literature review about communication in the workplace i'm studying Department of Health and Human Services

Running Head: Public Personnel and Labor Relations – Reflective Synthesis (8)

Public Personnel and Labor Relations

Reflective Synthesis (8)

Muneera Alsalem

Chapter 11: Performance Appraisal

One of the challenges for human resource management in public organizations is shifting from managing positions to managing performances. A major distinction is that managing performance involves considering the legislation that created any given public agency in order to clarify the authority to manage its performance. One of the key factors in the performance management is using performance appraisal. In theory, the performance appraisal process provides employees with feedback on their work, which leads to clarity about organizational expectations and to a more effective channeling of efforts and ability. The complications arise when using performance appraisals to frame organizational decisions about performance and pay. Because within the context of these decisions, human resource managers must consider any possible civil rights violations as well as know the details of union contract terms. Another problem with performance appraisals is that both managers and employees are usually dissatisfied with these performance appraisal processes. By analyzing a variety of issues related to performance appraisals, including the key questions of why evaluate performance and who should evaluate, a better understanding can be gained by me as an aspiring public administrator about the advantages and disadvantages, strengths and weaknesses, and usefulness of performance appraisal systems.

Why Evaluate Performance?

The technical aspect of performance appraisals is having a dependable, reliable, and accurate instrument that measures an individual’s performance to determine that individual’s strengths and weaknesses. Important decisions like merit-pay increases and promotions are linked to individual performance. Through this process, managers hope to achieve a number of objectives. These include communicating management goals and objectives to employees. Motivating employees to improve performance, distributing organizational rewards, and conducting research on employees. From the employee perspective, the most important issue is fairness.

Performance Appraisal and Alternate Personnel Systems

Civil service personnel systems are often called merit systems. This means that personnel decisions are based on competencies and performance rather than seniority and politics. An important point made here is that performance appraisal systems are largely irrelevant to political appointees. The reasons are that their superiors are elected officials who desire pursuit of political objectives rather than performance objectives. It is also noted how collective bargaining personnel systems oppose pay for individual performance and appraisal developed as part of performance-based compensation. Unions see individual incentive or merit plans as setting members against each other. Public administrators see performance evaluation as every different when some personnel are employed by outside contractors. Also, these performance appraisal systems can be irrelevant for part-time employees. Volunteer employees are another group who must be uniquely approached with performance appraisal systems.

Contemporary Challenges to Performance Appraisal

There are some contemporary work trends currently challenging the value of traditional performance appraisal systems. One of these trends is the changing nature of work means less commitment between organization and employee. It means reduced possibilities of impacting employees through feedback and rewards. Another contemporary trend is performance appraisal is less important to part-time employees but more important for full-time, permanent employees. The increase of private contractors has made it less relevant to use individual performance appraisal. Another recent trend in public organizations is the switch to work teams. This requires the use of multi-rater evaluations. The flextime and virtual workplace settings, for instance, increasingly used by knowledge workers makes it difficult to accurately appraise individual work performances.

Performance-Based and Person-Based Evaluation Criteria

The performance-based rating system measures each employee’s behaviors against previously established standards and criteria. In person-based rating systems, the rater compares employees against other employees. It is evident that person-based systems are easier and less expensive to design, administer, and interpret. However, these systems have low reliability and low validity. One of the reasons for these factors is personality characteristics which are unrelated to job performance. Another reason is that two supervisors may have very different definitions of loyalty and other employee traits. These weaknesses are why most performances in public agencies are evaluated by performance-based systems. In contrast to person-based systems, performance-based systems are relevant to job performance, better fulfill the purposes of reward allocation, and are reasonably reliable. The drawback is that these systems are more difficult to develop.

Seven appraisal methods are currently used: (1) graphic ratings, (2) ranking, (3) forced choice, (4) essays, (5) objective, (6) critical incidents or work sampling, and (7) behaviorally-anchored rating scales (BARS). The first three are used for person-based systems. The force choice techniques are the most valid of these trait-rating systems. Based on job analysis, the traits most related to successful performance have already been identified. The rater is asked to indicate the trait which corresponds most closely with an employee’s job performance or personality. The graphic rating scales consist of listing the desirable and undesirable traits and the rater marks next to the column the extent to which that employee demonstrates the trait. The ranking technique requires the rater to rank each employee on each trait. The latter four techniques in the above list are usually employed for performance-based systems. The essay is a performance narrative written by the rater concerning the employee’s performance. The objective method is the measure of quality, quantity, and timelines in employee’s performance. The critical incident technique records representative samples of good or bad performance in relation to agreed-upon standards BARS is a technique that employs objective performance criteria in a standardized appraisal format.

