Effect Of Management On Performance Appraisal

2016 Words May 10th, 2016 9 Pages
In Berman et al. (2016) under cognitive limitations, they mentioned spillover effect whereby if the rate does one thing exceptionally well or poorly, then that unfairly reflects on everything else he or she does. They also talked about the recency effect which occurs when a major event has taken place just prior to the time of the evaluation and overshadows all other incidents. Another error is a contrast error which exists when people are rated relative to other people instead of against performance standards. They mentioned organizational influences whereby management shows insufficient commitment to performance appraisal. Normally under organizational influences there are error of central tendency and no money effect. Berman et al. (2016) mentioned human nature where they argued that when managers must convey negative information, they have three options; avoid giving it, delay giving it, or distort it. A paradox arises, however, when playing safe through leniency may invite a legal challenge on the grounds that appraisers do not differentiate employees by performance. The appraisal is given by someone who does not want to give it to someone who does not want to get it.
Perlmutter et al. (2001), pointed out that for many supervisors, two of the most challenging fundamental areas of management are; how to motivate employees to perform at their best in the best interest of the agency and how to evaluate employees’ performance from the personal and organizational…
Open Document