Cross-Calibration in Performance Evaluations
Suppose you are tasked with conducting a performance evaluation for an employee who works for multiple supervisors, or who worked for most of the rating period on a different shift for a different supervisor, and only recently came under your supervision. In such cases, you may be wondering if there is a fair way to evaluate that employee. The answer is yes, and the process is called Cross-calibration.
Cross-calibration should be considered anytime an employee reports to more than one supervisor during the rating period. It allows all those responsible for supervising the employee’s job performance to discuss that performance and have input into the employee’s final evaluation.
Some organizations have multiple supervisors complete formal evaluations for a single employee. This can confuse employees and leave them with no single point of contact for follow-up. Employees could also compare evaluations from different supervisors and wonder why some are harsher or more lenient than others. In the Cross-calibration process, all employees’ supervisors provide input and are expected to complete a preliminary evaluation form, but the result is a single (formal) performance evaluation. Here is how the Cross-calibration process works.
Designate a lead evaluator: Select the supervisor who oversees the majority of the employees’ work. This provides a single point of responsibility, preventing duplication, conflicting feedback, or inconsistent scoring. The lead evaluator finalizes the evaluation and communicates it clearly to the employee. This allows the employee to have a clear point of contact for questions, feedback, and follow-up.
The lead evaluator collects input from all supervisors: Each supervisor fills out a preliminary evaluation form. Feedback from the participating supervisors should be focused on specific tasks or responsibilities for the employee they oversee, the behavior and performance of the employee in their presence, and the results or outcomes of the employee under their supervision. The lead evaluator then gathers all relevant input, which is organized and reflected in the final evaluation.
Hold a supervisor coordination meeting: At this meeting, the participating supervisors discuss any conflicting observations or ratings. Their goal is to achieve consensus or at least understand differing perspectives before finalizing the evaluation.
Cross-Calibration sounds simple, and it is, at least until disagreements occur. If disagreements do occur, follow these guidelines:
Focus on evidence, not opinion: The lead evaluator should ask each supervisor to provide specific examples or data that support their rating (positive or negative). The group should evaluate whether the disagreement stems from different levels of interaction with the employee, unequal access to performance information, or subjective impressions versus documented outcomes.
Discuss rating standards: Clarify how each supervisor is interpreting the rating scale. Differences may reflect an inconsistent understanding of what “Needs Improvement” vs. “Meets Expectations” actually means.
Attempt calibration through discussion: Facilitate a discussion where each supervisor explains their rationale. Try to calibrate based on Key Performance Indicators, organizational expectations, or past evaluations. The goal is to reach alignment, not necessarily unanimity on every point.
If disagreement persists, the lead evaluator decides: If consensus cannot be reached, the lead evaluator should weigh the inputs, prioritizing the supervisor with the most direct oversight or most relevant performance data. The lead evaluator should also document the disagreement and the final decision rationale. Finally, the lead evaluator should ensure the final rating is defensible and consistent with policy.
TIP: Cross-calibration is a valuable tool when an employee works for multiple supervisors because it ensures fairness, consistency, and accuracy. It balances various perspectives, leading to a more complete and balanced evaluation.