8/12/2019 HR Chapter8

1/8

Canadian Human Resource Management: A Strategic Approach

CHAPTER8: PERFORMANCEAPPRAISAL

PERFORMANCEMANAGEMENTASPARTOFMANAGERIALSTRATEGY Important element of strategic planning is the assessment of strengths and weaknesses of human

resources in organization

Performance analyses offer mgt the necessary data to assess current skill, experience and performance

level of every employee AND performance standards critical for future requirements

ffective appraisal system makes explicit what constitutes effective and efficient !ehaviour on part of

employees that is critical to implementing strategic plan determine what top mgt should do to

implement plan once it is formulated

"utcomes of analyses translate into valid appraisal instrument

o #alidity refers to fact that ppl are !eing measured on areas that are truly impt to the attainment

of their departmental$organizational o!%ectives

Performance appraisal:process !y which organizations evaluate employee %o! performance

o Accurate performance appraisals show employees where they are deficient

o Provide feed!ack on development activities, staffing process, %o! designs and external

challengeso &erve as quality control check on employee and '( dpt performance

o )ithout appraisal system*

Promotions, transfer and employee+related decisions su!%ect to trial and error

areer planning and '( development suffer !$c no systematic performance feed!ack

'( department lacks adequate info to evaluate performance o!%ectivelylack of

feed!ack can result in missed o!%ectiveso -ses of performance appraisals see figure .+/ pg0 123

Performance improvement

ompensation ad%ustments

Placement decisions

4raining and development needs areer planning and development

Deficiencies in staffing process

International inaccuracies

5o! design errors

Avoidance of discrimination

xternal challenges

o "rganization6s performance appraisal system must !e effective and accepted to identify

developmental and career planning needs and replacement summaries

ELEMENTSOFTHEPERFORMANCEAPPRAISALSYSTEM

Approach must identify performance+related criteria, measure criteria dn then give feed!ack toemployees and '( department

e! elemen"s of Performance Appraisal S!s"ems

'( department develop performance appraisals for employees in all departments so centralization

ensures uniformityresults are more compara!le across similar groups of employees

'( department seldom does evaluation of performance7 usually employee6s immediate supervisor !$c

often in !est position to make appraisal

Appraisal should !e*

/

8/12/2019 HR Chapter8

2/8

o Job-related: system evaluates critical !ehaviours that constitute %o! success

o Practical:understood !y all evaluators and employees 8ie* %udge !ased on production9

o Have standards--performance s"an#ar#s* !enchmarks against which performance is

measured

(elate to desired results of each %o!

ollect standards through %o! analysis

o Use dependable measures:Performance s"an#ar#s:ratings used to evaluate employee

performance asy to use, report on critical !ehaviours that determine performance

Direct o!servation* rater actually sees performance

Indirect o!servation* rater can evaluate only su!stitutes for actual performance

-sually less accurate !$c evaluate su!stitutes for actual performance

&u!stitutes are called cons"r$c"s

"!%ectives performance measures* indicators of %o! performance that are verifia!le !y

others 8ie* gross units produced, net units approved !y quality control, scrap rates, ; of

computational errors, ; of customer complaints or some other mathematically precisemeasure of performance9

&u!%ective performance measures* ratings not verifia!le !y others7 rater6s personalopinions

Ra"er %iases

ost common rater !iases*

o Halo Effect:!ias that occurs when an evaluation allows some info to disproportionately affect

the final evaluation

o Error of Central Tendency:error in rating employees that consists of evaluating employees

as neither good nor poor performers even when some employees perform exceptionally wellor poorly7 place marks near centre of rating sheet so employees appear ?average@

o Lenienc and Strictness !ias:

Lenienc! &ias:tendency to rate employees higher than their performance %ustifies

S"ric"ness &ias:tendency to rate employees lower than their performance %ustifies

