Description
The report explains what is performance appraisal, reasons why performance appraisal fails sometimes, some of the managerial issues concerning appraisals and also explains some of appraisal methods.
Performance Appraisal Programs
• Performance Appraisal
Ø A process, typically performed annually by a supervisor for a subordinate, designed to help employees understand their roles, objectives, expectations, and performance success.
Appraising and Improving Performance
• Performance management
Ø The process of creating a work environment in which people can perform to the best of their abilities.
Purposes of Performance Management
Reasons Appraisal Programs Sometimes Fail
• Lack of top-management information and support • Unclear performance standards • Rater bias • Too many forms to complete • Use of the appraisal program for conflicting (political) purposes.
Strategic Administrative Developmental
1
Managerial Issues Concerning Appraisals
1. There is little face-to-face discussion between the manager and the employee being appraised. 2. The relationship between the employee’s job description and the criteria on the appraisal form isn’t clear. 3. Managers feel that little or no benefit will be derived from the time and energy spent in the process, or they are concerned only with bad performances. 4. Managers dislike the face-to-face confrontation of appraisal interviews.
Managerial Issues Concerning Appraisals (cont’d)
5. Managers are not sufficiently adept at rating employees or providing them with appraisal feedback. 6. The judgmental role of appraisal conflicts with the helping role of developing employees. 7. The appraisal is just a once-a-year event, and there is little follow-up afterward.
Performance Measures Criteria
Five performance criteria stand out:
Strategic congruence
Establishing Performance Standards
Specificity
Validity
Acceptability
Reliability
2
Performance Standards Characteristics
Strategic Relevance Individual standards directly relate to strategic goals.
Alternative Sources of Appraisal
Criterion Deficiency
Standards capture all of an individual’s contributions.
Criterion Performance capability is not Contamination reduced by external factors. Reliability (Consistency) Standards are quantifiable, measurable, and stable.
Source: From The Wall Street Journal —permission, Cartoon Features Syndicate.
Figure 8–5 8–
Pros and Cons of 360 -Degree Appraisal
Figure 8–5 8–
Pros and Cons of 360 -Degree Appraisal (cont’d) (cont’
• PROS
Ø The system is more comprehensive in that responses are gathered from multiple perspectives. Ø Quality of information is better. (Quality of respondents is mor e important than quantity.) Ø It complements TQM initiatives by emphasizing internal/external customers and teams. Ø It may lessen bias/prejudice since feedback comes from more people, not one individual. Ø Feedback from peers and others may increase employee selfdevelopment.
Sources: Compiled from David A. Waldman, Leanne E. Atwater, and David Antonioni, “Has 360 -Degree Feedback Gone Amok?” Academy of Management Executive 12, no. 2 (May 1998): 86 94; Bruce Pfau, Ira Kay, Kenneth Nowak, and Jai Ghorpade, “Does 360 – -Degree Feedback Negatively Affect Company Performance?” HRMagazine 47, no. 6 (June 2002): 54 –59; Maury Peiperl, “Getting 360-Degree Feedback Right,” Harvard Business Review 79, no. 1 (January 2001): 142 –47; Joyce E. Bono and Amy E. Colbert, Understanding Responses to Multi -Source Feedback: The Role of Core Self Evaluations,” Personnel Psychology 58, no. 1 (Spring 2005): 171 205. –
• CONS
Ø The system is complex in combining all the responses. Ø Feedback can be intimidating and cause resentment if employee feels the respondents have “ganged up.” Ø There may be conflicting opinions, though they may all be accurate from the respective standpoints. Ø The system requires training to work effectively. Ø Employees may collude or “game” the system by giving invalid evaluations to one another. Ø Appraisers may not be accountable if their evaluations are anonymous.
Sources: Compiled from David A. Waldman, Leanne E. Atwater, and David Antonioni, “Has 360 -Degree Feedback Gone Amok?” Academy of Management Executive 12, no. 2 (May 1998): 86 94; Bruce Pfau, Ira Kay, Kenneth Nowak, and Jai Ghorpade, “Does 360 – -Degree Feedback Negatively Affect Company Performance?” HRMagazine 47, no. 6 (June 2002): 54 –59; Maury Peiperl, “Getting 360-Degree Feedback Right,” Harvard Business Review 79, no. 1 (January 2001): 142 –47; Joyce E. Bono and Amy E. Colbert, Understanding Responses to Multi -Source Feedback: The Role of Core Self Evaluations,” Personnel Psychology 58, no. 1 (Spring 2005): 171 205. –
3
360-Degree Performance Appraisal System Integrity Safeguards
• Assure anonymity. • Make respondents accountable. • Prevent “gaming” of the system. • Use statistical procedures. • Identify and quantify biases.
