The 360 Degree Performance Appraisal Method - Essay Example

Performance Appraisal Introduction Nowadays, many employees extremely reject performance appraisal when organizations use the method of performance management to get better results. It means performance appraisal brings a bigger negative impact than positive impact in employee performance. This paper will discuss the role of performance appraisal in an organization. Although initially the set up is good, the purpose of performance appraisal in the actual operation has a lot of problems in the process and leading to performance appraisal system to becoming a burden and even a curse to enterprises. In addition, this paper will also discuss whether having performance appraisal will change present situation. Performance Management Performance management is ‘a goal-oriented and continuous mean to appraise and manage employee’s performance (Dessile 2013). This means performance management forms an integral part of the continuing process of management and its aim is to continue to enhance the performance of individuals, departments and organizations to achieve a common purpose (Armstrong & Taylor 2014). It focuses on the achievement of sustained improvement in performance, the continuous development of skills and capabilities and the continuous development of learning and application of the knowledge gained to produce higher levels of performance. Performance Appraisal It is a common mistake to assume that if organizations implement performance appraisals, they will have achieved performance management. What’s more, performance appraisal is often the central pillar of performance management. According to the performance management cycle, there are four main objectives, which are planning, and action of the plan, monitoring and review. Review is about continuous formal and informal feedback (Cunneen, 2006). The review is also known as Performance Appraisal. Performance appraisal is a scientific project, including target system, responsibility system, evaluation system, evaluation method (Latham, 1981). It is intended to manage, improve and motivate employee performance and generally contribute to the overall output (performance) of an organization (Pilbeam & Corbridge 2010, p.16). Hence, Performance Appraisal is the refinement of performance management. In other words, management is the specific operating mode. They are the means of modern human resource management, but performance management is in a large range, it cannot be directly used for quantification. Performance Appraisal is a specific operation method of human resource management and performance management plan formulation to employees work.Traditionally supervisors was responsible for assessing employee’s performance. This performance was then moderated by the supervisor’s supervisor or a personnel officer (Beardwell & Thompson 2014).  The most common traditional performance appraisal method is the annual evaluation. Most organisations traditionally reserved this exercise for the end of the year thereby creating a big disconnect between actual and expected performance (Taylor, 2008). This also means that the feedback period takes very long and therefore changes of behaviour would take longer to implement. Most employees dreaded this exercise and they would approach it with a great deal of fear and scepticism, hardly the ideal environment for discussing performance (Dessler, 2013). Even though it is based on scientific measurement of performance annual evaluation reports were mostly routine exercises whose outcomes were hardly pursued or implemented. This method leaves the employee at the mercy of his/her Supervisor’s opinion which may or may not be fair. Other performance appraisal methods include the rating scale, critical incidence method, work standards methods, management by objectives (MBO’S) and narrative forms (Armstrong & Taylor 2014). Critical incidents method is a common performance appraisal technique. When using Critical incidents method to appraise employee performance, Supervisors keep a record of uncommonly good or bad work-related behaviours that may be discussed with the employee at a pre-determined time (Taylor 2008). It is used to identify specific examples of good and poor performance. Hence, Critical incidents method not only reflects current performance but also measures performance over time (Dessile 2013). Although this method is used to appraise performance, its real goal is analyze the negative incidents and plans on how to correct the deficiency. In general, these incidents are specific. Hence, Supervisor easily gets the solution and avoids similar behaviour the next time. To the employees, there is no doubt that using Critical incidents method could improve them abilities and behaviours (Taylor 2008). However, performance appraisals must be conducted individually. In short, every employee needs to have their own appraisals done by the manager. Some organizations range from medium sized to large, meaning that there may be tens to hundreds or thousands of employees in organization, all under the same human resources department. This means that the manager doing the performance appraisals has to invest a lot of time into the activity (Armstrong & Taylor 2014). In as much as the appraisals are done to boost the organizations, they can mean wasting a lot of precious production time especially on the part of the manager. Critical incidents method only focuses on typical event. It relies on incidences which may or may not happen (Beardwell & Thompson 2014). It is a matter of chance; it is not scientific but subjective and reactive, hardly the best way to run