Team Evaluation Form

Objective evaluation of the work of others is an important part of the career of most engineering graduates. Whether in research, design engineering, production management or academia, engineering graduates eventually find themselves in a position where they are making personnel evaluations which affect the future of their companies and their coworkers. With the widespread implementation of the team concept in the work place, the necessity to do these evaluations is likely to occur much earlier in a graduates career. With the exception of a few special cases, evaluations, unlike school grades, have only one purpose: future improvement of the individual. Nothing we do can affect the past; blame will not change a bad result. The only performance we can alter is future performance. Evaluations are an assessment of the past to define where improvement can be made and give insight into how it might be accomplished. Evaluations are, and should be a constructive enterprise. It should be both given and received in that spirit. There are some basic guidelines for fair and effective peer evaluations: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Individuals must know they will be evaluated and by whom. Individuals must be judged based on their ability level for the period involved; i.e. Junior and senior personnel are not judged against the same standards Assessments shall be based on results, not effort or good intentions, but outside factors that interfered with potential positive results should be considered. Individuals must be evaluated based on their performance in their assignment. Lack of opportunity, importance or challenge is a problem of management, not the individual. Be honest and straightforward. Your meaning should be unambiguous. Evaluations must be made on general patterns and not focused on isolated events, although these may have to be considered if they have had significant impacts. Personal relationships or preferences have no part in an objective evaluation. An evaluation should highlight strengths as well as weaknesses. Evaluations should be positive in tone, emphasizing development of the individual.

As a leader or team member, an individuals own overall performance will be greatly influenced by the remainder of the team. Improvement in team members means improvement in everyones performance. You are asked to use these principles as you rate: Your team. Yourself. Your teammate(s). Please be as specific as possible, avoiding did a good job and the like. Use examples. Each category that contains a negative, must contain at least one positive comment. And remember, the average of the individual rating should be close to the team result. Sometimes teams can do better than the individuals, but usually, not much.

Original team evaluation form created by Barry Barkel, UM Chemical Engineering Department

Self-evaluation
Please evaluate in words

Team Name/Section _Dana Fadel/Varun Mangla Project Topic: _Ion Exchange Calibration

Your Name ___Varun Mangla___________

RESULTS (TECHNICAL AND TECH COMM): ____3___ 4 (extremely competent, knew everything, did solid work) 3 (very competent, figured out what to do, confident in results), 2 (had to check the work, but everything was pretty much OK), 1 (had to redo some of the work, some was OK but there were a number of errors), 0 (had to redo all the work) Strengths Quick with Excel. Understood experiment setup very well. Able to go through requirements in an organized fashion. Suggestions for improvement Review concepts before meetings with partner. Ask questions of Professor or email GSI first to prevent wasting my time/partners time.

COMMUNICATION: ___1____ 3 (always easy to reach, initiates communication), 2 (answers e-mails, but doesnt initiate contact), 1 (eventually answers e-mails, doesnt initiate any communication), 0 (impossible to reach) Strengths I read emails as soon as I get them. Suggestions for improvement I did not always respond to emails when I got them, instead replying later. Sometimes, I forgot to reply. Although I always did answer phone calls.

MEETING GOALS & DEADLINES: ___2____ 3 (always there, always eager, always prepared), 2 (attends all scheduled meetings, well prepared, team player), 1 (missed some scheduled meetings, poorly prepared), 0 (seldom shows up to scheduled meetings, unprepared, not a team player) Strengths Always on time to meetings, mostly prepared. Worked well with Dana when completing lab. Suggestions for improvement Schedules did not quite line up sometimes, causing me to leave early, but come back later. Try to schedule better, or have better time management.

TOTAL RATING: 1-10 ___6_____ Comments (if you did not appropriately contribute to experiments, data analysis or report writing, please describe):

Teammate evaluation
Please evaluate in words

Team Name/Section _Dana Fadel/Varun Mangla Your Teammates Name __Dana Fadel____

Your Name ______Varun Mangla________

RESULTS (TECHNICAL AND TECH COMM): ___4_____ 4 (extremely competent, knew everything, did solid work) 3 (very competent, figured out what to do, confident in results), 2 (had to check the work, but everything was pretty much OK), 1 (had to redo some of the work, some was OK but there were a number of errors), 0 (had to redo all the work) Strengths Excellent skill in catching details and small mistakes that leads to large errors. Knew theory for calibration strongly, very motivated. Suggestions for improvement Can slightly improve on statistical analysis fundamentals.

COMMUNICATION: ____3_____ 3 (always easy to reach, initiates communication), 2 (answers e-mails, but doesnt initiate contact), 1 (eventually answers e-mails, doesnt initiate any communication), 0 (impossible to reach) Strengths Replies quickly, very reachable via phone or email. Initiates contact frequently, always contributes (i.e. no wasted emails). Suggestions for improvement None. Dana is very strong in this area. Perhaps add texting as a form of communication?

MEETING GOALS & DEADLINES: ___3______ 3 (always there, always eager, always prepared), 2 (attends all scheduled meetings, well prepared, team player), 1 (missed some scheduled meetings, poorly prepared), 0 (seldom shows up to scheduled meetings, unprepared, not a team player) Strengths Always on time, starts work on her own initiative. Productive (i.e. doesnt waste time), easy to collaborate with and discuss ideas. Suggestions for improvement Minor detail, when explaining point perhaps use more diagrams. Again, Dana is very strong in this category.

TOTAL RATING: 1-10 __10______ Comments (if the teammate did not appropriately contribute to experiments, data analysis and/or report writing, please describe):

TEAM evaluation Please evaluate in words

Your Name ___Varun Mangla________

Team Name/Section _Dana Fadel/Varun Mangla

RESULTS (TECHNICAL AND TECH COMM): ____4_____ 4 (extremely competent, knew everything, did solid work) 3 (very competent, figured out what to do, confident in results), 2 (everything was pretty much OK), 1 (there were a number of errors), 0 (significant errors, poor work) Strengths Suggestions for improvement

Together we were able to understand all the required material, and perform the data analysis. We did not cut corners, and went section by section to ensure we had covered each portion. However, we could have reviewed our data analysis in depth, and ensured all parts were included.

COMMUNICATION: ___2______ 3 (we were in touch and always knew where things were), 2 (except for a few glitches we stayed in touch fine), 1 (we could have done a lot better) 0 (not a team) Strengths Suggestions for improvement

We always knew what each other was doing. Sometimes, though, I was not available to discuss the lab. Dana took great initiative when this happened. To improve, I need to communicate properly and more often with my partner.

MEETING GOALS & DEADLINES: ____3_____ 3 (we met every goal and deadline), 2 (almost got everything done, but could have done better), 1 (missed some goals, met some but not all our deadlines), 0 (missed major goals and deadlines) Strengths Suggestions for improvement

We made sure to meet our internal goals and deadlines. To improve, we could meet them earlier so we could have more time to review the lab.

TOTAL RATING: 1-10 ___9_____

Comments: