Performance Management, Benefits and Service

Performance appraisal is an important issue in human resource management and has a significant effect in the performance of an organisation. It is the system of evaluating the performance of employees regarding the accomplishment of their responsibilities and determining their potential to grow and develop. Bias in the evaluation process can affect the accuracy and appropriateness of the performance appraisal. Bias is a serious issue because it affects the ability to make appropriate decisions about the promotion of employees. A performance appraisal system that works to the disadvantage of members of a group can also pose legal issues.

Before the assessment it is advisable to hold an informal briefing meeting to discuss the format of the assessment and to write up a plan. At the meeting the manager can provide the employee with the necessary paperwork for the assessment and provide them with the opportunity to collect information required to support their assessment.

An appraisal is one of the most commonly used methods of formal assessment and is used to evaluate and assess the performance of an employee against agreed targets and objectives, with the aim of improving employee performance. Where an employee has been able to achieve their targets, the appraisal can be used to recognise successes. This often helps to increase an employee’s confidence and motivation and can lead to better organisational performance. Many organisations will use the outcomes of an appraisal to identify potential candidates for promotions or even an increase in pay. At the same time, an appraisal meeting may include discussions on underperformance, identifying why this has occurred and how this can be avoided in the future.

The interaction of people at work is increasingly diverse where people are involved in the work having many reporting lines like a project team which has a matrix structure. So it is fair for such a person to be appraised by all these people than by his/her line manager only.

A good supervisor seeks out the strengths in their employees and looks to manage weaknesses by identifying if they are in part of lack of training or poor interrelational communication between the manager and employee. Good supervisors seek out their employees’ success by focusing their attention on tasks they will exceed in and not basing their evaluation on tasks in which they struggle with weakness (Buckingham & Coffman, 1999). This notion presents an innovative idea in the way managers approach the work of their employees. It seems to be an effective way of evaluating an employee’s work based on a multitude of factors that can be contributing to it. It removes the blame from solely the employee which offers the opportunity to both the manager

Evaluation can be time consuming and expensive where some people cannot complete the evaluation due to this constrains. My points of view, the main two factors are the resources and lack of measurement tools. The evaluation resources (staff salary and benefits,

Helping performance raters avoid bias is an important factor in creating a legally sound performance management system (Aguinis, 2013). All people leaders will be required to attend yearly and bi-yearly training to help manage the performance of employees. They will also be required to justify their ratings to their direct leader. Once the leader approves the rating, the performance review will be made available to the employee. The employee will be able to leave feedback and sign the performance review. Once signatures have been received the performance review will not be

This paper will discuss will discuss rating system that judge employees on job performance. The rating systems that will discuss in this paper are the following: forced-ranking, absolute-rating and relative-rating system. The author will discuss weather forced ranking is a good performance management system, the different between the absolute-rating and relative-rating systems, an what would the author rely on as a rating system and can a absolute-rating system be devise that would guarantee differentiation among workers,

Their own application of evaluation processes, working with others and their use of data and other feedback for evaluation.

The basic criteria evaluated for all employees are attendance, professionalism, completing tasks in a timely manner, and attitude. Faculty have additional components to be reviewed and are expected to maintain all standards, in accordance with our accrediting agency. Although the criteria are different for faculty and staff, the process in which they are evaluated is the same. Employees have the opportunity to meet with their supervisors to discuss the results of their evaluations and sometimes ratings are changed after discussion. This approach creates a positive effect both internally and externally. The opportunity to respond to the evaluation results are a key element that we uphold with our employees. We want them to understand the reason for their ratings in certain areas and offer suggestions for

The proactive evaluation between management and employees performance provides the key element in the success of the company.

Performance evaluations should focus on the individual’s job performance and not the individual. The four managers all have the same goal when it comes to their perspectives on performance appraisals and that is, they want to do what is best for their subordinates to motivate them to perform in their department’s best interest. Tom has a top priority to provide true and accurate feedback so employees know exactly where they stand. While I agree that evaluations definitely need to have a base of accuracy, I like Max’s view that most of good management is psychology. To know to act to do what is in the individual’s and department’s best interest, a manager needs to understanding people’s strengths and faults, and know how to motivate and reward employees. If that means a little fine-tuning, then so be it. Lynne, on the other hand, contaminated one of her workers evaluations by considering the individuals personal issues and inflated her rating to encourage and support her. Personally I don’t think it should have been a consideration in the evaluation however, supporting and encouraging the employee in other ways may be a more

Good performance review techniques and methods come in a variety of forms ranging from the use of management coaches to the establishment and distribution of written evaluations. Evaluations should include all direct reports from those employees who work within the department; from beginning to end, the process of using a questionnaire benefits gloriously to a manager and their employees. Discovering what employees genuinely think of a manager’s work and leadership abilities proves crucial as it becomes an essential step in maintaining strengths and improving weaknesses. The use of a hired management coach can help during the performance reviews immensely; as their job is to aide in the facilitation of meetings, coaches can assist in assuring that the review

Some managers were reluctant in differentiating between their employees and allow any unfamiliar person to evaluate them. Because of this true performer might miss his/her rewards and incentives.

Performance ratings is part of the performance and reward management system that used to support organisations’ personnel decisions in performance appraisal, promotion, compensation, and employee development (Yun, Donahus, Dudley, & McFarland, 2005). Accurate performance ratings are fundamental to the success or failure of the performance management process, therefore, raters have been suggested to be fully trained to minimise potential errors in performance ratings (Biron, Farndale, & Paauwe, 2011). Several rater training programs have been developed to enhance the quality of performance ratings, such as rater error training and frame-of-reference training (MacDonald & Sulsky, 2009). Nevertheless, not all rater training programs have been equally successful, many researchers have demonstrated the effectiveness of frame-of-reference training in increasing rating accuracy (Woehr, 1994; Keown-Gerrard & Sulsky, 2001; Roch, Woehr, Mishra, & Kieszczynska, 2012). The following will assess the effectiveness of frame-of-reference training in increasing rating quality through comprehensive examination of its validity, accuracy and reliability.