the human resources. Further action needs to be taken immediately to show a link between an incident and the need of performance improvement. In addition, it lacks comparability. It is easy to make but is not comprehensive and objective therefore it is difficult to make fair judgment and to be assessed convincingly (Meyer & French, 1995). The 360 degree Performance Appraisal Method Evidently there are some unavoidable shortcomings of appraisals based on traditional Performance Appraisal systems, hence the need for a more encompassing Performance Appraisal method that has become increasingly popular these days, known as the 360-degree feedback method. According to the 2005 e-reward survey, 360-degree feedback or similar methods have been by over 30 percent of answerers (Armstrong & Taylor 2014). This design of 360-degree feedback method is produces a more balanced review of an employee’s performance from wide sources of feedback. It refers to the systematic collection and feedback of performance data on an individual or group derived from a number of stakeholders on their performance (Millmore, Lewis, Saunders, Thornhill & Morrow, 2007). Performance data is collected for individuals from the person who they report to, their direct reports, their peers and their internal customers. The range of feedback can be extended to more stakeholders like external customers, clients and suppliers. It may also incorporate a self-assessment process (Armstrong & Taylor 2014). The feedback of this method is from many observations. Since the multi-angle assessment in more than single superior evaluators it is easier to accept the results and take action to improve. It is particularly critical in the development of the individual, because no matter how accurate, your results are not going to change the motive (Armstrong & Taylor 2014). During 360 degree appraisal, feedback comes from many different groups which are all in contact with the employee’s work. It helps to provide competence, quality and a more comprehensive understanding. It means this method has a strong persuasive rather than traditional method (Torrington et al 2011). In addition, implementation of a 360 - degree appraisal feedback can make almost all the employees involved and provides a public platform for communication between superior and subordinate(Torrington et al 2011). A case typical case in point is Google, the giant of software industry all over the world. Google emphasizes 360 degree appraisal feedback. The company usually uses this method to improve leader behavior, open and develop a course and help leader set an effective team. The company thinks this method not only could improve leader’s behavior, but also develop manager’s motivation (The Economic Time 2012). However, Google have not realized the feedbacks of stakeholders cannot be used directly. Swinburne (2001) state that since the feedback comes from many people, it will need further analysis to arrive at a conclusion. Moreover, due to the huge number of stakeholders involved the 360 degree takes long and consumes too much time. This huge number of stakeholders robs the method of confidentiality and leads to the generation of suspicion and cynicism which let them feel uncomfortable (Torrington et al 2011). If stakeholder is peers, this issue will affect organisation culture and even performance. Opinions are bound to vary, for instance the opinion of a line manager and that of the Appraisee is not likely to be similar giving room for controversy. Hence, 360 appraisals not only need the support of senior leadership. The enterprise has to be stable, the implementation process has to be trusting, and the company has to establish a long-term personnel ability development plan (Torrington et al 2011). Conclusion No doubt Performance Appraisal can help organisations achieve goals and develop by setting clear and measurable targets. However it requires the right organisational climate to obtain positive results. Adequate communication and preparation is necessary to make it a success so as to achieve the enterprises strategic objectives. It requires understanding of the maximum efficiency of the human resources, mobilise the enthusiasm of the people, motivate management to have a sense of mission and creativity and integrate the human resource functions. It has to obtain the support of the top management in order to optimise the utilisation of human resources. It is crucial in helping organisations achieve objectives. Otherwise it can become a cumbersome, time consuming and unnecessary burden. Reference List Armstrong, M., & Taylor, S. (2014). Armstrongs handbook of human resource management practice. 13th ed. London: Kogan Page. Beardwell,J & Thompson,A (2014). Human Resource Mangement. 7th ed. Edinburgh: Pearson Education. Cunneen, P. (2006) How to improve performance management, People Management, Vol 12, No 1, 12 January. Dessler, G (2013). Human Resource Mangement. 13th ed. Canada: Pearson Education. Latham, G. P. (1981). Increasing productivity through performance appraisal. Prentice Hall. Meyer, H. H., Kay, E., & French Jr, J. R. (1995). Split Roles in Performance Appraisal. Harvard Business Review. Taylor, S (2008). People Resourcing. 4th ed. London: CIPD. The Economic Time. (2012). 360 degrees Performance Appraisal.Available: http://www.whatishumanresource.com/360-degrees-performance-appraisal. Last accessed 23rd May 2015. Torrington et, al. (2011). Human Resource Mangement. 8th ed. Edinburgh: Pearson Education. Millmore, M., Lewis, P., Saunders, M., Thornhill, A. & Morrow, T. (2007), Strategic human resource management: contemporary issues, FT Prentice Hall, Harlow Read More