View
4.966
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
Dessler, Cole, and Sutherland
Human Resources Management in Canada Canadian Ninth Edition
Chapter Ten
Performance Appraisal: The Key to Effective Performance Management
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario 10-1
10-2
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Performance Management
-process encompassing all activities related to improving employee performance, productivity,and effectiveness
-process encompassing all activities related to improving employee performance, productivity,and effectiveness
10-3
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
The Performance Appraisal Process
-three steps:
1. Setting work standards
2. Assessing actual performance relative
to standards
3. Providing feedback to employee
regarding performance
-three steps:
1. Setting work standards
2. Assessing actual performance relative
to standards
3. Providing feedback to employee
regarding performance
10-4
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
The Performance Appraisal Process
1. Provides information for promotion and salary
decisions
2. Provides opportunity for reinforcement and/or
corrective action regarding performance
3. Provides opportunity to review career plans
1. Provides information for promotion and salary
decisions
2. Provides opportunity for reinforcement and/or
corrective action regarding performance
3. Provides opportunity to review career plans
Why Should Performance Be Appraised?
10-5
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
The Performance Appraisal Process
• Lack of standards; irrelevant, subjective,
unrealistic standards• Poor measures of performance• Rater errors• Poor feedback to employees eg. arguing• Failure to use evaluation results for decision
making
• Lack of standards; irrelevant, subjective,
unrealistic standards• Poor measures of performance• Rater errors• Poor feedback to employees eg. arguing• Failure to use evaluation results for decision
making
Performance Appraisal Problems
10-6
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Defining Performance Expectations
-job description often insufficient to clarify
performance expectations
-measurable standards should be developed
for each position
-job description often insufficient to clarify
performance expectations
-measurable standards should be developed
for each position
10-7
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Appraisal Methods
Trait: _____ ____ Outstanding
____ Very Good
____ Good
____ Improvement Needed
____ Unsatisfactory
____ Not Rated
Trait: _____ ____ Outstanding
____ Very Good
____ Good
____ Improvement Needed
____ Unsatisfactory
____ Not Rated
Graphic Rating Scale
10-8
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Appraisal Methods
Trait: ____________
Highest-ranking employee
1. _________________ 4. ____________
2. _________________ 5. ____________
3. _________________ 6. ____________ Lowest-ranking employee
Trait: ____________
Highest-ranking employee
1. _________________ 4. ____________
2. _________________ 5. ____________
3. _________________ 6. ____________ Lowest-ranking employee
Alternation Ranking Scale
10-9
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Appraisal Methods
Trait: ____________
EmployeeAs Compared to: Art Bob Carl DianeArt + + -Bob - - -Carl - + +Diane + + -
1 3 1 1Bob ranks highest
Trait: ____________
EmployeeAs Compared to: Art Bob Carl DianeArt + + -Bob - - -Carl - + +Diane + + -
1 3 1 1Bob ranks highest
Paired Comparison Method
10-10
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Appraisal Methods
Forced Distribution Method
High Performers 15% of employees
High-Average Performers 20% of employees
Average Performers 30% of employees
Low-Average Performers 20% of employees
Low Performers 15% of employees
High Performers 15% of employees
High-Average Performers 20% of employees
Average Performers 30% of employees
Low-Average Performers 20% of employees
Low Performers 15% of employees
10-11
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Appraisal MethodsCritical Incident Method
-keep a record of:
-uncommonly good
-undesirable
work-related behaviours
-review with employee at predetermined times
-keep a record of:
-uncommonly good
-undesirable
work-related behaviours
-review with employee at predetermined times
10-12
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Appraisal MethodsNarrative Forms
1. Rate performance
2. Note performance analysis and examples
3. Create improvement plan, including a
timetable and follow-up process
4. Discussion with employee
1. Rate performance
2. Note performance analysis and examples
3. Create improvement plan, including a
timetable and follow-up process
4. Discussion with employee
10-13
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Appraisal MethodsBehaviourally Anchored Rating Scales (1 of 2)
1. Generate critical incidents (job experts specify
effective and ineffective job-related behaviours)
2. Develop performance dimensions (experts
group incidents into clusters)
3. Reallocate incidents (different experts group
incidents into same clusters; retain incidents
similarly assigned twice)
1. Generate critical incidents (job experts specify
