General management
Duration: 10 - 20 mn
3 - 7 criteria
Cross-functional relationships

Evaluate the effectiveness of cross-functional relationships

For what
For who
Strengths
Options selection
Choose and validate the evaluation options

 
 
 
 
*
Unit price (excl. VAT):


What exactly are you buying?
result_averages_unit
Detailed description
How to use
Report
As a first step, once you have purchased this service, you will define the list of entities that will be part of the assessment. An entity can be any group in your organization: a function, a department, a team...
All the defined entities will be able to evaluate the others, but you can also specify which ones will not be evaluated.


You can then choose the criteria that will be used for the evaluation among seven possible choices:
Roles and expectations: clarity of the roles and responsibilities of the other entity's members and the expectations they have of their own entity,
  1. Proactivity: proactivity of the other entity to provide information without necessarily asking them
  2. Timeliness & Punctuality: response times of the other entity and reliability of the announced deadlines
  3. Quality & Completeness: quality and completeness of data provided to your entity
  4. Factual data : use of factual and objective data by the other entity
  5. Relational: Sympathy and empathy of the other entity's members
  6. Performance measurement: performance or service level measures in place between the two entities


You can choose these criteria in a number of ways, grouping or not, according to the following possibilities:
  1. The first five criteria are evaluated one by one
  2. The first five criteria are grouped into three groups:
    1. Roles & Expectations
    2. Proactivity, Timeliness & Punctuality
    3. Quality, Completeness & Factual Data
  3. The last two criteria are optional and may or may not be added to each of the previous two scenarios


It is important to consider that the selected participants may have to evaluate a large number of entities. In this case it is advisable to limit the number of evaluation criteria and to group them together in order to have a good quality of answer, even if the precision is less.

Next, you will define the members of these entities who will do the evaluation. Although individuals are doing the assessment, the assessment is about the entity, not the individuals. It is recommended that you define a representative quantity, with at least two members per entity to preserve minimal anonymity.

Participants will then be able to log on to the Wevalgo website (with a web link generated after the previous choices made) and can evaluate each of the defined entities, except their own. If they do not work sufficiently with an entity they can refrain from answering.

You will then have numerous graphs and tables of results allowing you to clearly see the relationships to be improved and the levers of progress to be put in place.
Key steps

The service can be used directly after the purchase with the steps described below.

  1. Customization of the service
    1. Definition of a title and an introduction for the participants who will log in to perform the evaluation
    2. Choice of the evaluation criteria among the proposed choices
    3. Definition of the entities to be evaluated and the evaluating entities (some evaluating entities may not be evaluated in turn)
    4. Definition of participants and choice of anonymity options
  2. Sending an invitation link to selected participants
  3. Selected participants complete evaluations on the Wevalgo web platform
    1. Participants log in to the Wevalgo website using the link sent
    2. They evaluate each of the entities defined in the invitation
    3. You can follow the progress of the responses in real time (to re-launch if necessary)
  4. Results available in real time with numerous graphs and tables of results
Three type of results are provided
  • performance table
  • performance charts
  • list of strenghts and weaknesses

Performance result table

This table is dynamic : configurable filters enable you to see average or detailed results, by evaluating or evaluated units, by criteria or by evalautor.
A few examples are given below, using only 4 criteria.

The Unit matrix table giving the average results by evaluating and evaluated unit 

Result by evaluating unit

The criteria table giving the average results by criteria for each evaluated unit

Result by criteria

A more detailedtable giving the results by criteria and by evaluating unit for each evaluated unit

Result by criteria

Performance charts

The results above can also be seen in charts. There are three charts:
  • results by evaluated unit : average results across all evaluating units for each evaluated unit
  • results by evaluating unit : average results across all evaluated units for each evaluating unit
  • results by criteria: average results across all evaluated units for each criteria

Strengths and opportunities

A sortable and filterable table is provided giving all the strengths and opportunies of improvement given by the participants. They can be regrouped by evaluating unit, evaluated unit or by evaluator.