LEVEL 5 DIPLOMA IN MANAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP
“Don't lower your expectations to meet your performance. Raise your level of performance to meet your expectations.” Ralph Marston There is no single good or best way of conducting performance management. But the overriding principle is that good performance management is equated with good management. It is about ensuring that managers manage effectively, that they communicate with the staff and that they understand what is expected of them, have the capability to deliver it and are motivated to deliver to the highest possible standard. 1. In relation to appraisal and the appraisal process
Managing employees' performance is a continuous process. It involves making sure that the performance of employees contributes to the goals of their teams and the business as a whole. The aim is to continuously improve the performance of individuals and that of the organisation. In the 1970’s an approach to performance assessment was developed under the management by objective movement. It was called “result-orientated appraisal” because it incorporated the agreement of objectives and an assessment of the results obtained against these objectives. Ratings were usually retained of overall performance and in relation to individual objectives. This form of performance appraisal received a boost during the later 1980’s because of performance related pay based on performance rating. (Armstrong's handbook of performance management: an evidence-based guide to delivering high performance 4th ed.)
2.1. The appraisal system conforming to the performance improvement cycle
There is, says Dulewicz (1989), "... a basic human tendency to make judgements about those one is working with, as well as about oneself." Appraisal, it seems, is both inevitable and universal. In the absence of a carefully structured system of appraisal, people will tend to judge the work performance of others, including subordinates, naturally, informally and randomly. The human inclination to judge can create serious motivational, ethical and legal problems in the workplace. Without a structured appraisal system, there is little chance of ensuring that the judgements made will be lawful, fair, defensible and accurate. Performance appraisal systems began as simple methods of income justification and it was used to decide whether or not the salary or wage of an individual employee was justified.
The process was firmly linked to material outcomes. If an employee's performance was found to be less than ideal, a cut in pay would follow. On the other hand, if their performance was better than the supervisor expected, a pay rise was in order. Little consideration, if any, was given to the developmental possibilities of appraisal. Sometimes this basic system succeeded in getting the results that were intended; but more often than not, it failed. The potential usefulness of appraisal as tool for motivation and development was gradually recognized and the general model of performance appraisal, as it is known today began. Performance appraisal may be defined as a structured formal interaction between a subordinate and supervisor, that usually takes the form of a periodic interview (annual or semi-annual), in which the work performance of the subordinate is examined and discussed, with a view to identifying weaknesses and strengths as well as opportunities for improvement and skills development. Performance appraisal, also known as employee appraisal, is a method by which the job performance of an employee is evaluated (generally in terms of quality, quantity, cost and time). Performance appraisal is a part of career development. Performance appraisal cannot be implemented successfully unless it is accepted by all concerned. There should be a common and clear understanding of the distinction between evaluation and appraisal. As Patten...