Tester's work - how to evaluate?

I’m happy that my question “How to evaluate tester's work?” was so vividly discussed in Software Testing Club forum. I was interested how to know that this tester is a good one and the other one isn't qualified enough.
I’ve got many interesting opinions and realized that this question was rather essential for modern managers of testing/QA teams.

Each company and each manager chooses its own approach to evaluation of their testing team members. It isn’t limited by the count of found bugs . There are different interesting ways and methods. And each of them has really high practical value.

Mostly my attention was attracted by two major points:
- Evaluation shouldn’t be measured by money – penalizing or rewarding;
- Each team member may participate in the process of their co-workers’ evaluation.

There are some schemes of evaluation implementing these points.

Of course, the quality of test-plan is one of the main issues. And the quantity of valid/invalid/rejected bugs can be observed here. But this is just specific metrics that give very unreliable results because there are different situations and different circumstances in which tester may find himself during the work on his part of the project.

The feedback from colleagues is very important in this case. Some managers call it “360º review”, the others use “the peer review “. These methods are the most meaningful and give the most visible results. People working together everyday are the best sources of information. They are constantly evaluating one another's work. They communicate. They have the common goal, the project. They depend on each other as testing is usually team game. And there’s a lot of information they notice about each other’s work.

I think colleagues’ opinion is the best way to evaluate. If people can work together, fulfill the tasks, rely upon each other – they are good workers, they are a team. And the results of such interaction are positive for the project.