Many Experts argue that performance appraisals lead to dysfunctional behaviours which may affect organizational performance. Do you agree with this statement? Discuses and Debate.
Virtually all the companies have some formal or informal means of appraising their employee’s performance. Performance appraisal means evaluating an employee’s current and/or past performance relative to his or her performance standards. While “appraising performance” usually brings to mind specific appraisal tools (Blech, 2007). Performance appraisal also always assumes that the employee understood what his or her performance standards were, and that the supervisor also provides the employee with the feedback, development, and incentives required to help the person eliminate performance deficiencies or to continue to perform above par. The aim should be improve performance.
Not surprisingly, some managers and employees dislike performance appraisal! The major reasons for dislike include lack of ongoing review, lack of employee involvement, lack of recognizing for good performance etc. Some have argued all performance appraisal system are so flawed that they are manipulative, abusive, autocratic and counterproductive . Though the purpose of performance management is to ensure and improve of employees activities and outputs are congruent with the organizational goals, but various dysfunctional behaviors occurs in the organization due to some unethical reason or sometimes situational impression. Performance appraisals lead to dysfunctional or optimistic behaviors which affect organizational performance. (Gary Dessler, 2006), Hence, dysfunctional behaviors lead an organization performance downstairs which arises for a lot of causes.
Dysfunctional behavior in any form is usually the result of the behaviour of the person trying to exert control on the situation. The teenager who lives in filth will never clean their room because "they have been told to do it." Human beings always resist when they are told what to do. The teenager is completely aware that their squalor is the fault of the parent who is trying to force them to clean their room, but the parent at the same time is equally convinced that their teenagers filth is a deliberate ploy to get back at them, so they redouble their efforts to get it cleaned up, therefore redoubling their teenagers resistance. The same resistance and consequences can be seen whenever one human being tries to influence the behaviour of another and where this is most evident is in the relationship between the manager and the employee. (Gary Dessler, 2006)
The manager frequently bangs on about the behaviour of his employees without realizing for a second that it is the behaviour of management that drives the behaviour of the workforce. The way to stop this dysfunctional behaviour is for the mangers to behave in a different way. In a conventional intervention this involves the manager first admitting that the problem lies with them.
Unfortunately the manager who is causing the problem is the last to know because nobody will ever tell their own manager they are being a jerk, and even if they did the manager would not listen because the manager knows that he is doing his best. To restore the functionality of the team the manager has to change his behaviour and that will only happen when they realize how destructive their current behaviour is. The way to make this happen is for them to realize for themselves how destructive they are being and then, because they want to do a good job too, they will actively seek out the changes that they need to make. (Wood-Chapman- Fromholtz- Morrison, 2004)
Management control systems (MCS), involving tools such as budgets, variance reports, standard operating procedures, or performance-based remuneration or other techniques (such as the balanced scorecard), seek to bring commonality of goals and process coordination within organizations. The need for goal sharing and...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document