Como você pode evitar erros comuns ao avaliar os membros da equipe de desenvolvimento de jogos?

Evaluation should be focused on impact and creating value for your business and customers. Don't fall into the trap of creating checklists of "stuff" that doesn't add value. Following instructions gets you through school but it doesn't make great products. -The number of fixed bugs doesn't equal value. -Following the design document doesn't equal value. -Quality of code doesn't equal value. -Looking at user data and finding an opportunity to cut engineering work by 50% on a project = value -Working with your teammates to remove a bottleneck that increases overall team flow by 2x = value -Consistently focusing on the top priority work for the business = value -Engaging with the customer and adding a small feature they love =value

Once again, clear criteria is key. Somebody can't overdeliver if the expectation isn't set in the first place. Doing this right requires regular, transparent discussions with the people involved.

You should have SMART goals set for all team members, with clear communication on both parts on what is expected of them/what they expect of the team. It is crucial to have a solid communitication system to avoid possible issues in the future regarding the evaluation of those goals, and also have an overall healthier and happier team dynamic, as a company without communication is doomed from the start.

Goals should be an ongoing conversation between leads and their team. The smart goal method as mentioned is good and allows the person who is setting their goals to outline the how and why they are doing them. By talking about these frequently in 1:1 meetings it removes the scary aspect of it and folks can focus on what they can do to better themselves and how it also helps the team/company.

Moving into the dreaded yearly evals. You should have already defined your criteria. The team should be well aware of it. As well as the expectations in performance associated to their seniority. And in a perfect world the topic should (IMO) be discussed regularly throughout the year as needed. - leadership (both team and self) - performance - learning (how they stayed up to date on their skills) - inclusivity Are a few I like to measure against.

Yes but ask yourself would you actually work with that person every day, does that person care about the topic, project, people?

You should base your decisions on the facts and evidence however, when it comes to team fit, you should consider how well they communicate their issues, ideas, etc. Which means you should look at them from the teams point of view and having couple team members while doing the interview makes this way easier. All in all, right fit is as important as technical proficiency and you can't be unbiased while considering it.

Be clear and specific about the areas that need improvement or commendation. Concentrate on actions and behaviors rather than personal attributes. This helps separate the action from the individual and encourages behavioral changes. Finally, if addressing an issue, suggest potential solutions or strategies for improvement rather than solely pointing out problems. Feedback without action points or solutions is just a waste of time

Depending on the type of personality of a receiver you might use different models for giving feedback to maximize value in results and avoid extras. The sandwich model is a kind of hammer and not for all life cases. From my experience, other approaches are useful: Ask-Specify-Know Model is good for regular f2f with a fresh context, when not built yet trust relations with the receiver or you are not confident enough about the context. Feedforward Method works well with good trust relations for improvement suggestions. For major feedback sessions, I recommend COIN model. But to maximise value you have to prepare well. Key bullets for the constr. feedback: Improvement-Oriented Timely Two-way Care Personally Avoid Personal blaming/critics

The fresh context is really important and it means the feedback should be timely. Strange when on performance year evaluation in Q4 will be raised an unspoken issue from Q1. Such an example is not constructive. In some cases it might be reasonable, to collect inputs about the issue from other witnesses to avoid subjectivity as much as possible and to enrich the context. But is crucial to have your own opinion and plan how to maximize value from the feedback. Also, context is an essential part of different feedback models for instance COIN (Context-Observation-Impact-Next Steps).

Even though you have to hold all team members (Yourself included) accountable to their SMART goals, you should never ONLY use those goals as the only way to evaluate performance. Communication is key: If a teammate is underperforming, talk with them first, understand their situation, perhaps they are going through a tough time personally, which will inevitably affect their performance. Holding 1-on-1 meetings with all team members periodically can get tedious over time, but still, work must be done. A 15-minute chat is enough most of the time.

Focusing solely on the issue at hand can make you see just part of the picture. Underperformance might stem from lack of clear expectations, or too many goals. Hitting the goals can come with a highly individualistic approach and lack of team work. Things like that can only be noticed if you look at the wider context. This will allow you to make sure that your team is moving in the right direction, ans not towards a dead end.

I agree that asking for feedback is crucial for your growth and building trust with your team members. But asking and adjusting nothing in the future is a terrible approach. That makes sense if you really would like to be better. Asking for feedback is not only important from your direct manager but also makes sense to ask team members at the same level. In my regular f2f, I asked a few questions: "What changes do you want to talk about in our methods, technology, or team management? "How can I help or deal with your problem or request? "How can I support you better? "What can I change in our work together, or how can I improve myself to be more effective?" More deep insights can happen on major talks in the mid or the end of the year.

It’s crucial to create an environment where everyone feels comfortable sharing their thoughts, allowing for continuous growth and development within the game development team. Being receptive to criticism and using it constructively can significantly enhance both the evaluation process and team dynamics.

Teams, and especially smaller game teams, are also about understanding the internal creative chemistry between the members. Don’t be afraid - if the team is willing of course - to combine and mix roles and responsibilities in order make sure everyone enjoys their tasks and contributions. When done right it would make for a happier team and a better product.

Reflecting and doing a retrospective with the team on finished projects is pretty insightful as well. It's allows to discern the technical perspectives of different team members, spotting role biases from their angles. Then it’s easier to tell how our design choices might be improved in future games or if we just need to tweak our pipeline a bit.