The Appraisal System of the Organization - Research Paper Example

Abstract This research paper looks at the performance appraisal including the factors that contribute to its success or its failure. It also examines the characteristics of performance appraisal and assesses the changes that take place in the appraisal of an organization named X. The research compares the appraisal system of the organization X and what the literature says about performance appraisal. The aims for the done comparisons are firstly to find out whether the performance appraisal that is practised in the organization matches what the literature says and secondly to ascertain the much discussions that have been raised concerning the most effective activities within an performance appraisal system. Methodology The methodology for the research is a case study on organization X found in the UAE. The study involves experimental analysis of a certain occurrence in real life situation based on several gathered evidences. The sources of data on this research are both primary and secondary sources, which were preferred so as to achieve uniformity of the obtained results. The primary data was obtained by conducting an interview where the sergeant of the organization X was interviewed while the secondary data was obtained from the literature on performance appraisal (Crowther & Lancastre 2008). Literature review Performance appraisal is defined by Murphy & Jeanette (2005) as the human resource management method that is used to evaluate the job performance of an employee in terms of quality of work, cost paid and the amount of time spent in the work. This is done by the manager or the supervisor in charge of the employees. It is a method that obtains and analyzes information on the net worth of an employee (Raymond 2009). The use of performance appraisals dates back to the Second World War. By then, it was used as simple methods of justifying the income earnings of the employees. That is, in deciding whether the salary or the wagers given to a particular employee is reasonable (Gorden, Zahiruddin & Bjornlund 2005). It was basically founded on material purposes. If the employee was found to be performing less than the salary allocated, the pay would be reduced (Smit 2006). On the other hand, if the employee’s performance could be found to be better than the expectations of the employer, the pay would be increased. The employers could not consider how to develop the appraisal; instead, the pay was considered the only drive towards improving the performance of the employees (DelPo 2007). According to Grote (2006), modern researchers define it as a structured method of interaction between the supervisors and the employees, which is done periodically. This is done either annually or semi annually. The process involves examination and discussion of the performance of the employee with the aim of identifying the strengths, weaknesses and opportunities for improvement on the employee’s performance (Dessler 2008). Some organizations use the findings of the employee’s performance appraisal to decide on the accurate rewards for the employees. These are rewards such as promotions, salary increases and bonuses (Grote 2008). Simpson (2007) states that for the appraisal system to be successful, both the manager and the subordinates should do regular review of the on-the-job performance so that they can keep knowing of how well or how bad they are doing. This knowledge will help the manager to create an environment that will promote high quality and cost effective work (Armstrong 2006). The manager should therefore ensure that he/she conducts annual review of each employee’s performance. Where the manager finds that a certain employee deserves a reward, this will help improve the performance of that employee further and will boost the performance of the organization (Ivancevich 2009). David (2006) argues that for the performance appraisal to benefit an organization, it should be taken as a positive practise that should add to the general welfare of the organization. When done in the right manner, it can be a very effective means of improving the productivity of an organization as well as improving the performance of the employees. David (2006) also says that performance appraisal motivates the employees and raises their self-esteem. The overall importance of performance appraisal is however to strengthen the relationship between the management and the subordinates and promotes their commitment towards the goals of the organization (Falcone & Sachs 2007). A lot of research has been done and has revealed that most of the employees would like to know how they are performing and where their supervisors have positioned them. Discussions of performance of the employees should therefore be done regularly and frequently since they offer an opportunity for communication between the supervisor and those doing the work (Smit 2006). Moorty (2009) explains that performance appraisal offers feedback on the performance of the employees. Following the results obtained, the employer can decide on whether to promote, demote, or terminate the employee. This sometimes results in dissatisfaction of the employees despite the satisfaction it gives to the supervisors. But on the hand, the employees are the one who should obtain much satisfaction from the performance appraisals more than the employers so that the process can become effective and successful. Nevertheless sometimes it is not easy to achieve the balance between the application and the trustworthiness of the performance appraisal system (Torrington, Hall & Taylor 2008). Researchers however recommend that more should be done on the performance appraisal procedures rather than on the measurement of the performance. Performance appraisal is also not always taken positively by the employees since some of the appraisal