Suppose you are responsible for conducting performance appraisals at your workplace. Discuss what are the issues you might face and how would you solve it? (25 marks)
The common problem with appraisals is that an employee’s excessive strength during the discussion review has a large amount of negative information that they did not hear during the instruction. This tends to cause the “employee” to turn off the listening while the manager explains what is wrong. Employees just raise their shields to leave all negative information. This is a very natural trait in a person. We are naturally suspicious of negative information for various psychological reasons (i.e., say, protective mechanisms), so when we are shown a large amount of negative information, we tend to discount or distrust it because employees in such situations may consider the process unfair or one-sided and not an accurate measure of their performance (unacceptable). As a result, evaluation can be futile as a motivating employee.
And also some of the problems of performance appraisal are:
Rater differences in their performance evaluations lead to many errors. One is a non-variation in perception. Two raters saw an employee disagree with a supervisor. One understands this negative as insubordination. Others see it as positive as a willingness to stand up for what one believes. Different value systems can also play out how rater disagrees. A rater may feel that honest and ethical behavior is paramount, regardless of the impact on income. Another may have an under-orientation that says any behavior, including apparent dishonesty, is allowed as long as it shows income. Another type of rater difference error is created when the rater detects any different aspects of behavior. A rater sees the employee at work where the staff feels comfortable and functioning effectively. Another can only see the individual at employee meetings where employees are uncomfortable and do not show the best advantage.
Rating Game
Performance appraisal methods can compare employees against one another, or compare employees against a standard. Within these two types, there are many appraisal methods. Some are as simple as straight rankings. Others are more complex, such as behavioral scales that attempt to establish a success criterion by defining performance behaviors. Whatever the technique may be, the ranking strategy can be something like a game or tournament. Again, these methods emphasize equality and compatibility with human performance and ignore the measurement of human values.
Central Tendency
Central tendency is the most commonly found error that occurs when a rater assigns mid-range scores or values to all individuals evaluated. Too high or too low a test can be avoided by assigning an “average rating” to everyone. Usually, the central tendency is caused by a lack of information or lack of knowledge about the employee and his or her behavior that the rater wants to avoid commitment or participation or he or she may not have enough time at his or her disposal. Such a habit will mislead the evaluation and remove its value.
Further Issues and Solutions
In addition to these common problems, there are other issues that can affect the effectiveness of performance appraisals. For example, recency bias occurs when the rater focuses too much on the employee’s most recent behavior rather than the entire appraisal period. This can lead to an unfair evaluation that does not accurately reflect the employee’s overall performance. To combat recency bias, raters should keep regular notes on employee performance throughout the appraisal period.
Another significant issue is halo and horn effects. The halo effect occurs when a rater’s overall impression of an employee, usually based on a single trait, influences their ratings of all other traits. Conversely, the horn effect happens when one negative aspect unduly influences the overall rating. To mitigate these biases, raters should be trained to evaluate each criterion independently and objectively.
Leniency and strictness bias are also problematic. Some raters may be consistently too lenient or too strict, which can distort the appraisal results. Implementing a forced distribution method, where raters are required to distribute ratings across a predetermined performance curve, can help address this issue.
Peer evaluations and self-assessments are additional tools that can enhance the appraisal process. Peer evaluations provide insights from colleagues who may have different perspectives on the employee’s performance. Self-assessments encourage employees to reflect on their own achievements and areas for improvement, fostering a sense of ownership over their development.
Theoretical Perspectives
To understand and address these issues, we can draw on several academic theories:
1. Cognitive Dissonance Theory: Proposed by Leon Festinger, this theory suggests that individuals experience discomfort when they encounter conflicting cognitions. Employees receiving negative feedback may experience dissonance if it conflicts with their self-perception as competent workers. This discomfort can lead them to dismiss or rationalize the feedback.
2. Attribution Theory: Developed by Fritz Heider, this theory explains how individuals attribute causes to events. Employees might attribute negative feedback to external factors (e.g., bias of the appraiser) rather than their own performance, leading to defensiveness.
3. Expectancy Theory: Victor Vroom’s theory posits that individuals are motivated to perform well if they expect their efforts to lead to desirable outcomes. If performance appraisals are perceived as fair and constructive, they can enhance motivation by clarifying performance expectations and providing a pathway to rewards.
4. Goal-Setting Theory: Edwin Locke and Gary Latham’s theory emphasizes the importance of setting specific and challenging goals. Performance appraisals can be an opportunity to set clear performance goals, which can improve employee motivation and performance.
Technological Enhancements
Incorporating technology can also improve the performance appraisal process. Performance management software can track and analyze employee performance data in real time, reducing the likelihood of biases and errors. These tools can provide continuous feedback, enabling employees to make timely improvements.
Conclusion
In conclusion, performance appraisals are a vital component of HRM, but they come with several challenges. By understanding the common issues, such as rater biases and psychological barriers, and applying relevant academic theories, organizations can develop strategies to enhance the effectiveness of appraisals. Implementing multiple feedback sources, utilizing technology, and providing rater training are crucial steps in creating a fair and motivating appraisal process.