- Published: October 31, 2021
- Updated: October 31, 2021
- University / College: Western Sydney University
- Language: English
- Downloads: 42
Front-Line Supervisor’s Performance Evaluation Form
The organisation is required to establish a system of evaluating the performance of the front line supervisor. Performing the appraisals will help the organisation to assist the supervisor in making improvements in the job and also accord the supervisor to know the goals and the objectives that he or she is supposed to know or to make known to other subordinates. The evaluation will be done on an annual basis and should not reflect any kind of personal favoritism, prejudice or biasness on the side of the evaluating officer or authority.
– The supervisor and the supervising authority aresupposed to have the copies of the latest job description.
– The following ratings will be used in the description of the performance of the front line supervisor. The rating scale will be 1-5.
– The evaluator will be expected to provide an explanation for awarding the ratings in the section of comments in the respective category of evaluation.
– The ratings shall be averaged together and noted in the comments sections.
– Each section of the evaluation shall be allocated weights in percentages from 1% to 100%. The averages over 5 in each evaluation part will be multiplied by the respective weights of the section and the overall ratings obtained by the summation of the products in all sections. The weights are awarded as follows:
– The evaluator will be expected to discuss the progress of the evaluation with the supervisor. The evaluation form will then be signed by the both of them and all will get an opportunity to give their comments.
Overall rating over 100% .
I admit that I have seen this evaluation report and I have been explained to my evaluation. I comprehend that I have the opportunity to make a written statement regarding this report form within ten from now working days. Upon submission of a statement within ten days, it will be attached to the report.
Evaluator: .. Date: .
The supervisor should receive a copy of this evaluation that has been promptly signed within a duration of one month upon request.
Bolin, S. (2007). The standards edge: the golden mean. United States: Bolin Communications.
Burkett, H. (2007). Proactive and responsive strategies to improve performance. Performance Improvement, 46(8), 2-2.
(1999). Harvard Business Review On Measuring Corporate Performance. Measuring Business Excellence, 3(1), 63-63.
Jablonski, J. R. (1991). Implementing total quality management: an overview. San Diego: Pfeiffer.
Lim, C. (1976). Price and quantity decisions of a firm facing uncertainty in the input and output markets. Kingston, Ont.: Institute for Economic Research, Queen’s University.
Poister, T. H. (1983). Performance monitoring. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books.
Singhal, K. (1978). Integrating production decisions. International Journal of Production Research, 16(5), 383-393.