CHAPTER 2: CURRENT SITUATION OF EVALUATION AND
2.2. Analysis of the work performance evaluation of civil servants in the Tax
2.2.5. The situation of the selection and training of the evaluator
Selection of the evaluator:
The selection of evaluator is an important factor determining the outcome of the evaluation. At the Tax Department of Tuyen Quang province, the direct leader is the evaluator, mainly with the help of personal self-evaluations and peer evaluations.
In the period prior to 2014, the final evaluator for civil servants in Divisions was the Deputy Director in charge of the unit with the recommendation by Division
Heads. From 2014 onwards, the Division Head is the evaluator and the one who ultimately responsible for the evaluation results of civil servants in his/her unit.
When surveying the opinions on who should be the final evaluator of the results of work performance of civil servants at the divisions of Tax Department, the results are as follows:
Table 2 5: Survey result on who would have been the final evaluator
Options No. of
answers Percentage
1. Director of Tax Department 6 7,5%
2. Deputy Director in charge of divisions 8 10%
3. Division Head 49 61,25%
4. Deputy Head or leaders of groups, team
(direct management) 16 20%
(Source: Survey results by the author) Table 2 6: The survey results suggest that taxpayers should evaluate the
service attitude of civil servants
Options No. of
answers Percentage
1. Be a good feedback channel 38 47,5%
2. Taxpayers do not have enough information to
evaluate 18 2,5%
3. Just for pharisaism 9 11,25%
4. Uneasy, putting pressure on the performing
tasks of civil servants 7 8,75%
5. Helping civil servants to have a better sense of
duty performance 31 40%
6. Other comments 1 1,25%
(Source: Survey results by the author)
The results showed that the opinion taxpayers' evaluation is a good feedback channel helping civil servants to be more aware in performing their tasks occupied a higher proportion than other opinions, although there is also fear that taxpayers do not have enough information to evaluate which can create pressure on the performance of civil servants and may be pharisaism. Thus, the communication on the purpose of evaluation on service attitude of civil servants by the taxpayers is a good mechanism to monitor the work that needs to be promoted in the coming time to raise awareness and contribute to the comprehensive evaluation of performance of civil servants.
Training the evaluator
The evaluator greatly affects the effectiveness of the work performance evaluation. Even when how clear the criteria of evaluation is, if the evaluator makes mistakes when evaluating the performance of work such as the inequality, favority, and medium trend …the evaluation results will be no longer objective, do not represent correctly the result, and lead to the wrong decisions on personnel.
Therefore, to be able to evaluate the performance of the work correctly, it is necessary to provide fundamental knowledge on E&C for the one who evaluates.
When surveying the opinion that whether the person who evaluates the completion of work of the civil servants will encounter common errors in the evaluation (can choose many answer options), the results show the following:
Table 2 7: The results of the survey on common mistakes of the evaluator
Options No. of
answers Percentage 1. Favority error (opinion can be dominated when the
evaluator prefers a civil servant to another civil servant)
9 11,25%
2. Medium trend error (evaluators who are afraid to cope with reality, do not want to offend others often tend to rate everyone at the average level)
6 7,5%
Options No. of
answers Percentage 3.Extreme error (too strict or too easy in evaluation) 5 6,25%
4.Prejudice error (not in favority due to the prejudice about differences between individuals such as age, hometown, gender, personality ... and not objective in the evaluation)
6 7,5%
5.Error due to the influence of the latest event (opinion may be influenced by the most recent acts of civil servants)
24 30%
6.None of the above 45 56,25%
(Source: Survey results by the author)
The results showed that 56.3% said that the evaluator did not make mistakes, the rest had common errors, in which the two most errors were favority (11.3%), and influence of the latest event (30%). Therefore, training evaluators is very necessary to avoid common errors.
Currently, basically, the working capacity, management experience of the direct leaderships (Head of Divisions) at the Tax Department of Tuyen Quang province is relatively good, so most of the guidance documents on the evaluation of work performance under the regulations of the Ministry of Finance, the General Department of Taxation, and the Tax Departments are all studied and implemented at the unit by those leaders; indeed, there are not so many training activities on E&C for them.