In the workplace, the means of using the evaluation system to perform unfair operations may include the following behaviors. It should be emphasized that these behaviors are inherently contrary to professional ethics and organizational fairness. The purpose of understanding them is to identify and prevent, not to emulate.： ###1. Control evaluation criteria 1. **Subjective standard tilt** -Deliberately set vague or subjective evaluation indicators (such as ”team spirit“ or ”leadership") to facilitate scoring based on personal preferences. -Tailor-made “bonus points” for specific employees, such as giving higher weights to indicators related to their personal strengths. 2. **Opaque information** -Do not disclose the evaluation process or standard rules, and only guide the evaluation direction through private communication. -The rules are not notified until the end of the assessment cycle, so that employees cannot prepare in advance. ###2. Data manipulation 3. **Selective data collection** -Only collect work results that are beneficial to specific employees and ignore their mistakes. -For employees who don't like to see, amplify individual mistakes and ignore overall contributions. 4. **360-degree feedback.** -Privately suggest that other colleagues give negative feedback in anonymous reviews. - Deliberately choose colleagues who have a poor relationship with the evaluator as the evaluator. ###3. Process vulnerability exploitation 5. **Time difference operation** -Initiate evaluation after the deadline of key projects, so that some employees cannot use the latest results to strive for scoring. -Extend the assessment cycle for biased employees to accumulate more positive data. 6. **Implementation of double standards** -The lateness of employee A is explained by the "flexible work system“, and the same behavior of employee B is recorded as an ”attitude problem." -Attribute mistakes that favor employees to external factors, and attribute personal abilities to other employees. ###4. Psychological pressure methods 7. **Threat evaluation hints** -Force employees to obey non-work needs through phrases such as “your promotion depends on this assessment”. -Use ”to be improved" comments as bargaining chips to require employees to accept unreasonable work tasks. 8. **Isolated evaluation** -Exclude target employees from cross-departmental cooperation projects and artificially reduce their visibility. -The key contributions of the employee were deliberately not mentioned in the evaluation meeting. ### Preventive advice： -**Institutional level**: Promote the combination of quantitative indicators and qualitative evaluation, and require all scores to be accompanied by specific examples. -**Supervision mechanism**: Establish anonymous complaint channels and third-party audit teams, and regularly audit and evaluate data. -**Employee response**: Keep records of work results on a daily basis, require evaluators to provide behavioral evidence, and challenge vague accusations. -**Cultural shaping**: Emphasize a “result-oriented” culture through training to reduce the influence of managers' personal preferences on evaluation. It is important to be vigilant that systematic favoritism is often accompanied by higher risks: favored employees may be exposed due to insufficient abilities, and the loss of outstanding employees who are excluded will lead to a decrease in team effectiveness, and data fraud once discovered will seriously damage management credibility. Credibility. Healthy organizations should be committed to establishing an evaluation system based on objective facts.