• 1. Critically assess the positive and negative aspects of Performance Appraisal ( PA) systems in terms of their effect on behaviours , motivation and teamwork . • Depending upon your conclusions suggest how PA systems might be modified, or what might replace them in order to better align performance management approaches with leadership theory . • 2. Use your wiki to develop your ideas using the library database and other sources appropriately to support your views. 3. Prepare a short presentation (10 – 15 minutes) of your team's findings. Make sure that in your presentation you cite all reference sources that you use, using APA format, and provide a reference list (as the last slide if you are using a slide show to support your presentation). 4. Present your findings on Wednesday 23 February at 9.00 am in IMC Room 249. 1 MBE2010/11 A-1
25
Embed
1. Critically assess the positive and negative aspects of Performance Appraisal (PA) systems in terms of their effect on behaviours, motivation and teamwork.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
• 1. Critically assess the positive and negative aspects of Performance Appraisal (PA) systems in terms of their effect on behaviours, motivation and teamwork.
• Depending upon your conclusions suggest how PA systems might be modified, or what might replace them in order to better align performance management approaches with leadership theory.
• 2. Use your wiki to develop your ideas using the library database and other sources appropriately to support your views.3. Prepare a short presentation (10 – 15 minutes) of your team's findings. Make sure that in your presentation you cite all reference sources that you use, using APA format, and provide a reference list (as the last slide if you are using a slide show to support your presentation).4. Present your findings on Wednesday 23 February at 9.00 am in IMC Room 249.
1MBE2010/11 A-1
11 PAs Evaluation, using Scoring Assessmentwith the Leadership Theories.
Disclaimers*This result was analysed, using the average of scoring by MBE A-1 (n=6), therefore, this result can not be identified and verified as a official research outcome on the course of WMG.*This analysis should be calculated by relative evaluation, however, it can not avoid human bias on the calculation precisely, because assessors are not professional.
Pros Might reduce frequency of negative critical incidents.
ConsNo information given back to employees.Would probably lead to a negative incident bias.Employees may worry about the consequences.Employees may conceal information regarding incidents.
Manager writes down positive and negative performance behavior of employees throughout the performance period.
ProsHelps managers to evaluate performance.If done objectively, can enhance teamwork.
ConsHuman bias by leaders/raters/supervisors all possible.Process is expensive and time consuming.Can be difficult to analyze data.Limited to behavioral observations, not open-ended.
This method describe a performance appraisal method where rater familiar with the jobs being evaluated prepared a large list of descriptive statements about effective and ineffective behavior on jobs.
ProsHelps managers decide where employees would be most effective.Useful when priorities are not clear.Peoples skills are recognised
ConsWeightings need to be reviewed regularly, due to changing requirements, markets, etc.People may be assigned to jobs they would prefer not to do, solely because they are good at them.
A range of plausible options is listed. Each option is compared against each of the other options. The results are tallied and the option with the highest score is the preferred option.
ProsEasy to understand for leaders and employees.Shared and individual goals.Quantitative comparisons possible.Could be used in most departments.
ConsDoes not give reasons as to why supervisors give particular ratings.Used subjectively in many cases.Not valid if comparing employees rated by different supervisors.
The Rating Scale is a form on which the manager simply checks off the employee’s
ProsNon-quantitative, descriptive evaluation can be very important for improvement.
ConsCould be biased.Evaluator might do it without fully assessing employee.Can take a long time and be uneconomical
This method asked managers / supervisors to describe strengths and weaknesses of an employee’s behavior. Essay evaluation is a non-quantitative technique.
8MBE2010/11 A-1
Analysis
Source: Smith, B. N., Hornsby, J. S., & Shirmeyer, R. (1996)
ProsQuantitatively assesses how well certain specific behaviors are exhibited.Could help managers to understand link between certain behaviors and critical incidents.
ConsCan take a long time to create and develop effective indicators.Bias and subjectivity could be present.
This method used to describe a performance rating that focused on specific behaviors or sets as indicators of effective or ineffective performance. It is a combination of the rating scale and critical incident techniques of employee performance evaluation.
9MBE2010/11 A-1
Analysis
Source: Smith, B. N., Hornsby, J. S., & Shirmeyer, R. (1996)
7. Performance ranking method
Series10
0.51
1.52
2.53
3.54
4.55
2.25 2.50
1.67
Behaviours Motivation Teamwork
ProsIndividually quite motivating, especially for competitive employees.Could be effective in short-term.
ConsDifficult to evaluate fairly.Would encourage competition with employees only looking out for themselves.Instills fear and can be demoralizing for those with low rank.
Ranking is a performance appraisal method that is used to evaluate employee performance from best to worst. It is a combination of the rating scale and critical incident techniques of employee performance evaluation.
10MBE2010/11 A-1
Analysis
Source: Katz, B., Bruck, M., & Coleman, W. (2001)
8. Management By Objectives (MBO) method
Series10
0.51
1.52
2.53
3.54
4.55
3.83 3.83 3.33
Behaviours Motivation Teamwork
ProsBased on employee/manager input and commitment.Gives focus and direction to employees.Periodic re-evaluation keeps progress on track.
ConsGoal-oriented approach that may not understand the limitations of the process to achieve (Red-bead).May limit people to reaching targets, when they could exceed them.De-motivates those unable to improve or achieve targets.
