PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

The performance is measured against such factors as Job knowledge Quality and quantity of output Initiative Leadership Abilities Supervision Dependability Co-operation Judgment Versatility Health

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

Assessment should not be confined to past performance alone. Potential of the employee for future performance must also be assessed

IMPORTANCE OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

IMPORTANCE OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

IMPORTANCE OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL PROCESS

Objectives of PA

Establish Job Expectations Design an Appraisal Programme Appraise Performance Performance interview

Archive Data

Use data for appropriate purposes

THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL PROCESS

1. Objectives of Appraisal Promotions and transfers Assessing training needs Pay increases

2. Establish Job expectation Informing employees what is expected of them

THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL PROCESS

3. Design Appraisal Programme 3.1 Formal versus informal appraisal Formal appraisal occurs once or twice in a year Informal appraisal occurs whenever the supervisor feels a need for communication.

3.2 Whose performance should be rated Individuals or teams

THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL PROCESS

3.3 Who are the Raters? Immediate supervisors Specialists from the HR department Subordinates Peers Committees Clients Self appraisal Combination of several

THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL PROCESS

360-degree appraisal

Clients

Superiors

Subordinates

Peers

THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL PROCESS

360-degree appraisal When appraisal is made by superiors, peers, subordinates and clients, it is called the 360-degree system of appraisal.

It was developed at General Electric, USA in1992.

THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL PROCESS

3. Design Appraisal Programme 3.3 Who are the Raters

THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL PROCESS

THE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL PROCESS

3.5 Timing of Evaluation Once in three months Six months One year

3.6 Methods of Appraisal Past oriented methods Future-Oriented Methods

METHODS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

Past-Oriented Methods Rating Scales Checklist Forced Distribution Method Critical Incidents Method Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales Field Review Method Future Oriented Methods Management by objectives Psychological Appraisals Assessment Centres 360-Degree Feedback

Performance Tests and Observations Confidential Records

Essay Method Cost Accounting Method Comparative Evaluation Approaches

METHODS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

RATING SCALE
Criteria Dependability Initiative Overall output Attendance Attitude Co-operation Excellent 5 Good 4 Acceptable 3 Fair 2 Poor 1

METHODS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

Advantages Economy Easy to administer Limited training of rater Standardisation Disadvantages Raters bias,

CHECKLIST
Yes Is the employee interested in the job? Do they obey orders? Do they observe safety precautions Do they report on time Do they complete the work on time? No

METHODS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

METHODS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

METHODS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

METHODS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

Developing a BARS
Identify important job dimensions Write short statements of job behaviors Assign statements (anchors) to job dimensions Set scales for anchors

BARS

PROBLEMS IN PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

Appraiser discomfort Lack of objectivity Halo/horn error Leniency/strictness Central tendency Recent behavior bias Personal bias Manipulating the evaluation Employee anxiety

APPRAISER DISCOMFORT
Performance appraisal process cuts into managers time Experience can be unpleasant when employee has not performed well

LACK OF OBJECTIVITY

In rating scales method, commonly used factors such as attitude, appearance, and personality are difficult to measure Factors may have little to do with employees job performance Employee appraisal based primarily on personal characteristics may place evaluator and company in untenable positions

HALO/HORN ERROR
Halo error - Occurs when manager generalizes one positive performance feature or incident to all aspects of employee performance resulting in higher rating Horn error - Evaluation error occurs when manager generalizes one negative performance feature or incident to all aspects of employee performance resulting in lower rating

LENIENCY/STRICTNESS
Leniency - Giving undeserved high ratings Strictness - Being unduly critical of employees work performance Worst situation is when firm has both lenient and strict managers and does nothing to level inequities

CENTRAL TENDENCY

Error occurs when employees are incorrectly rated near average or middle of scale

May be encouraged by some rating scale systems requiring evaluator to justify in writing extremely high or extremely low ratings

RECENT BEHAVIOR BIAS

Employees behavior often improves and productivity tends to rise several days or weeks before scheduled evaluation Only natural for rater to remember recent behavior more clearly than actions from more distant past Maintaining records of performance

PERSONAL BIAS (STEREOTYPING)

Managers allow individual differences such as gender, race or age to affect ratings they give
Effects of cultural bias, or stereotyping, can influence appraisals Other factors Example: mild-mannered employees may be appraised more harshly simply because they do not seriously object to results

MANIPULATING THE EVALUATION

Sometimes, managers control virtually every aspect of appraisal process and are in position to manipulate system Example: Want to give pay raise to certain employee. Supervisor may give employee a undeserved high performance evaluation

EMPLOYEE ANXIETY

Evaluation process may create anxiety for appraised employee Opportunities for promotion, better work assignments, and increased compensation may hinge on results

CONDUCTING THE PERFORMANCE REVIEW

A special time should be set for formal discussion of employees performance

Withholding appraisal results is absurd Performance review allows them to detect any errors or omissions in appraisal, or employee may simply disagree with evaluation and want to challenge it

THE APPRAISAL INTERVIEW

Achilles heel of entire evaluation process

Scheduling interview
Interview structure Use of praise and criticism Employees role Use of software

Concluding interview

INTERVIEW STRUCTURE

Discuss employees performance

Assist employee in setting goals and personal development plans for next appraisal period Suggesting means for achieving established goals, including support from manager and firm

CONDUCTING SEPARATE INTERVIEWS

There is merit in conducting separate interviews for discussing (1) employee performance and development and (2) pay When the topic of pay emerges in interview, it tends to dominate conversation with performance improvement taking a back seat

USE OF PRAISE AND CRITICISM

Praise

is appropriate when warranted Criticism, even if warranted, is especially difficult to give Constructive criticism is often not perceived that way

EMPLOYEES ROLE

Should go through diary or files and make notes of every project worked on, regardless of whether they were successful or not
Information should be on appraising managers desk well before review

CONCLUDING THE INTERVIEW

Ideally, employees will leave interview with positive feelings about management, company, job, and themselves Cannot change past behavior, future performance is another matter
Should end with specific and mutually agreed upon plans for employees development