Assessing the Performance of People in the Organizations - Essay Example

Introduction Earlier it was widely believed that it was the manager’s job to measure a subordinate’s performance. Now, most of the management thinkers and theorists are of the view that the manager has to help people (not “subordinates”) set their goals that are compatible with the objectives of the organization. According to Performance Appraisal (2011), many office managers view the performance appraisal process as something which must be done because they are required to do so. The job of evaluating others is mostly considered as an unpleasant job. The main reason being: if you do it diligently and honestly, you end up giving bad reports to some, which they actually deserve. But, if you try to please everyone by doling out good reports, your seniors might question your judgment and ability to differentiate between good and bad workers. Therefore, most of the initiating officers tend to take the performance appraisal process as a millstone round their necks. 2. Definition Wikipedia (2011) described performance appraisal as a systematic method of evaluating an individual’s on the job performance against pre-determined standards and his/her potential for the future responsibilities usually by his supervisors or managers. 3. Purposes of Performance Appraisal One may count as many as twelve purposes of performance appraisal; however, the most basic is to provide information about job performance. Following are the important purposes of performance appraisal:- 3.1 Basic Purpose. The basic purpose of performance appraisal is to get information about how people are doing their jobs and find the problems affecting the overall performance of individuals (Murphy & Margulies 2004). 3.2 Judgmental Purposes In judgmental perspective, performance appraisal may provide a basis for reward allocation, identification of high performance/high potential individuals and low performance/low potential individuals. It is also a tool to validate selection procedures, evaluate the usefulness of previous training programs and to provide a basis for promotions, transfers, layoffs (Ahmed 1998). 3.3 Developmental Purposes The developmental purpose of performance appraisal is to bring improvement in job performance, identify training and development requirements, and develop ways to overcome obstacles and performance barriers and to enhance motivation levels among personnel (Murphy & Cleveland 1995). 4. Benefits The process of performance appraisal helps both the managers and the workers by providing employees an opportunity to indicate the direction and level of their ambitions. It induces leaders to take interest in their subordinates’ development which in turn becomes a motivation tool in helping the organization to retain the ambitious and capable personnel instead of losing them to the competitors. It identifies areas where specific training is needed, desired, or available. Performance appraisal can be used as a motivational and encouragement tool for employees who have been trying to perform well (Rao 2004). Performance appraisal is also a means for communicating and documenting dissatisfaction in respect of unacceptable employee performance. It provides a reliable basis for making a myriad of organizational decisions concerning promotions, deputation, rewards, postings at key appointments, etc. 5. Process for Performance Appraisal Since a good report can qualify the individual for more important responsibilities, more rewarding assignments and promotion to higher ranks, therefore, a development plan should be preferably tailor made for each employee. In general way, a development plan should include the following steps:- 5.1 Analyze Job Duties and Responsibilities Job duties and responsibilities should be clearly spelled out and be available in written form for the benefit of the organization as well as the individual (Elizabeth et al. 2006). 5.2 Establish Standards of Job Performance Standards of performance for each job should be established and known to both initiating officer and the subordinate (Ziagon 1999). 5.3 Observe Performance Initiating officer should observe performance of his subordinates and make written observations and prepare written observations in their respective folders for future use (Shields 2006). 5.4 Provide Feedback Initiating officer should provide feedback to employee from time to time so that timely corrective measures could be taken (Armstrong & Baron 2011). 5.5 Preparation of Annual Report Initiating officer should compare performance with the established standards. He should also note discrepancies (positive as well as negative) and apprises subordinate of his annual report. Areas needing improvement should also be highlighted and methods of improvement be discussed (Schwartz 2006). 5.6 Make a plan for Employee Development US Department of Interior (2004) recommended in its performance appraisal handbook that a plan for employee development should be made. Such a plan may include special assignment and training courses. Employees should be stimulated for such development plans by linking appropriate financial/non-financial incentives with improvement in performance. 5.7 Review Progress Progress of the employee should be reviewed periodically and accomplishments should be recognized. It is important to give a sufficient time span between two performance appraisals to monitor the progress (Drake 1997). 