3 ms·
So stupid system with no instructions on how to calibrate. How do you say someone did a better than expected job if the "baseline" is 5? If they expect the no
by ta1243 3y ago
So stupid system with no instructions on how to calibrate.
How do you say someone did a better than expected job if the "baseline" is 5?
If they expect the normal to be 5, why give 1-4 as options. Why not "good" and "bad"
Not to mention the cultural differences between countries. While America loves being over-the-top with fake "oh you are so awesome", other countries (say Japan and the UK) are far more reserved.
- acdha 3y ago> If they expect the normal to be 5, why give 1-4 as options. Why not "good" and "bad" Some places do use a thumbs up/down rating but I think a lot of companies like the stress the 1-5 or 1-10 ratings put on workers. If you view your workers as easily replaceable, stress is a feature and the false precision lets you say that any particular outcome was data driven.
- zztop44 3y agoJapan has the opposite problem on restaurant review websites, where ~3.0 stars means OK and ~3.65 stars or above means absolutely bloody fantastic.
- themaninthedark 3y agoSo they use the system as intended?
- kergonath 3y agoI think a 3-states scale would be good. Something like “happy”, “not happy”, and ”feared for your life”. You’d want a way to identify outliers. But using a quantitative scale for this is not a good idea.
- iainmerrick 3y agoI'm a fan of 4 stars, as I think it forces you to make a real choice, while still being simple enough that it's hard to misinterpret: 4 stars => great 3 stars => quite good 2 stars => not so good 1 star => bad There's no score right in the middle so you can't sit on the fence (unless you ruin it by allowing half stars, Ebert style).