8/12/2019 HR Chapter8

3/8

CHARACTERISTICSOFANEFFECTI'EPERFORMANCEAPPRAISALSYSTEM #alidit:aka relevance

o (esults are the most valid criteria as they tend to !e o!%ective

o 5o!+related !ehaviours are also relevant !ut personality traits are still questiona!le

o >ust !e !ased on thorough %o! analysis and documented in %o! description for each position

o rucial for validation of any selection test

o ssential for any court challenge of performance criteria Reliabilit:aka consistency

o Difficult to achieve !$c different raters, different instruments and changing work environments

o #alid criteria tend to !e relia!le anager must act as coach to set goals that are seen as achieva!le !y employee Control o% standards:current standards used in appraisals often seem to !e !ased on assumption that

%o! in question is independent of other %o!s

8/12/2019 HR Chapter8

4/8

Disadvantage* past performance can6t !e changed

Noncompara"i*e E*al$a"ion Me"-o#s:appraisal methods that evaluate an employee6s performance

according to pre+set data, and not !y comparing one person6s performance with that of co+workers

Rating Scale:scale that requires the rater to provide a su!%ective evaluation of an individual6s

performance7 oldest and most widely used

o valuation !ased solely on opinions of rater

o riteria not related to %o! 8most of the time9o Immediate supervisor completes form !y checking most appropriate response for each

performance factor

o (esponses may !e given numerical values to ena!le average score to !e computed and

compared

o Advantages* Inexpensive to develop and administer, raters need little training or time to

complete form, can !e applied to large num!er of employees

o Disadvantages* !iases reflected, specific performance criteria omitted to make form applica!le

to variety of %o!s, standardized form with a procedure that is not always %o!+related

Critical Incident Method:rater records statements that descri!e extremely effective or ineffective

!ehaviour related to performance

o Incidents usually recorded !y supervisor during evaluation period for each su!ordinate

o (ecorded incidents include !rief explanation of what happened

o -seful for giving employees %o!+related feed!ack, reduce recency !ias

o Difficult to get supervisors to record incidents as they occur 8lose interest in it9

Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS):evaluation tools that rate employees along a rating

scale !y means of specific !ehaviour examples on the scale

o Attempts to reduce su!%ectivity and !iases of su!%ective performance measures

o Performance descriptions are grouped into performance+related categories

o ites specific !ehaviour that can !e used to provide performance feed!ack to employees

o 5o! related, practical, standardized for similar %o!s

o ould still have some !ias !ut the specific !ehaviours anchor scale and provide some criteriato guide sincere rater

o -nlikely that supervisors will follow through completelyreduce effectiveness

o !ehaviour bservation Scale +!S, is like

8/12/2019 HR Chapter8

5/8

>any large companies use ela!orate group evaluation method that reduces !iases !$c multiple raters

are used and some feed!ack results when managers and professionals learn how they compared w$

others on each critical factor0 '")#(, these results are often not shared w$ employee

Raning Method:method of evaluating employees that ranks them from !est to worst on the same

trait

o Doesn6t say how much !etter or worse the person is

o &u!%ect to halo and recency effects !ut rankings of B or more raters can !e averaged to help

reduce !iaso ase of administration and explanation

!orced "istri#utions:method of evaluating employees that requires raters to categorize employees7

sort them into classifications w$ a certain proportion in each

o (elative differences among employees are unknown

o "vercomes !ias of central tendency, leniency and strictness

o mployees are sometimes ranked lower than they or their supervisor$rater think to !e correct

F.T.RE+ORIENTE,APPRAISALMETHO,S

Self Appraisals

-seful if goal of evaluation is to further self+development

Defensive !ehaviour is less likely to occur when evaluate selfself improvement more likely

an help users set personal goals for future development

an !e used with past$future+oriented approached

mployee must !e involved and committed to improvement process

&tarts w$ supervisor telling employee what is expectedemployee gets worksheet and writes down

their understanding of the %o!

