問3
頻出度★★☆
評価指標には目標の達成度を評価する指標と, 目標達成の手段を評価する指標の 2 種類がある。“社員の英語力を向上する” との目標を設定したとき, 目標の達成度を示している指標として, 適切なものはどれか。
平成23年度 特別試験 ITパスポート試験 問3
This question's explanation and your answers so far.
解説
問 3
Incorrectア
“The rate of employees aware of the president's message on the importance of learning English is 80% or higher” is a metric that evaluates the means used to achieve the goal. Issuing and spreading the president's message is a measure taken to motivate employees to study, and its awareness rate shows nothing more than how far the means of publicizing has reached. Even if 100% of the employees knew the message, whether they actually studied and raised their English ability is a separate matter, so the degree of goal achievement cannot be told from it.
- イ
正解 The correct answer is イ, “The proportion of people scoring 650 or higher on the English proficiency test is 60% or higher.” This question first divides evaluation metrics into two kinds — metrics that evaluate the degree of goal achievement (outcome metrics, corresponding to KGI, showing how far the goal itself has been achieved) and metrics that evaluate the means used to achieve the goal (process metrics, corresponding to KPI, showing whether the activities aimed at the goal are being carried out as planned) — and then asks you to pick the former. The goal that has been set is “improve employees' English ability,” so a metric that indicates the degree of achievement must be a value that directly measures how much the employees' English ability has actually risen. Option イ uses scores measured with an objective yardstick, an English proficiency test, and looks at whether the employees who scored 650 or higher make up 60% or more of the whole. In other words, it puts a number on the outcome itself — how many employees have reached a certain level of English ability. If this proportion rises, English ability has improved; if it falls, it has not. The fact that the degree of goal achievement is directly tied to the rise and fall of the metric is what makes イ a metric of achievement. The other three measure how much the company carried out the “means” it uses to raise English ability — holding training sessions, having employees take a test, publicizing its importance — so they are classified as metrics that evaluate the means.
Incorrectウ
“The employee participation rate in the English proficiency test is 90% or higher” expresses the share of people who took the test — that is, the participation situation — so it is a metric on the side of the means. A high participation rate only shows that the mechanism for measuring English ability has taken root; it says nothing at all about whether the test takers' scores are high or low. Even if everyone takes the test, if everyone scores low, English ability has not improved, so this metric cannot judge the degree of goal achievement.
Incorrectエ
“The holding rate of the monthly in-house English training is 90% or higher” is a typical metric of the means: it measures whether the training measure was carried out as planned. The holding rate expresses the amount of activity on the company's side, and holding the training as scheduled does not necessarily mean the participants' English ability rose. Because it looks at how far an activity was carried out rather than at the outcome, it cannot be a metric that indicates the degree of goal achievement.
ここがポイント
- Think of evaluation metrics on two levels. The outcome metric that measures the degree of goal achievement is the KGI (Key Goal Indicator), which shows how far the goal itself has been reached. The metric that measures the means or the process of reaching the goal is the KPI (Key Performance Indicator), which shows whether the activities leading to the outcome are progressing as planned. When the question asks about the degree of achievement, choose the option that directly measures the state written in the goal — here, the level of English ability.
- The knack for telling metrics apart is to check whether you can declare the goal achieved when that number goes up. The training holding rate, the test participation rate, and the message awareness rate are all amounts of activity carried out by the company; even if they rise, there is no guarantee that English ability has risen. In contrast, the proportion of employees who meet the test score level is itself the result of measuring English ability, so it is a metric of the degree of achievement.
用語