effective and ineffective job-related behaviours)
2. Develop performance dimensions (experts
group incidents into clusters)
3. Reallocate incidents (different experts group
incidents into same clusters; retain incidents
similarly assigned twice)
10-14
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Appraisal MethodsBehaviourally Anchored Rating Scales (2 of 2)
4. Scale the incidents (from effective to
ineffective behaviour)
5. Develop final instrument (6-7 incidents
used as behavioural anchors for each
performance dimension)
4. Scale the incidents (from effective to
ineffective behaviour)
5. Develop final instrument (6-7 incidents
used as behavioural anchors for each
performance dimension)
10-15
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Appraisal MethodsBehaviourally Anchored Rating Scales
Advantages
-more accurate measure
-clearer standards
-assists feedback
-independent dimensions
-consistency
Advantages
-more accurate measure
-clearer standards
-assists feedback
-independent dimensions
-consistency
10-16
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Appraisal MethodsManagement by Objectives (MBO)
1. Set the organization’s goals
2. Set departmental goals
3. Discuss departmental goals
4. Define expected results (individual)
5. Performance reviews: measure the results
6. Provide feedback
1. Set the organization’s goals
2. Set departmental goals
3. Discuss departmental goals
4. Define expected results (individual)
5. Performance reviews: measure the results
6. Provide feedback
10-17
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Appraisal MethodsManagement by Objectives (MBO)
Problems
1. Setting unclear, unmeasurable objectives
2. Time consuming
3. Tug of war between manager and employee
Problems
1. Setting unclear, unmeasurable objectives
2. Time consuming
3. Tug of war between manager and employee
10-18
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Performance Appraisal: Problems and Solutions
Reliability
-criteria must be precise enough to result in consistent
measures when applied across many employees by
many different raters
Reliability
-criteria must be precise enough to result in consistent
measures when applied across many employees by
many different raters
Validity-criteria must be accurate to be valid; must be relevant to the job; broad enough to cover all aspects of job; specific
Validity-criteria must be accurate to be valid; must be relevant to the job; broad enough to cover all aspects of job; specific
10-19
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Performance Appraisal: Problems and Solutions
-unclear standards
-halo effect
-central tendency
-leniency/strictness
-unclear standards
-halo effect
-central tendency
-leniency/strictness
Rating Scale Problems
-appraisal bias
-recency effect
-similar-to-me bias
-appraisal bias
-recency effect
-similar-to-me bias
10-20
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Performance Appraisal: Problems and Solutions
Avoiding Appraisal Problems
Ensure rater
awareness
of problems
Ensure rater
awareness
of problems
Choose
the right
appraisal tool
Choose
the right
appraisal tool
Train
supervisors
to eliminate
rating errors
Train
supervisors
to eliminate
rating errors
10-21
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Performance Appraisal: Problems and Solutions
Who Should Do the Appraising?
-immediate supervisor-peers-rating committees-self-employees/subordinates-360-degree appraisal (all of the above)
-immediate supervisor-peers-rating committees-self-employees/subordinates-360-degree appraisal (all of the above)
10-22
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
The Appraisal InterviewTypes of Appraisal Interview
• performance is satisfactory; employee is
promotable• performance is satisfactory; employee is
not promotable• performance is unsatisfactory, but correctable
• performance is satisfactory; employee is
promotable• performance is satisfactory; employee is
not promotable• performance is unsatisfactory, but correctable
10-23
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
The Appraisal InterviewHow to Conduct an Appraisal Interview
• be direct and specific• don’t get personal• encourage the person to talk• develop an action plan
• be direct and specific• don’t get personal• encourage the person to talk• develop an action plan
10-24
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
The Appraisal InterviewHow to Handle a Defensive Employee
• recognize that defensive behaviour is normal
• never attack a person’s defenses
• postpone action
• recognize human limitations
• recognize that defensive behaviour is normal
• never attack a person’s defenses
• postpone action
• recognize human limitations
10-25
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc., Toronto, Ontario
Role of Appraisals in Managing Performance
• central role in performance management• quality-based appraisals:
• avoid forced distribution• use objective performance criteria• 360-degree feedback• atmosphere of partnership and constructive
advice
• central role in performance management• quality-based appraisals:
• avoid forced distribution• use objective performance criteria• 360-degree feedback• atmosphere of partnership and constructive
advice
Recommended