Tutor Pengisian KPI

Business purpose: What QPI is for (and what it is not)

• The video emphasizes that QPI must be derived from corporate strategy and Balanced Scorecard “Key Results”, not copied from job descriptions.
• QPI completion is positioned as a driver for personality development and team development, not merely administrative reporting.

---

Strategic alignment framework (TBG 2026 Balanced Scorecard / Strategic Map)

2026 strategic theme

Participants are instructed to realign QPI indicators with the 2026 Strategic Map and theme:

• Theme: “Accelerated and controlled growth” (quick growth, but governed/controlled)

Balanced Scorecard perspectives connection

The video ties QPI to the Balanced Scorecard’s four-perspective structure:

1) Foundation: Learning & Growth

Includes (examples mentioned):

• Talent lifecycle management
• Leadership regeneration
• Corporate culture
• HR capability in business units
• Assessment centers
• KPI-based “hair systems” (likely KPI-based performance management mechanisms)

2) Internal Process (4 pillars)

• Strategic control
• Legal & asset control
• External stability & reputation
• Internal audit

3) Customer perspective

• SLA achievement as a key enabler of customer satisfaction
• Focus includes internal & cross-division stakeholders

4) Finance outcomes

• Finance results are driven by good internal processes and governance

---

KPI target/metric callouts (explicit numbers mentioned)

Revenue growth

• “More than 15%” (linked to CKR number 5)

Compliance example metrics (simulation)

• SOP/regulation compliance completion %: scoring uses ranges; example uses 95% and a related SLA 95%
• Significant compliance risks identified & mitigated within 4 months: example value 3
• Unit compliance with new policy implemented: example 100%
• Modules completed: example 12 modules/year, then prorated for a 4-month period
  • Example: April period = 4 modules
  • Catch up from May onward

Timing explicitly stated

• KPI filling frequency: starting 2026, KPI filling every 4 months
• The video was made in April 2026, described as the first KPI period (January–April)
• Cut-off example: before May 12 (participants must fill before this date)

---

“Playbook” for writing/validating QPI correctly (anti-pattern + rules)

Common failure: “Fake KPI” (activity counted instead of results)

The video warns that KPIs can look “green” even while the company is “dying” if the KPI measures activity instead of outcomes, such as:

• Number of meetings, reports, training hours
• Sales visits, emails, proposals
• Marketing events/exhibitions, checklist completion

Example given: exhibitions with minimal conversion to sales despite frequent activity.

Correct KPI principles

• Output-based, not activity-based
• Use clear formulas (template/dictionary referenced)
• Data must come from a verified/validated system
• Mutual validation between employee POV and boss POV
  • Employee and boss both assess, then meet to validate
  • Goal: more objective scores

SMART (mentioned, but not sufficient alone)

Participants may apply SMART checks, but the video stresses that even SMART KPIs can still be rephrased job descriptions—so strategic alignment must also be checked.

---

Step-by-step process for the QPI cycle (process/workflow)

Step 1: Strategy alignment & origin of QPI

• Ensure QPI content comes from corporate key results mapped to Balanced Scorecard perspectives and aligned with the 2026 Strategic Map theme.
• Re-check whether QPI indicators are aligned or simply rephrased job descriptions.

Step 2: Make QPI “healthy” (avoid fake KPIs) + validate data

Reinforce healthy KPI rules:

• Output-based
• Formula clarity
• Validated data sources
• Employee + boss POV mutual verification

Step 3: How to score using the QPI assessment dictionary (layer-based)

Participants confirm which screen/layer they are on:

• Layer 1, 2, 3, 4 each has its own dictionary

Scoring logic:

• Part A: result/achievement-based (performance outcomes)
• Part B: narrative-based, covering:
  • planning & organizing
  • problem solving & decision making
  • collaboration & engagement
  • empathy & belonging
  • innovation & learning
  • respect & communication

Important: Part B scoring uses narrative + evidence/documentation, not just percentages.

Simulation rules and governance mechanics

The video demonstrates layered scoring and evidence (compliance example “Dylan”). It also emphasizes:

• QPI progress discussed in monthly meetings (PIKA mentioned)
• Boss should not be surprised by scores because discussions and history are tracked

Final stage: Dialogue & agreement, then submission flow

After employee and superior complete their POV versions:

• Conduct an open discussion / open argument
• Avoid “instant scoring” without validation and evidence

If agreement is reached:

• The results proceed upward to HR/management for deeper review and possible adjustment (increase/decrease based on management findings)

Confidentiality emphasized: don’t broadly share coworkers’ KPI details.

---

Coaching form integration (what happens after QPI)

After QPI is agreed, the video instructs to complete coaching together with the employee.

Coaching form structure (3 parts)

1. Feedback (beginning of coaching)

   • what the employee did well
   • what must be improved (linked to QPI results / SOP alignment)

2. Development (potential improvement)

   • includes a special assignment that is measurable
   • potential-focused development (not only correction)

3. Improvement (self-development)

   • behavioral or personal work-method changes derived from feedback

Concrete coaching example (recruitment monitoring)

Example employee (“Milea Anchika”) with boss (“Mr. Gufron”):

• Positive:
  • recruitment process runs faster
  • better responsiveness with users
• Needs improvement:
  • recruitment progress monitoring not consistently documented
  • candidate effectiveness evaluation not systematic

Development special assignment example:

• Make Milea the PIC to develop recruitment monitoring standards across business units
• Timeframe example: May–July / May–June (as agreed)

Improvement example:

• By June 2026: a more structured, transparent recruitment process
• Use a consistent recruitment monitoring format in every step

Process governance:

• coaching is signed/approved; then compiled by HR/HRBP/DHR
• leaders receive copies and must monitor coaching outcomes so it doesn’t “stay on paper.”

Coaching timing emphasis

• Coaching shouldn’t replace evidence-based agreement:
  • even if the immediate superior hasn’t approved coaching yet, the employee still must complete the coaching form, while waiting for later approval.

---

Key actionable recommendations (condensed)

• Ensure each QPI indicator is strategically derived from the 2026 Balanced Scorecard map, not job descriptions.
• Write KPIs as outputs/results with formulas, supported by verified data.
• Avoid “fake KPI” traps: don’t score based on activity counts (meetings, hours, visits).
• Use the QPI assessment dictionary for your exact layer; apply Part A (achievement) + Part B (narrative with evidence).
• Hold dialogue-based scoring alignment between employee and boss (employee fills first; boss validates; both agree with documentation).
• After agreement, conduct coaching using the 3-part coaching form, with measurable special assignments and self-improvement targets.

---

Presenters / Sources

• Ahmad Madu (presenter)
• Roles referenced in simulation examples:
  • Dilan (employee example)
  • Budi (Dilan’s superior example)
  • HRBP / HR / Management / MD level (referenced as reviewers/approvers)