|
|
|
|
|
Performance appraisal
|
|
|
Through a detailed analysis of current information, it is clear to certify that there is a 'consensus view' on Performance Appraisal Systems (PAS). Many believe (including Bright et al., 1997) that PAS grew momentum during the 1960's. Guest (1990) seeing the change to Human Resource Management (HRM) as "conforming to the 'American Dream'" (European Human Resource Management), it is now a strategic factor businesses have to deal with, but does help the handling of people/employee. This relates to other thinking that the origins of PAS can be found in the thinking of Douglas McGregor (1960's) through his Theory X and Theory Y in his book "The Human Side of Enterprise". PAS is a method to "review performance of staff" (Mullins 1996, Pg.639), with Jack Zigon (President: Zigon Performance Group) believing that PAS can be used for "many purposes" (website, 1994). Casico takes the definition stage further: "Performance appraisal, the systematic description of job-relevant strengths and weaknesses within and between employees and groups" (Pg.85 1998). The overall 'purpose' of a PAS is summed up by Mullins (appendix A), with McKenna et al. (1995) transcribing what others believe, that an effective PAS as two clear uses: to reward performance and develop employees, with PAS central to Human Resource policies (appendix B). An example of PAS usage is seen through a Dutch example. The Netherlands is an haven for PAS examples, where they are conducted frequently and with such there is low employee turnover (Clark 1996), giving high emphasis on employee development. Throughout Europe individual countries are now giving an increased emphasis on developing the employee -which is a factor that prolongs throughout the research. Amongst all the literature researched, Carrell et al. (1995), believe PAS are related to Human Resource growth, which is an on-going and continuous process. There are two major issues identified; if PAS is needed and through which method is to be used. To prevent from regurgitating a long and frequently similar list (Carrell et al. feel it may be worded differently but essentially same style of thought) of methods used, the methods identified are essentially the same. There are many forms/techniques of PAS, but the more effective ones depend on the one selected for a particular job analysis. Often the success of the technique used will depend on the skill and attitude of 'who' completes the appraisal. For example it would be inane to measure 'numbers' for a Marketer but fine for a job role in production. Jack Zigon feels the "better measure" is through words rather than numbers and sees that "in many cases numerical measures are useless". A factor seen at 'First Direct' and 'Halifax Bank', both banking corporations have now changed their numerical scales into worded scripts. 'Halifax' has changed their 5-point a-b-c-d-e scale into a 3-point worded scaling. 'Nissan' believe the best method will be fair and simple and create motivation for constructive feedback, with Zigon claiming people prefer the notion of "continuous improvement rather than absolute perfection". Such systems are often formalised and systematic, with regular assessment (as in the First Direct example), integral and specific to the situation at hand providing "job related and specific direction for future performance" (Carrell, 1995 Pg.386) and can often give an indication of the job role itself. A third major issue is that of the appraiser. Many believe that the actual appraiser can influence the success of the system. It is felt that there is a constant need for training and there must be positive relationship between the appraiser and the appraisee. It is also suggested that the appraiser must not display perfection levels (Wickens 1987) and there must be feedback offered with clear targets set.
|
|
|
|
Still Can't Find What Your Looking For? Then Try a Essay Search!
|
