PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
UNIT-1
TYPES OF PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
RELEVANCE OF PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
Deficiency Contamination
Performance Criteria
Overemphasis
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
EXPECTED LEVELS OF PERFORMANCE
BENCHMARKS, GOALS, AND TARGETS
CHARACTERISTICS OF WELLDEFINED STANDARDS
REALISTIC MEASURABLE CLEARLY UNDERSTOOD
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT AND PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
PROCESSES USED TO IDENTIFY, ENCOURAGE, MEASURE, EVALUATE, IMPROVE, AND REWARD EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE.
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
THE PROCESS OF EVALUATING HOW WELL EMPLOYEES PERFORM THEIR JOBS AND THEN COMMUNICATING THAT INFORMATION TO THE EMPLOYEES.
PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS AND THE LAW
LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE PA SYSTEM:
APPRAISAL CRITERIA BASED ON JOB ANALYSIS
ABSENCE OF DISPARATE IMPACT AND EVIDENCE OF VALIDITY
FORMAL EVALUATION CRITERION THAT LIMIT MANAGERIAL DISCRETION FORMAL RATING INSTRUMENT LINKED TO JOB DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF AND CONTACT WITH RATEE TRAINING OF SUPERVISORS IN CONDUCTING APPRAISALS REVIEW PROCESS TO PREVENT UNDUE CONTROL OF CAREERS COUNSELING TO HELP POOR PERFORMERS IMPROVE
USES OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL (PA)
THE PROCESS OF EVALUATING HOW WELL EMPLOYEES PERFORM THEIR JOBS WHEN COMPARED TO A SET OF STANDARDS, AND THEN COMMUNICATING THE INFORMATION TO EMPLOYEES. INFORMAL APPRAISAL DAY-TO-DAY CONTACTS, LARGELY UNDOCUMENTED SYSTEMATIC APPRAISAL FORMAL CONTACT AT REGULAR TIME INTERVALS, USUALLY DOCUMENTED
CONFLICTING USES FOR PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
WHO CONDUCTS APPRAISALS
SUPERVISORS WHO RATE THEIR SUBORDINATES EMPLOYEES WHO RATE THEIR SUPERVISORS TEAM MEMBERS WHO RATE EACH OTHER EMPLOYEES SELF-APPRAISAL OUTSIDE SOURCES RATING EMPLOYEES MULTISOURCE (360 FEEDBACK) APPRAISAL
TRADITIONAL PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL PROCESS
EMPLOYEE RATING OF MANAGERS
ADVANTAGES
HELPS IN IDENTIFYING COMPETENT MANAGERS SERVES TO MAKE MANAGERS MORE RESPONSIVE TO EMPLOYEES CAN CONTRIBUTE TO THE CAREER DEVELOPMENT OF MANAGERS
DISADVANTAGES
NEGATIVE REACTIONS BY MANAGERS TO EMPLOYEE RATINGS SUBORDINATES FEAR OF REPRISALS MAY INHIBIT THEM FROM GIVING REALISTIC (NEGATIVE) RATINGS RATINGS ARE USEFUL ONLY FOR SELFIMPROVEMENT PURPOSES
TEAM/PEER RATING
DISADVANTAGES
CAN NEGATIVELY AFFECT WORKING RELATIONSHIPS. CAN CREATE DIFFICULTIES FOR MANAGERS IN DETERMINING INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE. ORGANIZATIONAL USE OF INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS CAN HINDER THE DEVELOPMENT OF TEAMWORK HELPS IMPROVE THE PERFORMANCE OF LOWER-RATED INDIVIDUALS PEERS HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO OBSERVE OTHER PEERS. PEER APPRAISALS FOCUS ON INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO TEAMWORK AND TEAM PERFORMANCE.
ADVANTAGES
MULTISOURCE APPRAISAL
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL METHODS
GRAPHIC RATING SCALE
CATEGORY SCALING METHODS
A SCALE THAT ALLOWS THE RATER TO INDICATE AN EMPLOYEES PERFORMANCE ON A CONTINUUM OF JOB BEHAVIORS. ASPECTS OF PERFORMANCE MEASURED:
DESCRIPTIVE CATEGORIES, JOB DUTIES, AND BEHAVIORAL DIMENSIONS BEHAVIORAL RATING SCALES (E.G., BARS)
DRAWBACKS
RESTRICTIONS ON THE RANGE OF POSSIBLE RATER RESPONSES DIFFERENCES IN THE INTERPRETATIONS OF THE MEANINGS OF SCALE ITEMS AND SCALE RANGES BY RATERS POORLY DESIGNED SCALES THAT ENCOURAGE RATER ERRORS RATING FORM DEFICIENCIES LIMIT EFFECTIVENESS OF THE APPRAISAL
TERMS DEFINING STANDARDS AT ONE COMPANY
Figure 119
BEHAVIORAL / OBJECTIVE METHODS
BEHAVIORAL RATING APPROACH
ASSESSES EMPLOYEES BEHAVIORS INSTEAD OF OTHER CHARACTERISTICS CONSISTS OF A SERIES OF SCALES CREATED BY:
IDENTIFYING IMPORTANT JOB DIMENSIONS CREATING STATEMENTS DESCRIBING A RANGE OF DESIRED AND UNDESIRABLE BEHAVIORS (ANCHORS)
TYPES OF BEHAVIORAL SCALES
BEHAVIORALLY ANCHORED RATING SCALES (BARS) BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATION SCALES (BOS) BEHAVIORAL EXPECTATION SCALES (BES)
BEHAVIORALLY-ANCHORED RATING SCALE FOR CUSTOMER SERVICE SKILLS
Figure 1110
CUSTOMER SERVICE SKILLS (BOS)
CATEGORY RATING METHODS
CHECKLISTS
A PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL TOOL THAT USES A LIST OF STATEMENTS OR WORK BEHAVIORS THAT ARE CHECKED BY RATERS.