Training Performance Appraisers
Common rater-related errors raterError of central tendency Leniency or strictness errors Similar-toSimilar-to-me errors Recency errors Contrast and halo errors
Rater Errors: Training and Feedback
• Rating Error Training
Ø Observe other managers making errors Ø Actively participate in discovering their own errors Ø Practice job-related tasks to reduce the errors they tend to make Supervisor’s Checklist for the Performance Appraisal
Scheduling 1. Schedule the review and notify the employee ten days to two weeks in advance. 2. Ask the employee to prepare for the session by reviewing his or her performance, job objectives, and development goals. 3. Clearly state that this will be the formal annual performance appraisal. Preparing for the Review 1. Review the performance documentation collected throughout the year. Concentrate on work patterns that have developed. 2. Be prepared to give specific examples of above- or below-average performance. 3. When performance falls short of expectations, determine what changes need to be made. If performance meets or exceeds expectations, discuss this and plan how to reinforce it. 4. After the appraisal is written, set it aside for a few days and then review it again. 5. Follow whatever steps are required by your organization’s performance appraisal system. Conducting the Review 1. Select a location that is comfortable and free of distractions. The location should encourage a frank and candid conversation. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Discuss each topic in the appraisal one at a time, considering both strengths and shortcomings. Be specific and descriptive, not general and judgmental. Report occurrences rather than evaluating them. Discuss your differences and resolve them. Solicit agreement wit h the evaluation. Jointly discuss and design plans for taking corrective action for growth and development. Maintain a professional and supportive approach to the appraisal discussion.
• Feedback Skills Training
Ø Communicating effectively Ø Diagnosing the root causes of performance problems Ø Setting goals and objectives
4
Performance Appraisal Methods
Graphic Rating Scale Mixed Standard Scale
Behavioral Methods
Critical Incident
Behavioral Checklist
Trait Methods
Behavioral Methods
Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS) Behavior Observation Scale (BOS)
ForcedForced-Choice
Essay
Forced Distribution – High Performance Insight
30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Low Low- Avg High- High avg avg Low Low-avg Avg High-avg High
Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales
BARS combine best features of narrative, critical incidents, and quantified scales in five steps
v Generate critical v Develop
Merck began using this rating method for exempt employees when it found other methods resulted in 80% of employees rated a 4 or higher on a 5 point scale.
incidents performance dimensions v Reallocate incidents v Scale the incidents v Develop a final instrument
5
BARS for Grocery Clerks
• Researchers developed a BARS for grocery clerks by collecting critical incidents in 8 areas (rating scale given below):
•Knowledge and judgment •Conscientiousness •Skill in human relations •Skill in operation of register •Skill in bagging •Ability of checkout work •Skill in monetary transactions •Observational ability
Results Methods
• Productivity Measures
Ø Appraisals based on quantitative measures (e.g., sales volume) that directly link what employees accomplish to results beneficial to the organization.
v v
Criterion contamination Focus on short-term results
• Management by Objectives (MBO)
Ø A philosophy of management that rates performance on the basis of employee achievement of goals set by mutual agreement of employee and manager.
1 Extremely Poor
Poor Average Good Extremely Good 9
Highlights in HRM 6
The Balanced Scorecard
The Balanced Scorecard
• The appraisal focuses on four related categories
Ø Financial, customer, processes, and learning
• Ensuring the method’s success
Translate strategy into a scorecard of clear objectives. Attach measures to each objective. Cascade scorecards to the front line. Provide performance feedback based on measures. Empower employees to make performance improvements. Reassess strategy.
Source: Robert Kaplan and David Norton, “Strategic Learning and the Balanced Scorecard,” Strategy & Leadership 24, no. 5 (September/October 1996): 18 –24.
6
Summary of Various Appraisal Methods
Managing the Marginal Employees
High Ability High Motivation Low Ability Low Ability
Solid Performers
Misdirected Effort
Underutilisers
Deadwood
Managing Performance of Marginal Performers
• Solid performers
Ø High ability and motivation; managers should provide development opportunities, Reward Good Perf,
Following Legal Guidelines • Conduct a valid job analysis related to performance. • Base system on specific behaviors or results. • Train raters to use system correctly. • Review performance ratings and allow for employee appeal. • Provide guidance/support for poor performers. • Use multiple raters.
• Misdirected effort
Ø Lack of ability but high motivation; managers should focus on training, Restructured Job Assignment, Coaching, frequent Feedback
• Underutilizers
Ø High ability but lack motivation; managers should focus on interpersonal abilities, honest and Direct Feedback, Use Teambuilding and Conflict resolution, Link Reward to Perf Outcomes Ø Low ability and motivation; managerial action, outplacement, demotion, firing.
