as ‘20’ and ’16’ respectively. Further the qualitative score computation module 216 determines the cumulative qualitative score upon aggregating the qualitative score of each qualitative task. Therefore, in this example, the Cumulative qualitative score is 36
[0049] Subsequently, the score aggregation module 218 aggregates the cumulative quantitative score and the cumulative qualitative score based on the equation (3) in order to obtain a total score of the individual.
[0050] Total score = 85.2
16
[0051] Thus, in this manner, the system 102 facilitates to evaluate the performance of in the standardized manner for each individual.
[0052] Referring now to Figure 3, a method 300 for evaluating performance of an individual in an organization is shown, in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter. The method 300 may be described in the general context of computer executable instructions. Generally, computer executable instructions can include routines, programs, objects, components, data structures, procedures, modules, functions, etc., that perform particular functions or implement particular abstract data types. The method 300 may also be practiced in a distributed computing environment where functions are performed by remote processing devices that are linked through a communications network. In a distributed computing environment, computer executable instructions may be located in both local and remote computer storage media, including memory storage devices.
[0053] The order in which the method 300 is described is not intended to be construed as a limitation, and any number of the described method blocks can be combined in any order to implement the method 300 or alternate methods. Additionally, individual blocks may be deleted from the method 300 without departing from the spirit and scope of the subject matter described herein. Furthermore, the method can be implemented in any suitable hardware, software, firmware, or combination thereof. However, for ease of explanation, in the embodiments described below, the method 300 may be considered to be implemented as described in the system 102.
[0054] At block 302, a weight may be assigned to quantitative tasks and qualitative tasks. In one aspect, the weight may be assigned based on a level of an individual in an organization. In one implementation, the weight may be assigned by the weight assigning module 212.
[0055] At block 304, a cumulative quantitative score may be computed for the quantitative tasks. In one implementation, the cumulative quantitative score may be computed by the quantitative score computation module 214.
[0056] At block 306, a cumulative qualitative score may be computed for the qualitative tasks. In one implementation, the cumulative qualitative score may be computed by the qualitative score computation module 216.
[0057] At block 308, the cumulative quantitative score and the cumulative qualitative score may be aggregated in order to obtain a total score of the individual, thereby evaluating
17
the performance of the individual. In one implementation, the cumulative quantitative score and the cumulative qualitative score may be aggregated by the score aggregation module 218.
[0058] Referring now to Figure 4, a method 304 for computing the cumulative quantitative score for the quantitative tasks is shown, in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
[0059] At block 402, a predefined time period may be allocated to the individual for completing each quantitative task of the quantitative tasks. In one implementation, the predefined time period may be allocated by the quantitative score computation module 214.
[0060] At block 404, a quantitative rating may be received for each quantitative task based on one or more predefined factors. In one implementation, the quantitative rating may be received by the quantitative score computation module 214.
[0061] At block 406, a quantitative score may be computed for each quantitative task based on the predefined time period allocated, the quantitative rating defined, and the weight for the quantitative tasks. In one implementation, the quantitative score may be computed by the quantitative score computation module 214.
[0062] At block 408, the cumulative quantitative may be determined based upon the quantitative score of each quantitative task. In one implementation, the cumulative quantitative may be determined by the quantitative score computation module 214.
[0063] Referring now to Figure 5, a method 306 for computing the cumulative qualitative score for the qualitative tasks is shown, in accordance with an embodiment of the present subject matter.
[0064] At block 502, a count of the qualitative tasks may be determined. In one implementation, the count of the qualitative tasks may be determined by the qualitative score computation module 216.
[0065] At block 504, a grade for each qualitative task may be received based on the one or more predefined factors. In one implementation, the grade for each qualitative task may be received by the qualitative score computation module 216.
[0066] At block 506, a qualitative rating may be assigned to each qualitative task based on the grade. In one implementation, the qualitative rating may be assigned by the qualitative score computation module 216.
18
[0067] At block 508, a qualitative score may be computed for each qualitative task based on the count, the qualitative rating, and the weight for the qualitative tasks. In one implementation, the qualitative score may be computed by the qualitative score computation module 216.
[0068] At block 510, the cumulative qualitative score may be determined based upon the qualitative score of each qualitative task. In one implementation, the cumulative qualitative score may be determined by the qualitative score computation module 216.
[0069] Exemplary embodiments discussed above may provide certain advantages. Though not required to practice aspects of the disclosure, these advantages may include those provided by the following features.
[0070] Some embodiments enable a system and a method to identify top performers and bottom performers from individuals working on an assignment.
[0071] Some embodiments enable a system and a method to provide visibility of their individuals for better management and utilization of the individuals; which resource is utilized how much time, which resource is better in which kind of activity.