results and the method applied in its assessment may not be pleasing to them. However performance appraisal lowers the employee turnover and increases the satisfactions they get form their work (Daley 2008). On the other hand, research has also found out that performance appraisal may also have some negative implications to the employees due to the effort in terms of time and energy that he or she puts in achieving the organization’s goals within a given time. They may therefore engage some undesirable methods to achieve the desired results and this may lead to lack of trust. The culture and the culture of the organization and of the nation may also negatively affect the process of performance appraisal. The process of performance appraisal should therefore be well designed to ensure that it does not cause stress to the employees by making them feel as if they are under control, a feeling that may demotivate them and have an impact on their performance (Mathis & Jackson 2008). Comparing formal and informal performance appraisal methods, the informal methods have been found to have more impact on the performance of the organization than the formal processes. The informal methods are where the assessment is done on one on one basis between the supervisor and the employees. The formal method is where performance appraisal forms are filled in by the employees. Those doing the appraisal should therefore be well trained to ensure that it is done appropriately and may yield best results. Other researchers such as Cummings & Worley (2008) however argue that performance appraisal is not the best method to evaluate the employees while others states that it should not be solely relied on. Findings The research carried out in organization X revealed that the organization has about 500 employees. The major role of the organization is to teach police officers on behalf of the government by the use performance appraisal as their management tool. For the time between the years 2008 to 2010, the organization changed the design and the content of the PA that they had been using before to appraise their employees. The interviewed sergeant explained that this was done following noted loopholes on the previously used appraising system. The previously used appraisal system brought in more problems instead of benefits. This research paper therefore seeks to compare the previous and the currently used appraisal system using the data collected and what the academic literature says concerning performance appraisal (Lyster & Arthur 2006). The results of the interview with the sergeant revealed a number of loopholes in the previously used PA system. The sergeant explained that with the previous performance appraisal system, the employees did not have complete awareness of what their duties and responsibilities are. The PA terms were not specific mainly focused on the performance of the employees in the lower level more than on those in the upper level. This hindered the success of the appraisal on the lower level employees. According to what the interviewed sergeant said, the PA also failed because some of the aspects that were being assessed were not in line with what the job of the employees required (Podmoroff 2005). Assessing the abilities and skills of the employees, it was found that the ability to present personal ideas was more relevant for those officers in the higher levels due to their increasing responsibilities. The sergeant says that this has led to prejudice and inequitable rating of the performance of the employees as Shaw & Beatty (2005) suggest that if not carried out properly. Equality and fairness are two very important factors in the success of performance appraisal system. This is because the performance evaluation works as contributing factors to making of administrative decisions that concerns training, reward, and promotion of the employees. This also allows the administration to get feedback as well as the employees. However, some researchers also supports the findings of the case study by stating that in most cases, there arises many problems in the evaluation as well as passing the information to the relevant employees on the importance of performance appraisal and what it aims at achieving. However, performance appraisal should also follow the equity theory which states that to achieve a fair reward system. The inputs should be equal to the outputs. This means that if a person has invested a lot of hard work in achieving something, he or she should receive a reward that is equal to the efforts invested in order to further motivate the person. The equity theory also proposes that where an employee is being compared to a co-worker, the input and the output ration should be equivalent to that of the person being compared with. This will make the employees to appreciate the performance appraisal since the reward they get will be equivalent to the effort they have put. Another issue that was affecting the previously used performance appraisal system was the confidentiality that the supervisors maintained. This led to creating of a lot of suspicion in the employees. Gorden, Zahiruddin & Bjornlund (2005) says that too much confidentiality in the practices of an organization increase the employee turnover, and other undesirable behaviors such as theft, and absenteeism. This may also demotivate the employees According to the interviewed sergeant, the employees did not have adequate access to feedback and this could slow down the rate of improvements on their performance. Literature however says that employees should be able to access the feedback immediately so that they could start planning on how to improve their performance. After studying the performance appraisal that was being applied in the organization, it was found out that the information that was gathered was only signed by one individual thus denying the