Mc connell pp_ch16
-
Upload
faytechhawkinss -
Category
Business
-
view
292 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Mc connell pp_ch16
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Umiker's Management Skills for the New Health
Care Supervisor, Fifth Edition
Charles McConnell
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Chapter 16
Performance FeedbackPerformance Feedback
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Performance Feedback --
-- is an important responsibility of
those who manage the work of
others; unfortunately, it is
frequently under-utilized and
sometimes ignored altogether.
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Formal Performance Evaluations
Regularly scheduled, formal evaluations
are important, but they should not be
relied on alone. All employees—though
perhaps some more or less than others
—need to know how they are doing on
an ongoing basis.
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Performance Evaluation
A good evaluation meeting
concludes with both parties feeling
they have accomplished something
positive; specifically, an
understanding that includes mutual
expectations.
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Purposes of Performance Evaluation
Ensure understanding of performance expectations by management and employees,
Identify training and development needs, Ensure fair administration of rewards, Provide recognition for past service, and
Assist employees with career development.
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Evaluation is Preceded by:
Review and clarification of
performance expectations based on
job descriptions, work standards,
rules and policies, and previously
formulated objectives
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Inappropriate Evaluation Systems
Older forms of performance evaluation
are based primarily on personality
characteristics, requiring the supervisor
to “rate” each employee on the likes of
“attitude,” “cooperativeness,”
“adaptability,” and such.
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Personality Judgments
The more personality judgments
required or the more subjective
assessments made, the weaker and
less defensible the final evaluation.
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Peer Reviews
Often peer reviews are much more
accurate and acceptable than
individual reviews; they can help to
reinforce the emphasis on collective
responsibility.
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
360-Degree Feedback
In the 360-degree multisource
feedback approach, managers flesh
out the evaluation process by
obtaining input from colleagues,
subordinates, and sometimes
customers.
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Preparing to Evaluate
• Review the evaluation form
• Obtain employee input
• Review the employee’s file
• Schedule a conference
• Prepare some key remarks
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
The Evaluation Interview
Review/revise the position description
and performance standards
Discuss the performance ratings to be
used
Critique accomplishments related to
previously set objectives
Discuss future performance
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
“SCRAM” for Good Objectives
Specific, focusing on concrete and observable
behavior
Challenging; If not challenging, is not worth
much
Relevant; related to the person’s
responsibilities.
Achievable; challenging but doable
Measurable; to the extent possible
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Concluding the Interview
End the session with an affirmation,
an expression of confidence in the
ability of the individual to achieve
the new objectives.
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Follow-Up
monitor the person’s progress congratulate the individual on reaching
each objective or showing improvement; confirm promised support or offer more
support modify, replace, or cancel objectives as
appropriate document the employee’s achievements
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Appraising Teams --
-- involves the “what” and “how” of
team efforts and key results that
the team and each individual have
achieved.
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Evaluation Pitfalls
The process is not taken seriously by either party
The manager has only superficial knowledge of the employee’s performance
Documented work standards or objectives do not exist
The evaluation consists of highly subjective assessments
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Evaluation Pitfalls (more)
The evaluator employs excess judging
and too little listening
There is insufficient positive feedback
or respect for the employee’s self-
esteem
The evaluation consists of generalities
The evaluation forms are inadequate
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
Evaluation Pitfalls (more)
The “score” is used primarily to allocate salaries instead of to improve performance
New objectives are nonspecific or weak The employee has little or no
opportunity to participate in formulating objectives
Reprimands, criticisms, etc. were never been discussed prior to the evaluation
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC
An Evaluation Should Never Be A --
“Gotcha!”