January 10, 2008
I know from past experiences how performance review time is on both manager and employee. The yearly performance review not only impacts whether the employee is retained, but will also affect their opportunity for advancement. It is a responsibility that is not to be taken lightly. This being said there are obviously problems with the way performance reviews are handled, how one employee can be evaluated by two different managers and have such a startling difference between the two reviews. This paper will examine some of the issues and what can be done to prevent the issues.
Biases and Performance Reviews
Currently at our company we have been running into some problems in regards to employees who have been terminated as a result of their annual performance review. This has caused the company some legal issues which resulted in an investigation of our process of review. The review process doesn’t look as though it has a problem but the way in which the managers are evaluating the employees is the issue. Before we can train our mangers to be efficient in evaluation we need to know what the issues are and how to avoid them. While researching I discovered several areas’ that need to be improved. The first issue is referred to as the Halo Effect. The Halo Effect is when either a favorable or unfavorable employee behavior or characteristic affects the overall way the employee is viewed through the appraisal. (2007, HRN Management) This is especially evident if an employee reports to two managers and is given two drastically different reviews based on a relationship or closer bond with one particular manager. This issue relates not only in trusting the Manager’s ability to evaluate but also causes a problem when evaluating the employee for future opportunities within our organization. In order to avoid a result where...