Asee peer logo

Evaluating The Individual Scientist, Engineer, And Technologist: A Review Of Practices And Suggested Framework

Download Paper |

Conference

2002 Annual Conference

Location

Montreal, Canada

Publication Date

June 16, 2002

Start Date

June 16, 2002

End Date

June 19, 2002

ISSN

2153-5965

Conference Session

Engineering Management Curriculum

Page Count

14

Page Numbers

7.533.1 - 7.533.14

DOI

10.18260/1-2--10956

Permanent URL

https://peer.asee.org/10956

Download Count

167

Request a correction

Paper Authors

author page

Jeffrey Short

Download Paper |

Abstract
NOTE: The first page of text has been automatically extracted and included below in lieu of an abstract

Main Menu Session 3142

Evaluating the Individual Scientist, Engineer, and Technologist: A Review of Practices and Suggested Framework

Jeffrey E. Short, P.E. Southwestern Oklahoma State University Weatherford, Oklahoma

Abstract Measuring the performance of scientists, engineers, and technologists is a daunting task due to the nature of the job they perform and the absence of common work standards. Presenting this material in an engineering management class can be, therefore, confusing and controversial. This paper will seek to develop a review of industry practice in using five present performance appraisal types relative to scientists, engineers, and technologists; review a new innovation in individual performance appraisals, the individual balanced scorecard; and identify factors important to a successful performance assessment program for scientists, engineers, and technologists.

I. An Introduction to the Problem and Report Objectives

It starts with the prescribed form sent to each engineering manager with the little check boxes and a No. 2 pencil. The manager begins, “On a scale from one to five evaluate the engineer’s problem-solving ability.” Immediately the manager struggles to remember key instances in the last year where the engineer exhibited good or poor problem-solving abilities. Remembering none, the manager decides to rate the engineer a 3.5 based on no recent memory of odious or pernicious errors in judgement. The performance appraisal process has begun.

The performance appraisal is a well-recognized and established feature in modern corporate climates. Although many companies espouse a belief in systems thinking, the individual performance appraisal is a cornerstone of American management [1]. A survey by the Wyatt Company, a Washington consulting firm, found less than half of employees evaluated liked the process and the reviewers were even less satisfied [2].

Measuring the performance of scientists, engineers, and technologists is a more daunting task due to the nature of the job they perform and the absence of common work standards [3,4]. A. Schainblatt states, “There are no currently used systems for measuring the productivity of scientific and engineering groups without substantial flaws. Nor does the literature on productivity measurement offer encouragement that suitable systems will soon be available” [5]. This makes the topic of performance appraisal a particularly difficult and controversial portion of an engineering management course. This paper will seek to develop a review of industry practice in using five present performance appraisal types relative to scientists, engineers, and technologists; review a new innovation in individual performance appraisals, the individual balanced scorecard; and identify factors important to a successful performance assessment program for scientists, engineers, and technologists. The purpose of such a review is to

“Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2002, American Society for Engineering Education”

Main Menu

Short, J. (2002, June), Evaluating The Individual Scientist, Engineer, And Technologist: A Review Of Practices And Suggested Framework Paper presented at 2002 Annual Conference, Montreal, Canada. 10.18260/1-2--10956

ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2002 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015