Performance appraisal is defined by Mathias, Jackson (2005, p106) as ‘the process of evaluating how well employees perform their jobs as compared to a set of standards, and then communicating that information to those employees.’ This evaluation or review is usually carried out periodically. A performance appraisal usually forms an integral part of an organization’s Performance Management System, and although there are criticisms against performance appraisals, its many advantages heavily outweigh their shortcomings.
To understand difficulties faced by supervisors, it is necessary to first understand why supervisors want to carry out appraisals. The reasons mentioned by C.H. Tan, Torrington (2004, p228) are as follows:
Efficient human resource management. To ensure that each individual’s ability is effectively used in the organization, without talents being ignored.
Training. To identity training needs for the development of individuals.
Promotion. To assist promotion decisions
Planning for succession needs and identifying skill shortages
Authority. To sustain the hierarchy of authority.
Because of the above reasons, many organizations carry out performance appraisals at least once a year. A few companies even carry out their appraisals quarterly or monthly.
Performance appraisals, if done unfairly or is not objective, leads to poor working relationships between the appraisal and the appraisee, and demotivates the staff who are working hard and confuses those on who are unsure of their job scope and their career development in the organization.
Problems in appraisal
A major problem facing appraisers when conducting their performance appraisals is having poor judgment on their part. There are seven main factors that lead to such poor judgment. It is assumed that the appraiser wishes to conduct performance appraisals fairly and objectively to meet the abovementioned reasons.
One of the factors is...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document