The Common Goal and the Overall Productivity of the Organization - Research Paper Example

Introduction The term ‘performance appraisal’ refers to the system whereby a review that is formal in nature of an employee’s work performance is conducted. Performance appraisal can be considered as one of the means of assessing the involvement of each of the employee in an organization. It is to state that the performance appraisal system is quite significant for the purpose of effectively managing as well as assessing the staffs of an organization. It is through effective performance appraisal that tends to establish whether the training and/or development programs need to be conducted for a particular individual after having reviewed the performances (ILOFIP, n.d.). It can be evident that the performance appraisal system is quite significant for the employees since it is one of the means of providing the feedback to the employees with regards to their performance. It assists the management to comprehend whether the performance of a particular employee is at par with the standards as set by them (Jensen, 1997). In an organization where the performance management tends to be absent, the subordinates are unable to receive any kind of feedback from the organization and thus are unaware of the degradation in the quality of their performance. Thus, in this cases it becomes utmost important for an organization to inculcate performance appraisal system to review and assess the job of the individual workers. Performance appraisal tends to motivate the staffs to work for the common goal and thus enhance the overall productivity of the organization. In the research paper, the performance appraisal form has been presented below for that organization where the performance appraisal techniques have not been provided much importance and thus haven’t been properly implemented (Ghana: Quality Health Partners, 2005). Performance Management Form Name: Evaluation Period: Position Title: Date: Rating Scale Excellent: Unique as well as exceptional performance High: Performance is constantly superior Good: Performance is usually above the requirement of the job Average: Performance is recurrently proficient and reliable Mediocre: Performance is ordinary Fair: Performance meets the minimum constriction, however not always Poor: Performance is inadequate to a certain level Bad: Performance fails to meet the job condition on an usual basis Low: Performance is constantly undesirable A. Performance Factors Administration (10%) Administration factors will attempt to measure the ability of the supervisor in demonstrating efficiency in planning, organizing as well as effectively handling activities along with eradicating the redundant activities. Ratings: Excellent High Good  Average  Mediocre Fair Poor Bad Low Knowledge of Work (20%) Knowledge of Work intends to identify knowledge of the employees i.e. supervisors’ skill level and knowledge along with understanding of all phases of the job and those requiring enhanced skills and/or experiences Ratings: Excellent High Good  Average  Mediocre Fair Poor Bad Low Communication (15%) Communication relates to how efficiently a supervisor is listening to his subordinates. It also intends to identify whether the supervisor demonstrates his ideas orally and in writing or not. The other factor to consider is whether the supervisor reports to the management regarding the co-workers on a regular basis. Ratings: Excellent High Good  Average  Mediocre Fair Poor Bad Low Decision Making (20%) Decision Making relates to judging how well a supervisor is in comprehending the problems of the subordinates and thus making timely and practical decisions. Ratings: Excellent High Good  Average  Mediocre Fair Poor Bad Low Team Work (15%) Team work intends to observe how well a supervisor is compatible with the members and how well he demonstrates respect towards the rights of other employees and shows a supportive spirit. Ratings: Excellent High Good  Average  Mediocre Fair Poor Bad Low Leadership (15%) Leadership intends to identify how well does a supervisor supports the other team members in the organization and how good is he at delegating the task and finally achieving them. Ratings: Excellent High Good  Average  Mediocre Fair Poor Bad Low Scheduling (5%) Scheduling intends to observe how well a supervisor is at planning for a particular work and also in allocating the work to his subordinates. Ratings: Excellent High Good  Average  Mediocre Fair Poor Bad Low B .Objective for Upcoming Review Employees Strengths as well as Accomplishments __________________________________________________________________ Performances that need improvements Plan of Action __________________________________________________________________ Employee Comments ________________________________________________________________ Employee Signature Date Evaluator Signature Date Source: (NorthWestern Health Sciences University, n.d.). Justification The above performance appraisal form has been prepared for the supervisors to estimate his/her performances on a regular basis. The rating scale consists of nine parameters ranging from Excellent to Low. The supervisor will be evaluated based on the performance within a certain stipulated time. Seven performance factors have been taken into account since they are the key skills that a supervisor needs to possess. These factors are administration, knowledge of work, communication, team work, decision making, leadership and scheduling. It is to state that greater weightage has been provided to the decision making, team work, leadership, communication and knowledge of work because these are the most essential skills that the supervisor’s job demands. Conversely, comparatively less weightage has been provided to scheduling and administration since they are comparatively less significant; however are important skills that are required. After having assessed the performance of an employee, it is vital to provide feedback on the performance that needs improvement and thus plan the action that the organization along with the supervisor needs to take to make advancement in the performance. The plan can be to provide training to the supervisors. The evaluator also needs to check the reason behind the unsatisfactory performance and thus plan their actions accordingly. References Ghana: Quality Health Partners, (2005). Performance Appraisal Evaluation: Report of Findings and Recommendation. Action Planning. Retrieved Online on June 22, 2011 from http://www.ghanaqhp.org/fileadmin/user_upload/QHP/Performance_Appraisal_Evaluation_Report.pdf ILOFIP, (No Date). Employee Performance Appraisal. Good Practice Guide. Retrieved Online on June 22, 2011 from http://www.ilofip.org/GPGs/Performance%20Appraisal.pdf Jensen, J., (1997). Employee Evaluation: It’s a Dirty Job, But Somebody’s Got to Do it. Magazine. Retrieved Online on June 22, 2011 from http://www.tgci.com/magazine/Employee%20Evaluation.pdf NorthWestern Health Sciences University, (No Date). Management Evaluation. Leadership. Retrieved Online on June 22, 2011 from http://www.nwhealth.edu/hr/refs9.html Read More