CAN BE QUANTIFIED BY APPLYING WEIGHTS TO INDIVIDUAL CHECKLIST ITEMS.
DRAWBACKS
INTERPRETATION OF ITEM MEANINGS BY RATERS WEIGHTING CREATES PROBLEMS IN APPRAISAL INTERPRETATION ASSIGNMENT OF WEIGHTS TO ITEMS BY PERSONS OTHER THAN THE RATERS
SAMPLE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL FORM
Figure 118a
SAMPLE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL FORM
Figure 118b
COMPARATIVE METHODS
RANKING A LISTING OF ALL EMPLOYEES FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST IN PERFORMANCE. DRAWBACKS DOES NOT SHOW SIZE OF DIFFERENCES IN PERFORMANCE BETWEEN EMPLOYEES IMPLIES THAT LOWEST-RANKED EMPLOYEES ARE UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMERS. BECOMES AN UNWIELDY PROCESS IF THE GROUP TO BE RANKED IS LARGE.
COMPARATIVE METHODS
FORCED DISTRIBUTION
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL METHOD IN WHICH RATINGS OF EMPLOYEES ARE DISTRIBUTED ALONG A BELL-SHAPED CURVE.
DRAWBACKS
ASSUMES A NORMAL DISTRIBUTION OF PERFORMANCE.
RESISTANCE BY MANAGERS TO PLACING INDIVIDUALS IN THE LOWEST OR HIGHEST GROUPS.
PROVIDING EXPLANATION FOR PLACEMENT IN A HIGHER OR LOWER GROUPING CAN BE DIFFICULT. IS NOT READILY APPLICABLE TO SMALL GROUPS
FORCED DISTRIBUTION ON A BELLSHAPED CURVE
Figure 1111
CRITICAL INCIDENT
DRAWBACKS
NARRATIVE METHODS
MANAGER KEEPS A WRITTEN RECORD OF HIGHLY FAVORABLE AND UNFAVORABLE EMPLOYEE ACTIONS. VARIATIONS IN HOW MANAGERS DEFINE A CRITICAL INCIDENT TIME INVOLVED IN DOCUMENTING EMPLOYEE ACTIONS MOST EMPLOYEE ACTIONS ARE NOT OBSERVED AND MAY BECOME DIFFERENT IF OBSERVED EMPLOYEE CONCERNS ABOUT MANAGERS BLACK BOOKS
ESSAY
MANAGER WRITES A SHORT ESSAY DESCRIBING AN EMPLOYEES PERFORMANCE. DRAWBACK
DEPENDS ON THE MANAGERS WRITING SKILLS AND THEIR ABILITY TO EXPRESS THEMSELVES.
MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES (MBO)
MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES
SPECIFYING THE PERFORMANCE GOALS THAT AN INDIVIDUAL AND HIS OR HER MANAGER AGREE THE EMPLOYEE WILL TO TRY TO ATTAIN WITHIN AN APPROPRIATE LENGTH OF TIME.
KEY MBO IDEAS
EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT CREATES HIGHER LEVELS OF COMMITMENT AND PERFORMANCE. ENCOURAGES EMPLOYEES TO WORK EFFECTIVELY TOWARD ACHIEVING DESIRED RESULTS. PERFORMANCE MEASURES SHOULD BE MEASURABLE AND SHOULD DEFINE RESULTS.
THE MBO PROCESS
JOB REVIEW AND AGREEMENT
DEVELOPMENT OF PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
OBJECTIVE SETTING
CONTINUING PERFORMANCE DISCUSSIONS
TRAINING OF MANAGERS AND EMPLOYEES
APPRAISAL TRAINING TOPICS:
APPRAISAL PROCESS AND TIMING PERFORMANCE CRITERIA AND JOB STANDARDS THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED HOW TO COMMUNICATE POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE FEEDBACK WHEN AND HOW TO DISCUSS TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT GOALS CONDUCTING AND DISCUSSING THE COMPENSATION REVIEW HOW TO AVOID COMMON RATING ERRORS
COMMON RATER ERRORS
APPRAISAL INTERVIEW HINTS
Figure 1113
FEEDBACK AS A SYSTEM
DATA EVALUATION OF DATA
FEEDBACK SYSTEM
ACTION BASED ON EVALUATION
TRAINING OF MANAGERS AND EMPLOYEES (CONTD)
EFFECTIVE PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS (PMS) ARE:
CONSISTENT WITH THE STRATEGIC MISSION OF THE ORGANIZATION BENEFICIAL AS DEVELOPMENT TOOL USEFUL AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE TOOL LEGAL AND JOB-RELATED VIEWED AS GENERALLY FAIR BY EMPLOYEES EFFECTIVE IN DOCUMENTING EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE
