The performance appraisals. Problems with the traditional evaluations systems - Essay Example

? The Individual at Work Module Assignment 2 Part A summary of my recommendations for the company’s senior management team The performance appraisals should be a daily duty of the manager. Most performance appraisals are usually carried out once or twice a year, and I do not think this exercise presents the actual situation at the ground. Normally, these performance appraisals tend to be “tick the box” exercise. This, in essence, creates anxiety on the side of the management and that of the employees. After the performance appraisal has been completed, they should not be shelved until the next exercise. However, they should be looked at immediately to allow for appropriate review actions. This can help employees improve their performance. The performance appraisal should be objective in nature. This is to say that the perspective of the appraisal should be professional, without personal views. This is because personal views in the performance appraisals tend to be biased, and this is very detrimental. The process of performance appraisal should not come as a surprise to the employees. This gives the employee a sense of security in that he or she knows what is going to happen, and knows the criteria upon which they will be evaluated. To do differently would create the perception that the evaluation process is arbitrary, and this can reduce motivation on the side of the employee, which, in turn, can lead to decreased productivity. The appraisal should be a reflection of what is going on within the organization on a continuous basis. Managing people is an on-going process, so the appraisal should reflect this reality. The managers should not put more focus on the process alone. Rather, they should look at the continuing performance management. To this end, the emphasis should be on the reason why the performance appraisals are carried out. Briefly, a sound performance appraisal should be unbiased and purposely a continuous two-way and specific process. It should not be an exercise that brings in fear and embarrassment to the employees, but an exercise that motivates them. The performance appraisal should be centered around goals and objectives that the employee must meet, along with a plan on helping the employee to meet these goals and objectives. These goals and objectives must be concrete, quantifiable and measurable. The plan should focus on learning objectives, in that the plan should explain what core competencies must be learned to do the job well, as well explaining how these core competencies will be acquired. The plan should also detail how the employee will obtain the additional training, the criteria for promotion, and how the employee may meet the criteria for promotion. The performance appraisal should focus upon specificities about the employee’s performance, as opposed to generalizations. For instance, instead of stating that the employee has problems with tasks, the appraisal should state examples of when that employee has problems with tasks, as well as concrete advice on how to overcome these specific deficiencies. Likewise, instead of stating that the employee is good at managing people, the appraisal should state specific examples of when that employee showed leadership skills. This would show that the appraiser has knowledge of the employee’s actual performance. Part 2 Recommendations about how the success of a new performance appraisal process should be evaluated The success of a new performance appraisal process can be evaluated through various ways namely: The evaluation process should be a series of evaluations by the employees and the managers. The evaluation process should establish criteria by which the appraisals should be evaluated. This criteria should be decided upon by the employees themselves and the management team. For instance, one of the employees indicated that she felt that the performance appraisals did not evaluate her performance correctly, that the criteria was incorrect and that there was no discussion on how to improve. For this employee, the criteria by which to evaluate the performance appraisal process would be whether the process addresses these concerns. Moreover, it seems that many employees have the same concerns about the process. Therefore, the employees should be able to agree upon the criteria that the performance appraisals should meet, then this criteria should be used. On the other hand, the management might have a different view on the performance appraisal process, for they might be examining different criteria then the employees in this situation. The management team should come up with their criteria for evaluating the process, and their evaluation of the performance appraisal should concern whether the appraisal meets this criteria. After the employees and the managers create the criteria to be used, these two reports should be synthesized. In this way, it can be ascertained that both the employees and the management team has appropriate input in the process. The evaluation of the performance appraisal should also take into account how well the performance appraisal is tailored to individual job assignments. For instance, a company may be using the same performance appraisal for all employees, whether the employee is in IT or is an administrative assistant. This would clearly be inappropriate, as each job will have different goals and different ways to reach these goals. To this end, the employees and the management team should answer a questionnaire about how well the performance appraisal is tailored to the job assignment, and, if the performance appraisal is not appropriately tailored, the employees and management teams must give recommendations on how to properly tailor the performance appraisal so that it fits the job criteria. There should be a time frame for the evaluations. For instance, there should be a one to two week time frame by which the employees and management team creates the criteria that will be used to evaluated the performance appraisal. Then, the actual synthesis of the material should take another two weeks. Finally, the application of this criteria to the performance appraisal itself should take another week. Finally, the management team and the employees should create a “wish list” which details what they would look for in performance appraisals in the future. Again, these lists should be synthesized. The items which are repeatedly mentioned, such as the desire for more specifics on the job performance itself, should definitely be included in future appraisals. In addition, perhaps some more creative suggestions may be