The Push Against Performance Summary

Performance appraisal is a method which is increasingly used to evaluate employees to determine the degree to which they are performing effectively and encourage them to direct their energies towards organizational performance. Although the appraisal is being practiced, there are criticisms made against the system which generally arise from within the Orthodox and radical management frame work.

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

In the article, “Yay, It 's Time for My Performance Review! (Said No One Ever),” the question is whether the historical annual performance review is effective. Many major companies, such as General Electric, have done away with the annual reviews because they are only done once a year, they fail to understand an employee’s view/ideas and the review do not give qualitative feedback (Alabama Public Radio, 2016).

The performance appraisals process is flawed in many ways. Lack of preparation, time, training, and professionalism are a few examples of how the system is flawed. The individual completing the application often has many tasks that supersedes taking the appropriate time necessary to accurately keep notations of an employee's performance throughout the year. The lack of time leads to an employee receiving a performance review on the most recent accounts of his or her job performance instead of his or her performance throughout the entire year. Lack of professionalism can also hurt the appraisal process. An employee should be rated by his or her job duties instead of the personal opinion or feelings the manager or supervisor completing the form. All

Performance evaluations are important parts of all employees and managers tools to ensure positive actions are rewarded while negative actions can be evaluated and fixed to decrease problems in the future. Performance evaluations benefit supervisors and employees by identifying how to bring out the employees best attributes for the company (Hamlett, nd.). Evaluations provide a look at how a worker is doing compared to earlier reviews of their skill, knowledge, initiative and participation in the company’s vision (Hamlett, nd.). Introducing performance review evaluations is important to most organization for the success of their organization and the advancement of its employees. Performance evaluations provide a way for managers and supervisors to manage the performance of an organization and the people who make of the human resources of the organization (McCarroll, nd.). When implementing a new system it is important to understand the process must be realistic, challenging, yet attainable for performance expectations and standards to be successful for employees and the organization (McCarroll, nd.). Balanced scorecards are utilized in performance evaluations to essentially provide a way for organizations to align their strategic plans with day to day operations (Balanced Scorecard Institute, 2015). Balanced scorecards look at traditional financial measures, which are past events and long-term investments like

Culbert, made a very realist statement that nothing good came out of the old performance review that companies could view as positive (Culbert, 2011). Mr. Culbert made some very realistic observations in the fact that the marks received is really based on how much your supervisor or manager actually “like you” (Culbert, 2011). The author is correct in stating that need for individuals should have a performance review on a regular basis to make sure the person’s behavior and duties are lined up with company’s corporate strategy. It was brought out by author that performance review should be initiated by need and not just a date on the dreaded calendar. Performance evaluations should help the worker improve and not be pretentious (Culbert,

Performance evaluations, when implemented properly, act as a tool for improving employee productivity, team performance and individual development. They can serve to raise self-esteem, increase motivation, strengthen relationships and foster ongoing communication and commitment (Simpson, 2001). I feel that these reviews play a critical role in the workplace and should remain a part of standard operating procedures, however many are beginning to disagree.

The performance review process often gets ignored in today’s agile operating environments where people change jobs quickly and employees often care more about their industry and peer reputations than they do about company rankings. Many companies have replaced the formal performance review with greater managerial input in daily operations, social media and customer reviews and informal check-ins. However, a formal appraisal still generates many critical benefits such as determining salary raises, promotional opportunities and candidates for more advanced training and succession planning.

Performance Management Within the Workplace The basis of the mainstream of performance appraisals within the modern workplace is one person (a manager or executive) rating one more, an intrinsically individual process. There are distinction such as 360 degree appraisals that include the judgment of others such as clientele and peers/colleagues in the process but it is the action of one person transitory judgment upon another that is subjective in nature and the root cause of many of the problems encountered in the research associated with performance appraisals. Performance appraisals are of importance to the organisation, as they often provide the only measure of an individual's contribution and

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

Performance reviews are designed to both evaluate general performance and measure progress around specific goals. Both negative and positive aspects are incorporated in these reviews as they should serve as a point of reference to both look back in evaluation and ahead in anticipation. Pulling back from daily demands in order to assess and review employee performance allows managers to focus their attention on specific departments and clarify what is high priority to their company. Performance reviews also act as an opportunity to acknowledge working staff and identify professional development which will further support the staff members’ career growth. Reviews are seen as a powerful tool that can be tied to a company’s overall success;

Although performance reviews have been in place for generations, until recently, very little effort was given to understanding whether the process motivated employees or irritated the. One may develop the most technically sophisticated, accurate appraisal system, but if that system is not accepted and supported by employees, its effectiveness ultimately will be limited (Fischer, 2010).A review of the evidence supporting the use of feedback (such as performance appraisal) suggests that providing personnel with feedback is like gambling in the stock exchange: On average, you gain, yet the variance is such that you have a 40% chance of a (performance) loss following feedback (Kluger & DeNisi, 1996 Vol 119(2)).

“Performance appraisals can enhance employee performance as well as advance the mission and goals of an organization. There are many advantages of performance appraisals if they are applied fairly, consistently and objectively. Performance appraisals not applied fairly can be counterproductive and even destructive to

The process of conducting performance appraisals plays a crucial role in helping employee to meet job-related objectives. This process can largely be conducted through informal and formal settings but is mainly dependent on communications. Actually, the effectiveness of the performance appraisal process is dependent on communications to a large extent. The informal performance appraisal process is carried out in the daily operations of an organization since informal discussions take place and offer immediate performance feedback (Richman, 2011).

Trying to fix all the issues regarding performance appraisals is a difficult task. All of the proposed systems profess to be able to fix some of the problems, but none seems to cover them all. Therefore, the best solution is not the one that fixes all of the issues, but rather the one that addresses as many as possible, while also enhancing the workplace and performance. By these standards the most efficacious solution would be constant feedback and coaching, which improves morale and employee retention, while at the same time reducing recency bias.