Section Sixstakeholders, such as shareholders, executives, and production
workers may have a very different perspective on the time
frame that should be used for evaluation. Clearly, there are
problems when evaluation is performed on only a one-shot
basis instead of a continual and systematic basis. There are
obvious advantages with longitudinal approaches as opposed to
cross-sectional approaches because of the latter’s inability to
provide insights into causality.^7
Strategic Impact
Another aspect of human resource evaluation is that the nature
of the process is changing from a reactive focus on how well a
problem is solved or how successful a program has been to an
emphasis on the organizational and employee impact of human
resource policies, programs, and activities. For example, in
contrast to past evaluation practice in which a company might
have examined narrow criteria such as turnover rates, a more
strategic approach would examine whether it is losing high
performers. Essentially, more strategic approaches to
evaluation recognize the organizational interdependencies and
relationships of human resource policies, systems, and
activities. As a result, they have moved from narrow
determinations of whether human resource activities are
working to broader analyses of their contributions.^8