used, if these suggestions are well thought out and appropriate. Part 3 The rationale behind the recommendations in Parts 1 and 2 Introduction Sound performance evaluation allows workers and their managers communicate. In other words, the best performance appraisals should allow for both sides to share their views and knowledge. This is contrast to traditional evaluation methods, in which the management take the role of the judge, telling the employee whether their performance is good or not. This is most likely due to the fact that most of such evaluations are more or less manager’s ad hoc rulings and sometimes they may not be legitimate (Nelson, p 94). Due to problems associated with the traditional methods, in which the manager provides feedback, and the employee does not, new types of performance evaluations are emerging in organizations. This new types of evaluations are geared toward growth and improvement of employees. The traditional methods are done for reasons such as pay increases, promotions or rewards (Ulrich, p 197). The key significant attributes of the new types of performance evaluations are all round communication rather than one-way conversation like the case of traditional review techniques. Problems with the traditional evaluations systems According to renowned psychologists, the convectional performance evaluations systems destroy teamwork as noted by Allen et al (p 20). This is because they put more emphasis on managers evaluating employees. In the process, these managers usually act personally rather than being professional in their role as judges. The best performance evaluation systems should give feedback to allow those being evaluated to understand their areas of weaknesses so that they can improve (Bacal, p 120). Usually, traditional performance evaluation systems are best at sniffing out good performers and poor performers; however, they do not make a distinction on those in the middle ground. This can be very problematic when used for pay adjustments and rewards unless only employees at the extremes are rewarded differently (Collins, p 92). With the traditional evaluation systems, workers are judged by one person who can be biased or provide a partial view of what is on ground. The new methods offer a balanced perspective. Traditional methods also have other problems such as judge’s carelessness and, in the worst-case scenario, the use of the evaluations for political or personal gains. There is also the problem whereby the workers’ strength or weakness in one field is spread to other fields (Heath and Heath, p 62). Similarly, lenience and strictness mistakes may cause the workers to be judged low or high than their real position (Heath and Heath, p 72). The new evaluation systems avoid these problems inherent with traditional systems. Furthermore, a good performance appraisal should give some feedback on how to develop the employee. This is a function that is just as important as the evaluative process. In this way, the employee not only has feedback on how his or her performance. For instance, Fletcher (2001) describes a “learning goal orientation,” which is feedback on how the employee can gain better core competencies and skills, along with information on how to master new problems and tasks. According to Fletcher, this kind of evaluative process is more effective then the more traditional performance goal orientation, in which the employee’s performance is evaluated and the employee must demonstrate one’s competence (Fletcher, 2001). Discussions In most cases, peer evaluation systems usually stand a good chance of being accepted by the employees. They also allow all stakeholders to be involved in the performance evaluation process. This is because they are steady, role-relevant and are very accurate. Moreover, by assisting peers to comprehend each other’s role and communicating problems in friendlier manners, peer evaluations probably help individuals to live peacefully with each other (Cook, p 199). This in turn improves the organization’s performance. To the employees this makes the workplace a good environment to work at and less embarrassing. Further, this can help the workers to put more of their energy on their duties meaning that there will be no need of overtime. This in essence decreases the cost of production hence high profit. Peer evaluation systems can only work well if the participants understand that the management will not use them to determine pay rise, rewards or promotions. Nevertheless, a peer evaluation system with the authority to offer promotion, pay increase or penalty can be healthy in some organizations if the workers believe that performance evaluation is a good idea (Mishra and Mishra, p 209). In the self-evaluation approach, employees are key drivers of the process. The employees know their tasks well and this is the idea behind self-evaluation system. Here, the employees rate themselves on different scales. They are also required to raise their views on areas that need improvements. The strength of this performance is that it affords the employees a chance to state their goals. It also helps them to expose areas that they think they are weak. Usually, managers do not take part in this performance process even though the process itself allows interaction between the managers thereby bringing in good relationship between the two sides (Weisbord, p 187). This approach also helps the employees to understand their tasks well. In the self-evaluation process, the managers act as counselors rather than a rater like in other approaches. At this position, the managers can provide the support needed by employees to improve their performance. The process itself enhances the employee’s dignity and this makes them feel respected. The employees are taken as equal players in the evaluation process and this enhances their commitment to the organization’s goals and objectives (Nathan, p 26). This, in essence, makes the whole process satisfying and dynamic. Upward evaluations are best for big organizations. In this process managers acts as fans and must be ready to agree with findings of the evaluations process. This performance evaluation process is based on the idea that the managers in some cases may fail to understand that what they tell their subordinates measure up to what they really do (Sutton, p 27). With Upward evaluations, managers are compelled to act consistently with what they say and this brings into play integrity to their character. For upward evaluation process to be credible, an expert should called in to help those involved understand the evaluation results. Particularly, the participants should be helped to resolve misunderstandings. This