With the ever evolving status of the development of Personnel Management comes the evolvement of strategizing the guidelines, and structure for the foundation of Personnel Management Evaluation. The importance of Personnel Management is high, and has been progressively growing into the fast pace of society. The idea behind having personnel management is to find ideal candidates who are self sufficient among many other desirable qualities. Finding an employee who fits the complete package of a company's criteria is essential in cost saving for a business, and it's success. There are many guidelines Personnel Management follow, and one of the most important is the personnel evaluation system. This provides a clear cut plan for both the employee, and employer on the expectations of each position. The business structure, and goals should be common knowledge, and a common goal to achieve. This paper will discuss various states evaluation systems, four key factors in implementing a public personnel evaluation system, and four challenges public managers must consider in implementing a public personnel evaluation.
Compare and contrast three state agencies personnel evaluation systems. The state of Virginia's personnel management evaluation had quite extensive information on their guidelines for evaluation. Each employee is given the opportunity to fill out a self evaluation form which is given to them two weeks prior to their interim or annual evaluation. This gives them the opportunity to rate job performance, and also the opportunity for them to rate their supervisors. The responsibility of the supervisor is to fill out a form as well, and ensure if there is a poor evaluation to be given, that it be filled out immediately to be reviewed with each employee. Along with a poor evaluation plan must be an improvement plan which will help guide the employee to the correct standard of the employer. If the employee feels the poor evaluation is in just they have the opportunity to file an appeal with reasons as to why they feel the evaluation is unfair. At the time of the employees evaluation if performance is up to par discussion of pay increase would occur. A future performance plan will be set out for the employee to review along with their supervisor (State of VA, 2000) The state of Texas did not have as quite the lengthy details on their evaluation system as Virginia. Information given by the state of Texas gives the required elements for their planning and evaluation system. Their four requirements are functional job descriptions, performance standards, performance planning, and collaboration (Reynolds, 2006). They stated these are the four most important components for successful evaluation of their employees. Each employee is to receive their evaluation annually after their anniversary date. They have approximately 10 days after the anniversary date to complete the evaluation. A break down for the performance evaluation is given in the form of ratings which consist of employee exceeding standards, meeting standards, meeting most standards, does not meet standards, and not applicable. The evaluation is called a performance evaluation conference, where an hour will be allotted in a private setting. The employee is given the opportunity to give feedback on their supervisor, but it is not mandatory to do so. The state of Kentucky had the most details information on the expectations of the personnel evaluation system. The handbook discussed in detail and covered the general information on the development, statutes and regulation, an overview of the evaluation process, and tips and tools for the evaluator. The performance evaluation in the state of Kentucky is require to be completed no more than 30 days after the annual performance period. All performance evaluations are to be in writing, and to be...
References: Personnel Cabinet. (2011) Employee Evaluation System, Supervisor Handbook. Retrieved from http://www.personnel.ky.gov/NR/rdonlyres/1560AE4B-CF23-452C-B875
State of VA. (2000) Department of Human Resource Management Policies and Procedures Manual. Retrieved from http:// www.dhrm.state.va.us/hrpolicy/policy.html
Wandersman, Abraham. (2009) Four Keys to Success (Theory, Implementation, Evaluation, and
Resource/System Support): High Hopes and Challenges in Participation. DOI 10.1007/s10464-008-9212-x
Reynolds, Carl. (2006) Office of Court Administration Performance Planning & Evaluation System for Headquarters and Court Collection Employees. Retrieved from http://www.docstoc.com/docs/5192342/office -of-court
Please join StudyMode to read the full document