Who Should Evaluate Performance?

The most immediate supervisor most commonly assesses the performance of his or her subordinates, and most employees prefer this approach. Self-ratings can also be used in conjunction with supervisor appraisals to improve accuracy. Peer ratings have also been used more often in recent years to address a number of problems associated with traditional supervisor-subordinate evaluations. One of these advantages is that peers have a close-up, comprehensive view of each other performing at work. Because of this contemporary trend of public organizations using work teams, peer ratings have been considered effective in assessing work teams compared to supervisor ratings. Self-ratings in conjunction with peer ratings have also been viewed by human resource managers as effective in obtaining a more accurate, reliable appraisal of any given employee’s performance. This new approach also addresses the problem of supervisors’ tendency to make global evaluative judgments. Another emerging technique is the 360-degree evaluation. This method places the employee being rated in a metaphorical circle of different raters, supervisor and peers, who then rate the targeted employee through communicating with each other while undertaking the process. These multiple views being done while they are debated and discussed provides a more accurate picture of that employee’s contribution to an organization. In addition, recent research shows that this approach is most effective for the purposes of employee coaching, employee development planning, and employee feedback.

Characteristics of an Effective Appraisal System

There are a number of guidelines for the effective use of appraisal systems by public organizations. One guideline is to use separate systems for separate purposes. If the purpose is allocation of rewards the rater becomes a judge. If the purpose is to improve the performance, the rater becomes a coach, a counselor, or facilitator. A second guideline is that the rater should have the opportunity, ability, and desire to rate employees accurately. A third guideline is that job analysis and performance appraisal need to be closely related by developing occupation-specific job descriptions that include performance criteria along with the minimum qualifications, responsibility, and duties. A fourth guideline is that the appraisal of any employee must also be tied to the long term objectives of an employee’s job position. The fifth guideline is to recognize the inherent flaws in appraisal systems in regards to being unable to capture the subtle nuances of human behavior.

The Human Dynamics of Appraisal Process

One of the most significant reasons why performance appraisal systems fail to be effective is the human dynamics of any given public organization. For example, many supervisors are reluctant and unwilling to rate employees on performance. This is simply because these supervisors believe that they are already aware of which employees are high-performing on a consistent basis. This means that the supervisors approach the appraisal process as something of a hassle and a waste of time. These supervisors do not think such formal procedures are necessary because they already know which employees are performing at a high level and which ones are not. The other problem is the often-negative responses by employees who receive bad performance assessments from their supervisors or peers. These employees are going to declare unfairness or bias. These employees may create workplace tensions and even conflicts over bad assessments of performance. One of the ways that public administrators have overcome this problem is to preview the appraisal process to the employees by having them fill out a short questionnaire. This questionnaire gives the employees the opportunity to prepare themselves psychologically and realistically for the performance appraisal process. It also helps relieve stress on the supervisors who are conducting the appraisals.

Performance Appraisal, the Sanctions Process, and Fairness

One of the key functions of a performance appraisal is providing an employee a preview of possible sanctions coming due to poor performance. This allows the disciplinary action can be justified based on credible, legitimate evidence. It serves then as a warning device but also establishes a context of organizational justice. In other words, employees who are being disciplined can shift attention to the formal records of their performance appraisal by supervisor or peers. It is also important for the employees to recognize that their poor performances are directly associated with poor performances. It does so because a performance appraisal requires preset expectations, accurate observations of behavior, and a written record of the discussions between supervisor and employee. The most significant challenge for human resource managers in public organizations is addressing this following question: How does an organization establish a formal procedure for performance appraisal in the context of advancing fairness and organizational justice?

Reference

D.E, Nalbandian, J., and Llorens, J. (2010). Public Personnel Management: Contexts and Strategies (6th Edition). New York: Longman/Pearson