6. Basic principles of Performance Appraisal In the following paragraphs, basic principles that if followed may make the performance appraisal more useful, effective, dynamic and responsive to organizational objectives:- 6.1 Use Multiple Evaluators One of the disadvantages of the appraisal system is its total reliance on the subjective judgment of one individual, namely, the initiating officer. As already noted, the traits rating system envisages an all-powerful role of the initiating officer, most of the assessments tend to indicate their own style and personal characteristics than the performance of assessees. As no two initiating officers can think and judge alike, even similar levels of performance of two individuals are usually rated differently by different initiating officers. However, it has been noted in many organizations that as the number of evaluators increases, the probability of getting more accurate information increases. For this purpose, a number of companies are using peer rating and subordinate-rating in addition to the rating of initiating officers. This approach entails rating of instructors by their students at the end of a training course. This is also called 360 performance evaluation method (Goodwin 2008). 6.2 Use Multiple Criteria Instead of using a single criterion for judging peoples’ performance, it is more suitable to use multiple criteria. This is more desirable so because most of the personnel do not perform a single task, they carry out a number of different things. Therefore, criteria should be identified that evaluates performance of people on different tasks. Of course, it will not be possible to evaluate each and every activity but at least critical activities can be identified and evaluated that lead to high or low performance (Lee 2006). 6.3 Evaluate Performance, Not Traits Many traits, which are usually considered to be related to good performance, may, in fact, have little or no performance relationship. For example, traits like loyalty, initiative, courage, reliability, and self-expression are intuitively appealing as desirable characteristics in personnel. But the relevant question is: “Are individuals who are evaluated as high on those traits high performers than those who rate low?” We can’t answer this question easily. We know there are employees who rate high on these characteristics and are poor performers. We can find others who are excellent performers but do not score well on traits such as these. Another weakness of trait evaluation is the judgment itself. What is “loyalty”? When is an employee “reliable”? What one person considers “loyalty,” another might not. So traits suffer from weak inter-rater agreement (Hickman 2001). 6.4 Document Performance Behavior in Written Form Since even the most intelligent officer with the sharpest memory cannot remember even the critical performances of most of his subordinates, it is useful to document the performance behavior of each individual as and when it occurs (Vinson 1996). 6.5 Use Full Scale In order to avoid the adverse effects of rating everyone around average and using less scale range for grading raters might be forced by an appraisal system to rank subordinates from the best to the least able (Fisher 1997). 6.6 Take Group Performance into Account Also Since individual efforts lead to collective performance, therefore, achievements of the whole section should also be taken into account while raising the evaluation report on an individual (Krikpatrick 2006). 6.6 Rate Single Trait/Factor of all Personnel at One Time Initiating officers must be trained to rate all of their subordinates on a single factor or trait before moving on to the next factor (Maddux 2000). 6.7 Discourage Beliefs in the Stereotypes Harvard Business Review (2005) suggested that during professional courses, the initiating officers must be exhorted to see people as individuals while making them aware that believing in stereotypes is also a concealed form of racism. 6.8 Create Atmosphere of Openness Atmosphere of openness and participative management helps a lot in making an appraisal system work. Therefore, lower ranks should be involved in the performance appraisal process to make it more productive for the organization as well as for the individuals (Henderson 1980). 6.9 Use Critical Incidents Limitations of the traits appraisal approach could also be offset by asking the initiating officers to record in writing the critical incidents that were made basis of their assessments. These incidents should be important events, performances or decisions critical for effective performance in a particular job. These incidents may include outstanding or unsatisfactory performances. In this way, some meaning could be injected in the grades given to the assessees (Bohlander & Snell 2007). 6.10 Train Initiating Officers While it is almost unthinkable to expect an untrained person to evaluate the performance of a machine, in case of evaluating the human resources, training for the initiating officers is unfortunately not considered essential in many organizations. There is substantial evidence that training evaluators can make them more accurate raters. Common errors like grading an individual’s performance based on a single good or bad event, adopting lenient behavior by raters and delay in timing for raising a performance appraisal following performance requiring a review could be minimized, even eliminated in workshops when initiating officers practice observing and rating behaviors. But the effects of the training tend to diminish with the passage of time; therefore, regular refresher sessions are essential (Kotter 2011). 