3 dynamics of evaluation of collaborative work in the company

Collaborative work evaluation dynamics: examples

Before proceeding, it is worth remembering that the dynamics of evaluating collaborative work are not aimed at fostering collaborative work within the company. Their objective is different: to evaluate and measure the effectiveness of other dynamics that have indeed been created to foster it.

With this in mind, we can highlight the following:

• Surveys. This is one of the quantitative evaluation dynamics, meaning that the information they provide is 100%% objective and not subject to individual interpretation by the interviewer and the analyst. An example can be found in questions that ask the respondent to rate their level of agreement with certain information from 1 to 4, with 1 being «strongly disagree» and 4 being «strongly agree». In our case, such information must, of course, relate to collaborative work in the company. To ensure that the answers are not conditional, surveys must be conducted individually with each worker, without them knowing what their colleagues are answering. There is the possibility that the surveys could be anonymous so as to avoid conditional answers, although the company may be interested in knowing the opinion of each specific employee.
• Personal interviews. These are qualitative evaluation dynamics, which means that the information provided by the interviewee, being more open than with surveys, may be subject to subjective interpretations by the interviewer and the analyst. As with surveys, personal interviews must be conducted in such a way that no employee knows their colleagues' answers, in order to avoid conditioning. On the other hand, an important difference between surveys and personal interviews is that the latter can never be anonymous, as the interviewer will always know who is giving each answer. If we want to maintain anonymity to avoid conditioning, we can always clarify to the interviewee that only the interviewer will know who gave their answers, as they will provide the information to the analyst without the person's name.
• Testing. A third possibility can be found in evaluation dynamics that consist of creating a collaborative work environment with the sole purpose of assessment. For example, one could design cooperative games like an Escape Room or a treasure hunt that deals with the work environment itself, to observe how the work group responds to it: if they collaborate with each other, who takes the lead and who doesn't, how they counteract the weaknesses of one person with the strengths of another, etc.

Ultimately, there are different evaluation dynamics that help us measure how collaborative work is being implemented and developed within the company and, based on the information they provide, maintain or modify its guidelines.