in essence will help them focus their energies on the recommendations of the review process (Menand, p 201). All- around feedback evaluation helps in exposing all characteristics of person’s life. Collaboration with individuals outside their section and concern towards clients among others allows this review process to get more information than the other performance evaluation processes. All- around feedback evaluation system assist employees who are not in good terms with their managers to resolve their conflicts (Greenleaf, p 74). All-round feedback can be used for individual’s growth and development. This is because it collects information from various sources including other employees, supervisors, outsiders and the participants themselves. This brings in the organization a good relationship, improved communications and increased knowledge sharing (Gladwell, p 202). It also brings efficiency in organization’s productivity and allows the managers understand where the employees need training. This in essence helps the organization achieve its long-term goals and objectives. Most managers see performance evaluation as very difficult task and as such, they normally do not like it. This can be true given that the fact that, the practice of performance evaluation, as conventionally conducted, is faulted. This is because the traditional performance evaluations methods are not based on values, are not vision driven, and they are not oriented to the organization’s mission (Covey, p 24). Disparities between the employee’s input and appraisal ratings can generate a conflict environment that can stay as long as possible (Coens and Jenkins, p 122). In performance measurement system, feedback is very vital for the success of the system (Bok, p26). Nevertheless, this should be a discussion. There should be a dialogue between the employee and his/her manager as both have some views to bring to the table. Feedback should be collected from all stakeholders including external sources in order to have clear and correct input of individual contribution to the organization. It should be organization’s duty to help all her employees to increase their skills. An organization grows and develops on this basis. Moreover, this particular performance evaluation is appropriate and tailored to this company. This is because the employees who have conducted an exit interview gave very specific feedback on why they thought that the present performance appraisal was inappropriate and inadequate. This performance appraisal addresses these employees’ concerns, while giving them a voice in the process. The proposed performance appraisal gives the employees a chance to evaluate the current performance appraisal, as well as design their idea of an ideal appraisal. In this way, the employees can know that their opinions are valued, while the performance appraisals themselves can be more geared towards specificities in job performance, which is what the employees are asking for. The emphasis on development also addresses a key concern that the employees have, as the employee comment provided stated that there was not a discussion on how to improve skills and training. This performance appraisal corrects this, as the one of the main objectives of this proposal is development of the employee, in that it provides a concrete plan for the particular employee to develop the skills that he or she might be deficient in. Fletcher (2001) would agree that this approach is best, as a learning goal orientation has been shown to be more effective then performance goal orientated performance assessments. Conclusion The above suggested appraisal systems can work for both large and small organizations. These performance measure systems can expose things that are usually not heard, minimize stress, enhance communications, and probably increase employees’ performance remarkably. Briefly, employee’s involvement the appraisal system is essential. Truly, if they are part in designing the system, it is likely that they will own it and be dedicated to it. These in essence will benefit both the organization and the employees. References Allen, Janis and McCarthy, Michael. You Made My Day: Creating Co-Worker Recognition & Relationships. New York: Lebhar-Friedman Books, 2000. Bacal, Robert. The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Dealing with Difficult Employees. Indianapolis: Alpha Books/Macmillan USA, Inc., 2000. Bittel, Lester and Newstrom, John. What Every Supervisor Should Know. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1990. Bok, Derek. Our Underachieving Colleges: A Candid Look At How Much Students Learn and Why They Should Be Learning More. New Jersey: Princeton University, 2006. Buckingham and Coffman, Curt. First, Break All The Rules, What the World’s Greatest Managers do Differently. New York: Simon&Schuster,1999. Coens, Tom and Jenkins, Mary. Abolishing Performance Appraisals: Why They Backfire And What To Do Instead. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2002. Collins, Jim. How The Mighty Fall and Why Some Companies Never Give In. New York: HarperCollins, 2009. Cook, Marshall. Effective Coaching. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1999. Covey, Stephen. The 8th Habit from Effectiveness to Greatness. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2004 Fletcher, Clive (2001) Performance appraisal and management: The developing research agenda. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, vol. 74, pp. 473-487. Gallagher, Carol. Going to the Top. New York: Penguin Books, 2000. Gladwell, Malcolm. The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 2002. Greenleaf, Robert. Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power & Greatness. New York: Greenleaf Center, 2002. Heath, Chip and Heath, Dan. Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die: Made to Stick. New York: Random House, 2007. Menand, Louis. The Marketplace Of Ideas: Reform and Resistance in the American University. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., Inc., 2010 Mishra, Aneil and Mishra, Karen. Trust is Everything: Become the Leader Others Will Follow. 2008. Nathan, Rebekah. My Freshman Year: What A Professor Learned By Becoming A Student. New York: Penguin Books, 2006. Nelson, Bob. 1001 Ways to Reward Employees. New York: Workman Publishing, 1994. Sutton, Robert. The No Asshole Rule. New York: Warner Business Books, 2007. Ulrich, Dave. Human Resource Champions: The Next Agenda for Adding Value and Delivering Results. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1997. Weisbord, Marvin. Productive Workplaces. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1987. Read More