Performance appraisal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. (November 2009)

A performance appraisal, employee appraisal, performance review, or (career) development discussion^[1] is a method by which the job performance of an employee is evaluated (generally in terms of quality, quantity, cost, and time). Performance appraisal is a part of career development.

It is the process of obtaining analyzing and recording information about relative worth of an employee to the organization.

Contents 1 Aims 2 Methods 3 Criticism 4 See also 5 References 6 Sources 7 External links

[edit] Aims

Generally, the aims of a performance appraisal are to:

• Give feedback on performance to employees.
• Identify employee training needs.
• Document criteria used to allocate organisational rewards.
• Form a basis for personnel decisions: salary increases, promotions, disciplinary actions, etc.
• Provide the opportunity for organisational diagnosis and development.
• Facilitate communication between employee and administration
• Validate selection techniques and human resource policies to meet federal Equal Employment Opportunity requirements.

[edit] Methods

A common approach to assessing performance is to use a numerical or scalar rating system whereby managers are asked to score an individual against a number of objectives/attributes. In some companies, employees receive assessments from their manager, peers, subordinates, and customers, while also performing a self assessment. This is known as a 360-degree appraisal and forms good communication patterns.

The most popular methods used in the performance appraisal process include the following:

• Management by objectives
• 360-degree appraisal
• Behavioral observation scale
• Behaviorally anchored rating scale

Trait-based systems, which rely on factors such as integrity and conscientiousness, are also commonly used by businesses. The scientific literature on the subject provides evidence that assessing employees on factors such as these should be avoided. The reasons for this are two-fold:

1) Because trait-based systems are by definition based on personality traits, they make it difficult for a manager to provide feedback that can cause positive change in employee performance. This is caused by the fact that personality dimensions are for the most part static, and while an employee can change a specific behavior they cannot change their personality. For example, a person who lacks integrity may stop lying to a manager because they have been caught, but they still have low integrity and are likely to lie again when the threat of being caught is gone.

2) Trait-based systems, because they are vague, are more easily influenced by office politics, causing them to be less reliable as a source of information on an employee's true performance. The vagueness of these instruments allows managers to fill them out based on who they want to/feel should get a raise, rather than basing scores on specific behaviors employees should/should not be engaging in. These systems are also more likely to leave a company open to discrimination claims because a manager can make biased decisions without having to back them up with specific behavioral information.

[edit] Criticism

Performance appraisals are an instrument for social control. They are annual discussions, avoided more often than held, in which one adult identifies for another adult three improvement areas to work on over the next twelve months. You can soften them all you want, call them development discussions, have them on a regular basis, have the subordinate identify the improvement areas instead of the boss, and discuss values. None of this changes the basic transaction... If the intent of the appraisal is learning, it is not going to happen when the context of the dialogue is evaluation and judgment.

—Peter Block^[2]

[edit] See also

• Employment integrity testing

[edit] References

1. ^ MIT Human Resources
2. ^ Abolishing Performance Appraisals: Why They Backfire and What to do Instead, by Tom Coens, Mary Jenkins p.82

[edit] Sources

• Thomas F. Patterson (1987). Refining Performance Appraisal. http://www.joe.org/joe/1987winter/a5.html. Retrieved 2007-01-18. 
• Joyce Margulies (2004-03-24) (PDF). Performance Appraisals. http://www.bnabooks.com/ababna/eeo/2004/eeo55.pdf. Retrieved 2007-01-18. 
• 1998, Archer North & Associatiates, Introduction to Performance Appraisal, http://www.performance-appraisal.com/intro.htm
• U.S. Department of the Interior, Performance Appraisal Handbook

[edit] External links

• Negotiated Approach to Performance Appraisal, University of California
• Discussion on and formats of performance appraisals