7. Alignment of Staff performance with organizational strategy and goals Every company has a vision and mission that decides where the company is heading. Employees performance must be align with company objectives so that corporate goals may be achieved. Within an organization, all the processes must compliment the organizational objectives if it does not then this must not be a process. Performance appraisal is one such process if aligned with organizational goals renders desirable results to tale organization in right direction. For this it is important that all employees are in knowledge of corporate goals and objectives that have already been set at a very early stage of the organizational maturity. Compensation programs like rise in pay and bonuses may be linked performance appraisals to increase the performance of organization towards its objectives and for effective utilization of this tool. It is also a source to identify the problematic areas and critical issues faced by employees during their work that may hinder overall organizational performance. It has been observed that personal goal alignment with the organizational strategic and operational objectives is higher at senior level but decreases as levels are moved down to worker kevel. It is mainly because performance appraisal is managed as an HR process rather than a business process. It is critical that the goals defined should be relevant, significant, measurable and complete and comprehendible by all employees using common point of view (Smither 1998). To design a strategic performance appraisal system, identification of behaviors and goals that support success of company’s vision and mission is critical at senior corporate level. Also performance factors must be in line with company’s strategic goals. Understanding of corporate goals and objectives must be engrossed till root level of the company so everyone is focused at the same aim. At manager level, departmental activities and results necessary to support organizational goals must be determined that may identify desired employee behaviors (Allan et al. 1989). For all organizational positions, factors for success must be identified and communicated to each worker. Assign and prioritize goals to each employee considering his strengths and weaknesses relevant to his position but this assignment must be aligned with organizational strategic goals against which his performance is to be measured (Grote 1996). Conclusion Assessing the performance of people in the organizations is not an easy task. It requires appropriate training, personal commitment to fair dealing, proper and updated records of performances of people and above all, a dynamic, workable assessment system. There are a number of limitations of performance appraisal system that contribute to faulty assessments. The most crucial limitation is overwhelming reliance on the personal judgment of the initiating officers. Another limitation is the system’s bias toward trait rating than performance rating. While many of these limitations can be tackled by employing a number of remedial measures, some very important problems cannot be removed due to limitations of the system itself (Patterson 1987). In order to bring about the long lasting improvements in the performance appraisal system, there is a need to study and apply the modern trends in human resource management. References Wikipedia (2011) Performance Appraisal, [online] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performance_appraisal [Accessed: 17th April 2011]. Performance Appraisal (2011) Introduction to Performance Appraisal, [online] Available at: http://www.performance-appraisal.com/intro.htm [Accessed: 17th April 2011]. Patterson, R. (1987). Refining Performance Appraisal. Journal of Extension [online]. 25, Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1987winter/a5.php [Accessed 17th April 2011 ]. Goodwin, P. (2008). Human Resources : What Is Employee Performance Appraisal? . [online]. Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBKZ6Puml1c [Accessed 19th April 2011]. US Department of Interior (2004). A Guide for Managers/Supervisors and Employees. London: The Stationery Office. Murphy, T. and Margulies, J. (2004) Performance Appraisal, ABA Labor and Employment Law Section Equal Employment Opportunity Committee 2004 Mid-Winter Meeting, 1(1), p.7. Grote, R. (1996) The Complete Guide to Performance Appraisal, New York: AMACOM, p.4-103. Murphy, K. and Cleveland, J. (1995) Undestanding Performance Appraisals, California: Sage Publications. Ahmed, M. (1998) Performance Appraisal Management, New Delhi: Anmol Publication, p.37-93. Smither, J. (1998) Performance appraisal: State of The Art in Practice, New York: Jossey-Bass Publishers, p.43-89. Allan, M, Susan, R & Edward, L 1989, Designing Performance Appraisal Systems, New York: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Rao, V. (2004) Performance Management and Appraisal Systems : HR Tools for Global Competitiveness, New York: Sage Publications, p.39-117. Henderson, R. (1980) Performance Appraisal: Theory to Practice, Virginia: Reston Publications, p.79-166. Harvard Business Review (2005) Harvard Business Review on Appraising Employee Performance. Boston: Harvard Business Press. Kirkpatrick, D. (2006) Improving Employee Performance Through Appraisal and Coaching, 2nd ed. New York: AMACOM, p.47-132. Elizabeth, H, Dilum, J & Hay, G 2006, Managing and Measuring Employee Performance, 2nd ed. London: Kogan Page Publishers. Ziagon, K. (1999) How to Measure Employee Performance, Pennsylvania: Zigon Performance Group. Shields, J. (2006) Managing Employee Performance and Reward, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p.59-78. Armstrong, M. and Baron, A. (2011) Managing Performance, London: CIPD Publishing, p.112-126. Schwartz, A. (2006) Performance Appraisal: Appraisal and Meeting, 2nd ed. New York: Schwartz & Associates, p.57-111. Maddux, R. (2000) Effective Performance Appraisals, California: Crisp Publications, p.7-14. Drake, J. (1997) Performance Appraisal: One More Time, California: Crisp Publications, p.33-39. Lee, C. (2006) Performance Conversations: An Alternative To Appraisals, Arizona: Fenestra Books, p.83-109. Hickman, S. (2001) How to Conduct a Performance Appraisal, Virginia: ASTD Publications, p.1-7. Vinson, M. (1996) The pros and cons of 360-degree feedback: Making it work, Training and Development, p.11–12. Fisher, M. (1997) Performance Appraisals, London: Kogan Page Publications, p.3-22. Bohlander, G. and Snell, S. (2007) Managing Human Resources, Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning, p.379. Kotter, J. (2011) The General Managers, New York: The Free Press, p.170-182. Read More