• Deadwood
7
doc_834139568.pdf
The report explains what is performance appraisal, reasons why performance appraisal fails sometimes, some of the managerial issues concerning appraisals and also explains some of appraisal methods.
Performance Appraisal Programs
• Performance Appraisal
Ø A process, typically performed annually by a supervisor for a subordinate, designed to help employees understand their roles, objectives, expectations, and performance success.
Appraising and Improving Performance
• Performance management
Ø The process of creating a work environment in which people can perform to the best of their abilities.
Purposes of Performance Management
Reasons Appraisal Programs Sometimes Fail
• Lack of top-management information and support • Unclear performance standards • Rater bias • Too many forms to complete • Use of the appraisal program for conflicting (political) purposes.
Strategic Administrative Developmental
1
Managerial Issues Concerning Appraisals
1. There is little face-to-face discussion between the manager and the employee being appraised. 2. The relationship between the employee’s job description and the criteria on the appraisal form isn’t clear. 3. Managers feel that little or no benefit will be derived from the time and energy spent in the process, or they are concerned only with bad performances. 4. Managers dislike the face-to-face confrontation of appraisal interviews.
Managerial Issues Concerning Appraisals (cont’d)
5. Managers are not sufficiently adept at rating employees or providing them with appraisal feedback. 6. The judgmental role of appraisal conflicts with the helping role of developing employees. 7. The appraisal is just a once-a-year event, and there is little follow-up afterward.
Performance Measures Criteria
Five performance criteria stand out:
Strategic congruence
Establishing Performance Standards
Specificity
Validity
Acceptability
Reliability
2
Performance Standards Characteristics
Strategic Relevance Individual standards directly relate to strategic goals.
Alternative Sources of Appraisal
Criterion Deficiency
Standards capture all of an individual’s contributions.
Criterion Performance capability is not Contamination reduced by external factors. Reliability (Consistency) Standards are quantifiable, measurable, and stable.
Source: From The Wall Street Journal —permission, Cartoon Features Syndicate.
Figure 8–5 8–
Pros and Cons of 360 -Degree Appraisal
Figure 8–5 8–
Pros and Cons of 360 -Degree Appraisal (cont’d) (cont’
• PROS
Ø The system is more comprehensive in that responses are gathered from multiple perspectives. Ø Quality of information is better. (Quality of respondents is mor e important than quantity.) Ø It complements TQM initiatives by emphasizing internal/external customers and teams. Ø It may lessen bias/prejudice since feedback comes from more people, not one individual. Ø Feedback from peers and others may increase employee selfdevelopment.
Sources: Compiled from David A. Waldman, Leanne E. Atwater, and David Antonioni, “Has 360 -Degree Feedback Gone Amok?” Academy of Management Executive 12, no. 2 (May 1998): 86 94; Bruce Pfau, Ira Kay, Kenneth Nowak, and Jai Ghorpade, “Does 360 – -Degree Feedback Negatively Affect Company Performance?” HRMagazine 47, no. 6 (June 2002): 54 –59; Maury Peiperl, “Getting 360-Degree Feedback Right,” Harvard Business Review 79, no. 1 (January 2001): 142 –47; Joyce E. Bono and Amy E. Colbert, Understanding Responses to Multi -Source Feedback: The Role of Core Self Evaluations,” Personnel Psychology 58, no. 1 (Spring 2005): 171 205. –
• CONS
Ø The system is complex in combining all the responses. Ø Feedback can be intimidating and cause resentment if employee feels the respondents have “ganged up.” Ø There may be conflicting opinions, though they may all be accurate from the respective standpoints. Ø The system requires training to work effectively. Ø Employees may collude or “game” the system by giving invalid evaluations to one another. Ø Appraisers may not be accountable if their evaluations are anonymous.
Sources: Compiled from David A. Waldman, Leanne E. Atwater, and David Antonioni, “Has 360 -Degree Feedback Gone Amok?” Academy of Management Executive 12, no. 2 (May 1998): 86 94; Bruce Pfau, Ira Kay, Kenneth Nowak, and Jai Ghorpade, “Does 360 – -Degree Feedback Negatively Affect Company Performance?” HRMagazine 47, no. 6 (June 2002): 54 –59; Maury Peiperl, “Getting 360-Degree Feedback Right,” Harvard Business Review 79, no. 1 (January 2001): 142 –47; Joyce E. Bono and Amy E. Colbert, Understanding Responses to Multi -Source Feedback: The Role of Core Self Evaluations,” Personnel Psychology 58, no. 1 (Spring 2005): 171 205. –
3
360-Degree Performance Appraisal System Integrity Safeguards
• Assure anonymity. • Make respondents accountable. • Prevent “gaming” of the system. • Use statistical procedures. • Identify and quantify biases.