employees a chance to view how the PA has rated them. This creates an implication that the results could not have been fair and prejudice could be applied in giving the rewards such as promotion (Coens 2009). The main aim of organization X was to create a performance appraisal instrument that on top of indicating a practice that is based on the population, it will also create a sensible performance feedback and deal with regular performance issues. This was their reason for restructuring the old performance appraisal system. Some of the changes that were effected on the performance appraisal were a proper definition of the evaluation scale, grading versus the abilities being classified following different sub groups to give more efficient appraisals, offer an opportunity for employees welfare and training and to allow for information signing by both the manager and the employee (Senior & Swailes 2010). The sergeant however said that after these changes were implemented, positive changes were also noted in the organization as wells as among the employees. For the organization, it became possible to gauge the behaviours of the employees more precisely. The changes also improved the manner in which decisions were being made and improved the way in which were being selected. Above all these, it allowed the leaders to be more just to the employees. In cases where the employees perceive the performance appraisal system as being fair, the success of the system also comes in very easily. The fairness and justice also contributes to the values of the organization (Mohrman, Susan & Lawler 2009). In addition, the new performance appraisal also led to decrease job rotation which increased inherent motivation to the employees (Bruce & Pepiyone 2008). A company can maximise its performance when there is a clear understanding of what needs to be done to motivate its employees. The new performance appraisal that the organization X adopted also helped in properly linking the employees’ worthiness and their pay. It led to making of valid decisions in selection of the employees and improved the general working conditions. Other than the positive things that the new performance appraisal has brought, it has however brought in additional paperwork and other works that take more time since the system has become more complex (Spector 2009). Nevertheless, communication of feedback is still in one direction. Treece (2007) puts it that there is a difference between theory and practise in regard to time taken in performance appraisal. It is therefore very necessary to ensure that information should not flow in one way in any organization (Hickcox 2008). Information should be flowing in all direction to ensure the every member of the organization stays informed and that they stay closer. Proper communication between the employees and their supervisor is very important because it will prevent suspicion and the practise of bias (Alvesson, M., 2006). But on the other hand, communication creates fear to those employees whose performance is below the requirement and those who feel insecure in their work. Other the benefits of the new performance appraisal system to the employees are that it clarified their duties and what is expected of them. It also allows them to receive feedback that will help them to make the necessary improvements on their work. Lastly, in accordance with the literature, the implemented changes also resulted to improved social welfare of the employees, increased motivation and work morale (Falcone & Sachs 2007). This led to development in employee training and in the manner which decisions were being made. Limitations of the study Some of the factors that were limiting in the study included time, level of study, credibility and funds. Time was limiting in that time that was allocated to carry out the study was not adequate to review both the old and the new performance appraisal systems. To be able to cover both, more time could have been allocated. The other limitation was the level of study. The study area was just one organization and this could not have been adequate for generalization of results. Use of a case study is not considered scientific enough since the focus is only on one area (Gerring 2007). The other issue that was limiting is credibility. This is because the study relied upon both secondary and primary sources of information. Simpson (2006) in his article on importance of performance appraisal in management states that credibility is very necessary for its success. Focusing on the primary information, the study was carried out in an impartial ground where there was no bias. However, due to inadequate knowledge, some features of the study might have been out of as a result of personal understanding. Primary data may also be subject to politics within the organization. Concerning the secondary data, it was gathered form academic literature sources some of which might have been outdated and influenced by the bias of the authors of the articles (Yin 2005). The other limiting factor was the funds that were required to carry out the study. Funds were necessary for transport and to purchase research materials such as books. Finally, this knowledge applied in this research report does not involve much professionalism. Conclusion Performance appraisal is highly applied in many strategies within most organizations. Despite the fact that there is no experimental evidence to connect the implementation of PA and improvement in performance of the employees, the case study of organization is an adequate evidence for this. The case study has proved a link between what Daley (2007) says about theories of organizational management and what is practical. The case study has indicated the advantages of performance appraisal if it is applied in the correct manner. In the case of organization X, their previously used