Each question should have a 1 through 5 attached to it alongside the letter. Add it all up, and at the end, you get the overall score.
Just as an info point--the system actually used to be like this. It changed shortly after I started, so, say eight or nine years ago? This change definitely happened before they shifted to the all-reviews-at-once system (everyone used to get their review on their anniversary, which meant leaders were
constantly writing reviews all year long--I imagine that sucked for them, but it was before I became a TL, so I can't speak from experience).
The problem is, even with that system,
the scores were still determined before the review was written. The only practical effect is that the person writing the review had to adjust category scores up or down in order to get the points total into the proper range, which is even worse than the current system. I would have no problem (under the current system) with giving someone a review that has, say, 1 U, 5 IE, 13 E, and 1 EX in the individual scores, but "adds up to" an IE overall. If you do well in lots of categories, but poorly enough in the most important ones (ones more directly related to your workcenter, say), then it's totally appropriate for a "mostly Es" review to "add up to" an IE. (For instance, for a flow team member, an IE in the sense of urgency category is NOT counterbalanced by an E/EX or even an O in the "follows the dress code/looks acceptable" category.) Under the current system, I
could deliver that review, with meaningful feedback on each category
and overall. In the old system, though, that many Es would have probably bumped the overall score into the E range, which means I'd have to artificially shift a bunch of the individual scores down (though they don't deserve to be) in order to get the total score down into the IE range (where it should be). That's crap, frankly.
My point is, just having points for the scores and adding them up would only be an improvement if the overall score wasn't pre-determined--and in a situation where it IS pre-determined, we're actually better off
without the point system.
(Note also that the point system could be made to work better with pre-determined scores if the categories didn't all have equal weight--say the sense of urgency category was worth U:0/IE:3/E:6/EX:9/O:12, but the appearance category was only worth U:0/IE:1/E:2/EX:3/O:4. Sadly, that's just getting way too complicated for Target to ever implement)