Training Performance Appraisers
Common rater-related errors raterError of central tendency Leniency or strictness errors Similar-toSimilar-to-me errors Recency errors Contrast and halo errors
Rater Errors: Training and Feedback
• Rating Error Training
Ø Observe other managers making errors Ø Actively participate in discovering their own errors Ø Practice job-related tasks to reduce the errors they tend to make Supervisor’s Checklist for the Performance Appraisal
Scheduling 1. Schedule the review and notify the employee ten days to two weeks in advance. 2. Ask the employee to prepare for the session by reviewing his or her performance, job objectives, and development goals. 3. Clearly state that this will be the formal annual performance appraisal. Preparing for the Review 1. Review the performance documentation collected throughout the year. Concentrate on work patterns that have developed. 2. Be prepared to give specific examples of above- or below-average performance. 3. When performance falls short of expectations, determine what changes need to be made. If performance meets or exceeds expectations, discuss this and plan how to reinforce it. 4. After the appraisal is written, set it aside for a few days and then review it again. 5. Follow whatever steps are required by your organization’s performance appraisal system. Conducting the Review 1. Select a location that is comfortable and free of distractions. The location should encourage a frank and candid conversation. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Discuss each topic in the appraisal one at a time, considering both strengths and shortcomings. Be specific and descriptive, not general and judgmental. Report occurrences rather than evaluating them. Discuss your differences and resolve them. Solicit agreement wit h the evaluation. Jointly discuss and design plans for taking corrective action for growth and development. Maintain a professional and supportive approach to the appraisal discussion.
• Feedback Skills Training
Ø Communicating effectively Ø Diagnosing the root causes of performance problems Ø Setting goals and objectives
4
Performance Appraisal Methods
Graphic Rating Scale Mixed Standard Scale
Behavioral Methods
Critical Incident
Behavioral Checklist
Trait Methods
Behavioral Methods
Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS) Behavior Observation Scale (BOS)
ForcedForced-Choice
Essay
Forced Distribution – High Performance Insight
30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Low Low- Avg High- High avg avg Low Low-avg Avg High-avg High
Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales
BARS combine best features of narrative, critical incidents, and quantified scales in five steps
v Generate critical v Develop
Merck began using this rating method for exempt employees when it found other methods resulted in 80% of employees rated a 4 or higher on a 5 point scale.
incidents performance dimensions v Reallocate incidents v Scale the incidents v Develop a final instrument
5
BARS for Grocery Clerks
• Researchers developed a BARS for grocery clerks by collecting critical incidents in 8 areas (rating scale given below):
•Knowledge and judgment •Conscientiousness •Skill in human relations •Skill in operation of register •Skill in bagging •Ability of checkout work •Skill in monetary transactions •Observational ability
Results Methods
• Productivity Measures
Ø Appraisals based on quantitative measures (e.g., sales volume) that directly link what employees accomplish to results beneficial to the organization.
v v
Criterion contamination Focus on short-term results
• Management by Objectives (MBO)
Ø A philosophy of management that rates performance on the basis of employee achievement of goals set by mutual agreement of employee and manager.
1 Extremely Poor
Poor Average Good Extremely Good 9
Highlights in HRM 6
The Balanced Scorecard
The Balanced Scorecard
• The appraisal focuses on four related categories
Ø Financial, customer, processes, and learning
• Ensuring the method’s success
Translate strategy into a scorecard of clear objectives. Attach measures to each objective. Cascade scorecards to the front line. Provide performance feedback based on measures. Empower employees to make performance improvements. Reassess strategy.
Source: Robert Kaplan and David Norton, “Strategic Learning and the Balanced Scorecard,” Strategy & Leadership 24, no. 5 (September/October 1996): 18 –24.
6
Summary of Various Appraisal Methods
Managing the Marginal Employees
High Ability High Motivation Low Ability Low Ability
Solid Performers
Misdirected Effort
Underutilisers
Deadwood
Managing Performance of Marginal Performers
• Solid performers
Ø High ability and motivation; managers should provide development opportunities, Reward Good Perf,
Following Legal Guidelines • Conduct a valid job analysis related to performance. • Base system on specific behaviors or results. • Train raters to use system correctly. • Review performance ratings and allow for employee appeal. • Provide guidance/support for poor performers. • Use multiple raters.
• Misdirected effort
Ø Lack of ability but high motivation; managers should focus on training, Restructured Job Assignment, Coaching, frequent Feedback
• Underutilizers
Ø High ability but lack motivation; managers should focus on interpersonal abilities, honest and Direct Feedback, Use Teambuilding and Conflict resolution, Link Reward to Perf Outcomes Ø Low ability and motivation; managerial action, outplacement, demotion, firing.
• Deadwood
7
doc_834139568.pdf