ineffective PA system was improved and it became an effective tool to be used for management. From the findings of the study, the implementations that had been done on the PA system of organization X was found to match with what the academic literature says. However, just like any other management tool, Yin (2008) says that performance appraisal has both positives and downfalls. Literature has its suggestions on the best practices which if taken into consideration could yield better changes to the organization as the study indicates. Nevertheless, performance appraisal has to be an annual practise that is done regularly. Organizations should incorporate the practise within their culture so that it can be an ongoing activity. The employees will also be getting feedback regularly and they will be able to take the practise positively as a tool of improving their performance (Morrisey 2010). Apart from periodically evaluating the performance of employees, the management of the organizations should also consider how effective the tool is and do some changes on aspects that are not working well. This is because where the performance appraisal system is not functioning properly, there might be mixed reactions regarding the attributes of the employee’s performance that are given the most and the least priority (Sims 2006). Nevertheless, it is not likely that a performance appraisal will be found which does not face criticism or that is not subject to legal confrontation. Bibliography Crowther, D., & Lancastre, G., 2008, Research methods: a concise introduction to research in management and business consultancy, Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston. McBurney, D., & White T., 2009, Research Methods, Cengage Learning, New York. McNeill, P., & Chapman, S., 2005, Research methods, Routledge, London. Armstrong, M., 2006, A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice (10th ed.). Kogan Page,London. Smit, M., 2006, HR, Show me the money; Presenting an exploratory model that can measure if HR adds value, SAGE, London. Mathis, R., & Jackson, J., 2008, Human resource management, Cengage Learning, Boston. Torrington, D., Hall, H., & Taylor, S., 2008, Human Resource Management, Financial Times Prentice Hall, London. Dessler, G., 2008, Human resource management, Pearson Prentice Hall, New York. Ivancevich, J., 2009, Human Resource Management, McGraw-Hill Higher Education, New York. Raymond., N., et al., 2009, Human Resource Management, McGraw-Hill, New York. Murphy, H., & Jeanette, C., 2006, Performance appraisal: an organizational perspective, Allyn and Bacon, Austria. DelPo, A., 2007, The performance appraisal handbook: legal & practical rules for managers, Nolo, California. Murphy, H., & Jeanette, C., 2005, Understanding performance appraisal: social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives, SAGE, London. Grote, R., 2006, The complete guide to performance appraisal, AMACOM Div American Mgmt Assn, New York. Grore, D., & Grote, R., 2008, The performance appraisal question and answer book: a survival guide for managers, AMACOM Div American Mgmt Assn, New York. Falcone, P., & Sachs, R., 2007, Productive performance appraisals, AMACOM Div American Mgmt Assn, New York. Simpson, G., 2006, Performance Appraisal: An Important Managerial Responsiblity, retrieved on 15th July 2010 from < http://www.managerwise.com/article.phtml?id=161> David, L., 2007, The Importance of Performance Appraisals, retrieved on 15th July 2010 from Moorty, S., 2009, The Importance of Performance Appraisals, retrieved on 15th July 2010 from Daley, D., 2008, Performance appraisal in the public sector: techniques and applications, ABC-CLIO, Texas. Lyster, S., & Arthur, A., 2006, 199 pre-written employee performance appraisals: the complete guide to successful employee evaluations and documentation, Atlantic Publishing Company, Georgia. Cummings, T., & Worley, C., 2008, Organization development & change, Cengage Learning, New York. Shaw, D., & Beatty, R., 2005, Performance measurement, management, and appraisal sourcebook, Kogan Page, London. Spector, B., 2009, Implementing Organizational Change: Theory Into Practice, Prentice Hall, New York. Senior, B., & Swailes, S., 2010, Organizational Change, Pearson Education Canada, Alberta. Gorden, G., Zahiruddin, A., & Bjornlund, L., 2005, Employee motivation: getting p.a.i.d. for productivity, Management Information Service, Chicago. Podmoroff, D., 2005, 365 ways to motivate and reward your employees every day-- with little or no money, Atlantic Publishing Company, Geaorgia. Bruce, A., & Pepiyone, J., 2008, Motivating employees, McGraw-Hill Professional, New York. Treece, M., 2007, Successful business communication, Allyn and Bacon, Austria. Alvesson, M., 2006, Communication, power and organization, Walter de Gruyter, Routt. Mohrman, A., Susan M., & Lawler, E., 2009, Designing performance appraisal systems: aligning appraisals and organizational realities, Jossey-Bass Publishers, Mexico. Falcone, P., & Sachs, R., 2007, Productive performance appraisals, SAGE, London. Coens, T., 2009, Abolishing Performance Appraisals: Why They Backfire and What to Do Instead, Berrett-Koehler, Meulbone. Gerring, J., 2007, Case study research: principles and practices, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Yin, R., 2005, Applications of case study research, SAGE, London. Yin, R., 2008, Case study research: design and methods, University of Chicago, Chicago. Sims, R., 2006, Managing organizational behaviour, Greenwood Publishing Group, Mexico. Daley, D., 2007, Performance appraisal in the public sector: techniques and applications, Willey Science, New York. Morrisey, G., 2010, Performance appraisals in business and industry: key to effective supervision, Addison-Wesley, Michigan. Hickcox, E., 2008, Making a difference through performance appraisal, OISE Press, Ontario. Read More