[0072] Some embodiments enable a system and a method to create transparent system where the individuals get to know their performance rating based upon the feedback of the manager and manager gets to know holistic view of the team based upon the activities performed by each individual.
[0073] Although implementations for methods and systems for evaluating performance of an individual in an organization have been described in language specific to structural features and/or methods, it is to be understood that the appended claims are not necessarily limited to the specific features or methods described. Rather, the specific features and methods are disclosed as examples of implementations for evaluating the performance of the individual.

WE CLAIM:
1. A method for evaluating performance of an individual in an organization, the method comprising:
assigning, by a processor, a weight for quantitative tasks and qualitative tasks based on a level of an individual in an organization; computing, by the processor, a cumulative quantitative score for the quantitative tasks by allocating a predefined time period to the individual for completing each quantitative task of the quantitative tasks, receiving a quantitative rating for each quantitative task based on one or more predefined factors, computing a quantitative score for each quantitative task based on the predefined time period allocated, the quantitative rating defined, and the weight for the quantitative tasks, and determining the cumulative quantitative score based upon the quantitative score of each quantitative task; computing, by the processor, a cumulative qualitative score for the qualitative tasks by determining a count of the qualitative tasks, receiving a grade for each qualitative task based on the one or more predefined factors, assigning a qualitative rating to each qualitative task based on the grade, computing a qualitative score for each qualitative task based on the count, the qualitative rating, and the weight for the qualitative tasks, and determining the cumulative qualitative score based upon the qualitative score of each qualitative task; and aggregating, by the processor, the cumulative quantitative score and the cumulative qualitative score in order to obtain a total score of the individual, thereby evaluating the performance of the individual.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the level of the individual is one of Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, and Level 4.
20
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the weight is assigned based on a mapping table comprising predefined mapping of the level of individual with the quantitative tasks and the qualitative tasks.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the quantitative rating is defined from a scale of 1 to 10.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the grade is defined as one of distinguished, exceptional, very good, average, and needs improvement.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the qualitative rating is assigned upon referring to a grade-rating mapping table, and wherein the grade-rating mapping table comprises a predefined mapping of each grade with a qualitative rating.
7. A system for evaluating performance of an individual in an organization, the system comprising:
a processor; and a memory coupled to the processor, wherein the processor is capable of executing a plurality of modules stored in the memory, and wherein the plurality of modules comprising: a weight assigning module for assigning a weight for quantitative tasks and qualitative tasks based on a level of an individual in an organization; a quantitative score computation module for computing a cumulative quantitative score for the quantitative tasks by allocating a predefined time period to the individual for completing each quantitative task of the quantitative tasks, receiving a quantitative rating for each quantitative task based on one or more predefined factors, computing a quantitative score for each quantitative task based on the predefined time period allocated, the quantitative rating defined, and the weight for the quantitative tasks, and determining the cumulative quantitative score based upon the quantitative score of each quantitative task;
21
a qualitative score computation module for computing a cumulative qualitative score for the qualitative tasks by determining a count of the qualitative tasks; receiving a grade for each qualitative task based on the one or more predefined factors, assigning a qualitative rating to each qualitative task based on the grade, computing a qualitative score for each qualitative task based on the count, the qualitative rating, and the weight for the qualitative tasks, and determining the cumulative qualitative score based upon the qualitative score of each qualitative task; and a score aggregation module aggregating the cumulative quantitative score and the cumulative qualitative score in order to obtain a total score of the individual, thereby evaluating the performance of the individual.
8. The system of claim 1, wherein the weight assigning module assigns the weight based on a mapping table comprising predefined mapping of the level of individual with the quantitative tasks and the qualitative tasks.
9. A non-transitory computer readable medium embodying a program executable in a computing device for evaluating performance of an individual in an organization, the program comprising a program code:
a program code for assigning a weight for quantitative tasks and qualitative tasks based on a level of an individual in an organization; a program code for computing a cumulative quantitative score for the quantitative tasks by allocating a predefined time period to the individual for completing each quantitative task of the quantitative tasks, receiving a quantitative rating for each quantitative task based on one or more predefined factors, computing a quantitative score for each quantitative task based on the predefined time period allocated, the quantitative rating defined, and the weight for the quantitative tasks, and
22
determining the cumulative quantitative score based upon the quantitative score of each quantitative task; a program code for computing a cumulative qualitative score for the qualitative tasks by determining a count of the qualitative tasks; receiving a grade for each qualitative task based on one or more predefined factors, assigning a qualitative rating to each qualitative task based on the grade, computing a qualitative score for each qualitative task based on the count, the qualitative rating, and the weight for the qualitative tasks, and determining the cumulative qualitative score based upon the qualitative score of each qualitative task; and a program code for aggregating the cumulative quantitative score and the cumulative qualitative score in order to obtain a total score of the individual, thereby evaluating the performance of the individual.