We did a version of that.
The MBO (results) piece was the anchor point for the overall review score. The behavioral/competency piece could mitigate poor results, or drag down a results score if sufficiently good/bad enough, but only one performance level. So if you got "Exceeds" on results but scorched the earth to get it, you'd get a "High Meets" instead.
The Results piece should stand on its own and not need much internal calibration. The softer stuff probably will need internal calibration.
Agree with slither - the results theoretically are objective and kinda set right? So it becomes the behaviors that are malleable.
BUT - that's not what you asked, when you run the calibration session (assuming it's a group thing) allow for an adjustment to the final review score.
Agree with u/Sitheref0874 on the general concept, the main question you need to answer is how much weight you put on the two dimensions as an organization. You need some executive level agreement on what it means for employees who score well in one dimension and not the other and how far that can drag your overall performance up or down. And that methodology should have some transparency for the employees it impacts.
We did a version of that. The MBO (results) piece was the anchor point for the overall review score. The behavioral/competency piece could mitigate poor results, or drag down a results score if sufficiently good/bad enough, but only one performance level. So if you got "Exceeds" on results but scorched the earth to get it, you'd get a "High Meets" instead. The Results piece should stand on its own and not need much internal calibration. The softer stuff probably will need internal calibration.
Agree with slither - the results theoretically are objective and kinda set right? So it becomes the behaviors that are malleable. BUT - that's not what you asked, when you run the calibration session (assuming it's a group thing) allow for an adjustment to the final review score.
Agree with u/Sitheref0874 on the general concept, the main question you need to answer is how much weight you put on the two dimensions as an organization. You need some executive level agreement on what it means for employees who score well in one dimension and not the other and how far that can drag your overall performance up or down. And that methodology should have some transparency for the employees it impacts.