MBO is a process in which managers / employees set objectives for the employee, periodically evaluate the performance, and reward according to the result. MBO focuses attention on what must be accomplished (goals) rather than how it is to be accomplished (methods)
11MBE2010/11 A-1
Analysis
Source: Ivancevich, J. M. (1972).
9. 360 degree performance appraisal
Series10
0.51
1.52
2.53
3.54
4.55 4.42
4.08 4.08
Behaviours Motivation Teamwork
ProsWide scope of feedback makes use of all possible sources of experience.Motivator to perform on all fronts.Removes subjectivity aspects of other methods.Identifies strengths and areas for improvement.Anonymous, so no fear of reprisal from those who are rated.Holds even the management accountable.Can address skills, competencies, behaviors.Very flexible.
ConsExtremely time-consuming for all involved.Limitations where new employees are involved (may not have experience as assessors, other people might not know them well, etc…)
360 Degree Feedback is a system or process in which employees receive confidential, anonymous feedback from the people who work around them.
12MBE2010/11 A-1
Analysis
Source: Pollack, D. M., & Pollack, L. J. (1996)
10.Forced ranking (forced distribution)
Series10
0.51
1.52
2.53
3.54
4.55
2.7
3.6
1.8
Behaviours Motivation Teamwork
ProsCan create a high-performance culture.Framework is fixed and does not depend on changing market requirements.
ConsWould encourage cut-throat competition with employees only looking out for themselves.Makes collaboration almost impossible.Harms morale.
Forced ranking is a method of performance appraisal to rank employee but in order of forced distribution. For example, the distribution requested with 10 or 20 percent in the top category, 70 or 80 percent in the middle, and 10 percent in the bottom.
13MBE2010/11 A-1
Analysis
Source: Smith, B. N., Hornsby, J. S., & Shirmeyer, R. (1996)
11. Behavioral Observation Scales
Series10
0.51
1.52
2.53
3.54
4.55
3.08
2.33 2.58
Behaviours Motivation Teamwork
ProsAvoid critical incidents by understanding who/what might cause them.Allows management to identify patterns in employee behaviors.
ConsEmployees may conceal information from supervisors.Can de-motivate staff as there is no room for experimentation; failure is punished.Could be biased.
Behavioral Observation Scales is frequency rating of critical incidents that worker has performed.
14MBE2010/11 A-1
Analysis
Source: Topel, R. (1993)
Result of Scoring -TableBehaviours Motivation Teamwork
1. Wide scope of feedback makes use of all possible sources of experience2. Helps managers to evaluate performance.3. Easy to understand for leaders and employees.4. Quantitative comparisons possible.5. Non-quantitative, descriptive evaluation can be very important for
improvement.6. Could help managers to understand link between certain behaviors and
critical incidents.7. Periodic re-evaluation keeps progress on track.8. Allows management to identify patterns in employee behaviors.
MBE2010/11 A-1 23
1. Identifies strengths and areas for improvement.
2. Motivator to perform on all fronts.3. Peoples skills are recognised4. Shared and individual goals.
1. Can address skills, competencies, behaviors.
2. If done objectively, can enhance teamwork.
3. Gives focus and direction to employees4. Framework is fixed and does not
depend on changing market requirements.
Conclusion
Options to Replace Performance (Modification)
Giving DirectionGiving Feedback & Identifying areas for trainingDeveloping a new Reward System (not only based on financial reward).Providing an Objective Basis for PromotionMotivating Staff
References
• Adair, J. (2006). Action -Centered-Leadership. In Leadership and Motivation (pp. 19-35). Kogan Page Ltd; Reissue.• Adair, J. (1987). The leader. In Effective Teambuilding (pp. 116-125). Business Management.• Deming, E. W. (1993). The new economics: for industry, government, education. Cambridge: MIT, Centre for
Advanced Engineering Study.• Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The Motivation to Work (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley &
Sons.• Ivancevich, J. M. (1972). A Longitudinal Assessment of Management by Objectives. Administrative Science
Quarterly Vol. 17, No. 1, Mar., 1972 , 126-138.• Katz, B., Bruck, M., & Coleman, W. (2001). The Benefits of Powered Liposuction Versus Traditional Liposuction: A
Paired Comparison Analysis. Dermatologic Surgery Volume 27, Issue 10 , 851-914.• Keavenya, T. J., & McGann, A. F. (1975). A comparison of behavioral expectation scales and graphic rating scales.
Journal of Applied Psychology Volume 60, Issue 6 , 695-703.• Park, K., & Kim, J. (1990). Fuzzy weighted-checklist with linguistic variables. Reliability Volume: 39 Issue:3 , 389 -
393 .• Pollack, D. M., & Pollack, L. J. (1996). Using 360 Degree Feedback in Performance Appraisal. Public Personnel
Management, Vol. 25 .• Smith, B. N., Hornsby, J. S., & Shirmeyer, R. (1996). Current Trends in Performance Appraisal: An Examination of
Managerial Practice. SAM Advanced Management Journal, Vol. 61 .• Topel, R. (1993). Discretion and bias in Performance Evaluation. European Economic Review 37 , 355-365.• Woolsey, K. L. (1986). The Critical Incident Technique: An Innovative Qualitative Method of Research. Canadian