Latest digests
 identify and briefly describe the basic steps in performance appraisal

Performance management is a system designed to identify the ways to achieve organizational goals through constant assessment and feedback leading to improvement of employee performance. Performance management, unlike the performance appraisal or annual evaluation process, is an ongoing assessment of employees in a manner geared to match their goals to the organizational goals. It also makes strong use of goal-setting and metrics to identify progress and areas of individual strengths.

Performance management systems, in various forms, have been employed for nearly two millennia. In the third century AD, the Chinese were not only using performance appraisal systems but were critiquing each other’s biases in their evaluations of their employees (Murphy and Cleveland, 4; Evans, 3). During the Industrial Revolution of the 18th century, factory managers became aware of the importance of their employees’ performance on their production outputs (Grote and Grote, 3; Murphy and Cleveland, 4). The development of the philosophy of performance evaluation systems in America has been attributed to such researchers and philosophers as Peter Drucker and Douglas McGregor, who developed ideas of management by objectives (MBOs) and employee motivation (Evans, 4; Murphy and Cleveland, 3). Spreigel reported in 1962 that by the early 1960s more than 60% of American organizations had a performance appraisal system.The system’s popularlity stemmed from the Army’s implementation of a performance management system for its officers (Murphy and Cleveland, 3). Since then, researchers have continued to develop theories of how different performance evaluation methods can contribute to the success of the organization.

Both employees and employers have historically disliked the performance review process. Armstrong reports that most appraisals have existed in a vacuum, with little or no relation to the workplace: “employees have resented the superficial nature with which appraisals have been conducted by managers who lack the skills required, tend to be biased and are simply going through the motions” (9). In order to have a productive, positive performance review, Aguinis identifies six recommended steps (41):

The performance management system is designed to benefit the organization, but like any system it may meet with resistance or be unconstructively applied. Many supervisors resist the change from a simple annual performance evaluation process or no process at all to the performance management system for many reasons: a dislike of criticizing employees; lack of skill in the appraisal process; dislike of new procedures; and mistrust of the validity of the appraisal instrument (67). Other reasons the performance management system may fail because of lack of support from the supervisors and the employees, unclear goals or lack of support for professional development.

Again Rensis Likert, the famous social scientist, in his article “Motivational Approach to Management Development” is concerned about the impact of performance appraisal on the employees and the manager. “The fundamental flaw in the current review procedure is that they compel the superior to behave in a threatening, rejecting and ego-deflating manner with a sizable proportion of its staff. This pattern of relationship between the superior and the subordinate does not only affect the subordinate but also impairs the capacity of the superior to function effectively”.

In such a case, the performance dimension may include level of understanding of the students, ability to communicate properly, fairness in the evaluation of exam sheets and quizzes, regularity, and punctuality in taking classes. This is also known as upward appraisal. Faculty rated as unsatisfactory by their students are given a notice, if actually proved unsatisfactory, and expected to improve their performance within a specific time; failing with which they may be terminated.

Stereotyping is a potential error in personality analysis that can distort performance appraisal. It involves judging someone based on the group he belongs to and the appraiser’s perception of the group. For example, an appraiser who believes that women make good managers would tend to rate his female appraisees better than his male appraisees.

The proponents of the performance appraisal system feel that the principle reason for the “uneasy” feeling about it may be due to the fact that judgement may not be particularly well-founded. Indeed, it is fair to say that most top executives consider the evidence on which the compensation based, to be inadequate with the minimum of objective facts and maximum of subjective opinions.

The purpose of conducting employee performance appraisal is for making decisions about employees without any bias by the HR manager. Decision-making by HR managers about employees rewarding, promotions, demotions, transfers and sometimes suspensions/dismissal of employees are depended upon the employee performance appraisal. The decision taken by HR manager should match exactly with performance appraisal results of employees to avoid grievance or disturbances in between them, as they affects overall performance of the organisation.

Ve an effect on the employees’ future performance. Performance appraisal feedback by managers should be in such way helpful to correct mistakes done by the employees and help them to motivate for better performance but not to demotivate. Performance feedback task should be handled very carefully as it may leads to emotional outburst if it is not handing properly. Sometimes employees sh

2625ms

Related articles