Is this a Bad Evaluation?

allnurses Guide · Nov 4, 2010

I just have to agree with everyone else; I think you got a very good eval and you should be proud. Hold your head high. And enjoy the 50 cent raise; it's a pretty good one. =) My last raise was a whopping 16 cents, and I've been a nurse 7 years (I've moved around a lot though =)).

RaziRN · Nov 4, 2010

Thank you everyone for the advice, encouragement and insight into the management side of things. Very thought-provoking. I knew I wouldn't get a perfect eval (who among is perfect?) and I'm glad I didn't get berated on time management. I've definitely improved on time management but there's room for more improvement for sure. I'm just too hard on myself in all aspects of life. Thank you again for clearing that up for me; I was very confused as to why the numbers were so-so but the written part full of praise and then actually getting a good raise. (Ha, I rhyme!) :)

llg, PhD, RN · Nov 4, 2010

You also need to think of it this way: if you get scores in the 90's, what scores would be left to give those nurses who have been there for more than 5 years? What scores would be left to give those nurses who are leaders among the staff ... the charge nurses, preceptors, and those clinical experts who everyone else goes to as advice? They need to "leave some room at the top" for the real experts.

Evaluations are much like other scoring systems: they need to be designed so that the experienced experts who are "superstars" can get a higher score than the beginner -- even if that beginner is doing a great job "for a beginner." You can't expect to be one of the best nurses on the unit with only 10 months of experience -- and you need to expect that the scoring system will reserve the top scores for the truly top performers.

My hospital clarified its scoring system a few years ago in the following way -- and it has helped. These guidelines are printed on the form so that everyone can see what the numbers mean. They score on a system of 1-7 points for each item.

Scores of 1, 2, or 3 indicate some problem in the area and need to be accompanied by an action plan to correct the deficiency. Few of those scores are given.

Scores of 4 or 5 are the scores most commonly given. These are the scores used to rate the typical competent performers. They are considered "just fine" but provide 2 levels to show two different levels of performance.

Scores of 6 or 7 are for star performers. To get a 6 or 7 on a criteria, there needs to be documentation that the person is a leader in that aspect of practice. For example, it would be for contributing to the development of a policy rather than just following the policy ... or teaching others rather than just practicing correctly ... etc.

Most people are happy to get their scores of 4 or 5 and get the positive eval placed in their file for another year. Some people go the extra mile and get a couple of 6's or 7's, but understand they need to go above and beyond the correct performance of their job duties to deserve that higher score.

wooh, BSN, RN · Nov 4, 2010

This is the same company that sends out annual employee satisfaction surveys and annual customer service surveys. Oddly enough they are very unhappy we they receive 3's on THEIR evaluations!

Wow, I've never thought of it that way, and am SOOOOO going to have to point that out the next time we get a Press-Gainey scores lecture. :devil:

wooh, BSN, RN · Nov 4, 2010

It seems to me to be a poor way to try to motivate employees. If you know you won't be rewarded for trying to achieve excellence in practice and you get your annual raise regardless of whether you "improved" or not, it seems that this would be a disincentive to try to work harder.

It absolutely is. I remember the year that I took on new responsibilities and improved on everything that needed improvement on my previous year's eval. Guess what I got? THE EXACT SAME EVAL SCORES and EXACT SAME RAISE. How hard do you think I worked the year after that? :cool:

Ruby Vee, BSN · Nov 4, 2010

i think the numbered scales are pretty arbitrary. our hospital scores on a 1-5 scale, and as preceptors we're told that our orientees' first evaluation should be straight 3's. if they're less than 3, they can't get off orientation but no one is supposed to get higher than a 3 unless they've been consistently doing good stuff for a year. that lets out everyone who's getting an end of year evaluation, too.

pay attention to the comments that are written on your evaluation -- this is a better indicator of how you're doing. if someone thought about it enough to write in a comment about it, you can bet that you stand out. (either in a good way or a bad way, depending upon the nature of the comment.) if you get a copy of your evaluation, pay special attention to the areas where you didn't get a comment -- that may be an area where you need to improve.

but you got your raise and got only good comments -- that sounds like a great evaluation to me!

TDCHIM · Nov 4, 2010

This isn't limited to nursing, trust me - it's corporate BS and it is everywhere. They're basically butchering a statistical concept in order to justify limited raises. The general idea is they're applying a "normal" curve to your staff population, assuming that only 5% of people will score at the extremes of the curve (68% will be within one standard deviation of the mean, 95% will be within two standard deviations of the mean, and 99.8% will be within three standard deviations of the mean). But applying that idea means they're assuming each department has a staff that fits a normal curve, which is a chancy assumption. It allows no variance for a department staff where 70% of the staff's work is above and beyond the "average" expectations for a staff member. So people are stuck with numerical assessments that don't really reflect the level of their work.

You can probably see where this is going - if you have a department where 70% of the staff is actually working at a level below the "average" corporate expectations, this idea pushes managers to list the "right" percentage of their staff as average! So people in lazy departments are rewarded with better-than-deserved numeric ratings, while those in top-flight departments can be considered artificially "average."

I agree with some of the previous posters: you should focus on the written comments and the tangible feedback (like your raise!) you've received from your boss. You were recognized, praised and rewarded for good work. Don't worry - it appears your boss knows the value of your work! If you want specific pointers on areas where you need to improve, you could ask her for a list. I commend your desire to keep bettering your performance - many people would be satisfied with a raise and would just keep doing what they'd been doing! :)

DizzyLizzyNurse · Nov 4, 2010

When someone I worked with became supervisor she also told me she is not allowed to score someone above a 4 because 5 means perfect and no one is perfect....then why have 5????

One year I called in one time during the whole year and picked up a ton of time (when they would call me begging because of certain other people who call in all the damn time) and only got an "average" in the section of the eval about my attendance...really? I didn't feel bad at all saying 'NO' to the OT when they were begging after that.