ompleted sheets tell supervisor what they need to do to ?eliminate road!locks to meeting or

exceeding %o! standards@

Mana(emen"+&!+O&/ec"i*es Approac- 0M%O1:requires an employee and supervisor to %ointly esta!lish

performance goals for the future0 mployees are su!sequently evaluated on how well they have o!tained

these o!%ectives

>utually agreed upon goals that are o!%ectively measura!le

mployee can ad%ust !ehaviour to ensure attainment of o!%ective if can measure progress toward it

8/12/2019 HR Chapter8

6/8

&imulated work experiences include in+!asket exercises, decision+making exercises, computer+!ased

!usiness games and other %o!+like opportunities that test the employee in realistic ways

-sually done over few days away from %o! site

stimate strengths, weaknesses and potential of each person and pool estimates to arrive at conclusion

Cood predictor of on+the+%o! performance in 2E cases

xpensive, requires separate facility and multiple raters

Recen" ,e*elopmen"s 345+#e(ree performance appraisal:com!ination of self, peer, supervisor and su!ordinate

performance evaluation

o omes from trend toward flatter organization and wider span of control

o Fewer managers have to supervise more employees therefore difficult to assess everyone6s

performance accuratelytrend toward teamwork and participative mgt

-se performance appraisal software, integrated system

o &ystem is time consuming, complex and costly a%or pro!lem is rater understanding and consistency of evaluationsprovide hand!ooks w$

guidelines for conducting evaluation or for providing ratees w$ feed!ack

mphasis has shifted from not making errors to the a!ility of raters to make valid %udgements !ased

on relatively complex info

Attention:the more deviant the o!served !ehaviour is from the expected norm, the more strongly the

attention+arousing stimuli work 8ie* supervisor is more likely to pay attn to poor !ehaviour9

Categori/ation:process of classifying and storing data7 helps us to make quick %udgements w$ ltd info

a!out something 8ie* stereotyping is one categorization that may result in !iased conclusions9

Recall:when making %udgements, we recall al relevant info we stored in our memory a!out the event

or person in question7 depending on impression we record, we can recall some info over others7accurate evaluation results from recalling all info 8ie* write down all Is9

$n%ormation $ntegration:once %udgement called for, rater tries to recall as much info as possi!le and

to generate an integrated picture of employee

8/12/2019 HR Chapter8

7/8

o >easures to improve validity of supervisory ratings*

-se !ehaviour+!ased scales

4rain how to use these scales

Familiarize raters w$ performance definitions

-se several raters

-se quantitative criteria whenever possi!le

-se %o! samples for important evaluation decisions

4rain raters to make !ehaviour sampling a routine part of supervisor6s %o!avoid memory+related

!iased Avoid trait ratings

reate positive consequences for rater and ratee

o "nce raters are trained, appraisal process can !egin ake criticisms specific, not general and vague

o Focus criticisms on performance not on personality characteristics

o &tay clam and do not argue w$ the person !eing evaluated

o Identify specific actions the employees can take to improve performance

o mphasize the evaluator6s willingness to assist the employee6s efforts and to improve performance

o nd the evaluation session !y stressing the positive aspects of the employee6s performance and reviewing plans

to improve performance

H$man Reso$rce Mana(emen" Fee#&ac7

Performance appraisal process also provides insight into the effectiveness of the '(> function

'igh num!ers of poor performers may indicate errors elsewhere in '(> function:poor screening ofhires, %o! analysis info is wrong, employment equity plan seeks wrong o!%ectives, fail to respond to

challenges of external environment or effective %o! design, sometimes pursue wrong o!%ectives or

may !e faulty !$c of mgt resistance, incorrect performance standards or measures or lack of

constructive feed!ack

Future+oriented performance appraisal allows the '( dpt to provide feed!ack to employees as to the

status of their career progression

o Investigate inadequate performance

8/12/2019 HR Chapter8

8/8

o If lack of skill or experience, necessary improvements have to !e made part of goals discussed

w employee

o &tep+!y+step plan will !e the outcome of the interview process

.