So, the study is taken to know about performance appraisal, how the employees do their job in Hamdard Wakf Laboratories. Employees are satisfied with the work they are doing or not. After what period the jobs of employee have been evaluated (i.e., monthly, quarterly, half-yearly or annually).For what purpose their jobs have been evaluate either for administrative purpose or for self improvement & Which type of method (traditional or modern method )of performance appraisal is using in Hamdard Wakf Laboratories.
The objective of the study is to gain the knowledge about how the Performance appraisal is done in Hamdard Wakf Laboratories & how they are implementing it in the company.
WHAT IS PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL?
Since organizations exist to achieve goals, the degree of success that individual employees have in reaching their individual goals is important in determining organizational effectiveness. The assessment of how successful employees have been at meeting their individual goals, therefore, becomes a critical part of HRM. This leads us to the topic of performance appraisal.
Get your grade
or your money back
using our Essay Writing Service!
People differ in their abilities and aptitudes. These differences are natural to a great extent and cannot be eliminated even by giving the same basic education and training to them. There will be some differences in the quality and quantity of work done by different employees even on the same job. Therefore, it is necessary for management to know these differences so that the employees having better abilities may be rewarded and the wrong placements of employees may be rectified through transfers. The individual employee may also like to know the level of his performance in comparison to his fellow employees so that he may improve on it. Thus, there is a great need to have suitable performance appraisal system to measure the relative merit of each employee.
The basic purpose of performance appraisal is to facilitate orderly determination of an employee's worth to the organization of which he is a part. However, a fair determination of the worth of an employee can take place only by appraising numerous factors some of which are highly subjective, as for instant, attendance, while others are highly subjective, as for instant, attitude and personality. The objective factor can be assessed accurately on the basis of records maintained by the Human resource or personnel Department, but there is no device to measure the subjective factor precisely. Notwithstanding this, appraisal of these factors must be done to achieve the full appreciation of every employee merit.
Performance appraisal goes by various names such as performance evaluation, progress rating, merit rating, merit evaluation, etc. But in this chapter, we shall use the terms performance appraisal and merit rating to denote the appraisal of the performance of the employees of an organization.
Performance appraisal means systematic evaluation of the personality and performance of each employee by his supervisor or some other person trained in the techniques of merit rating. It employs various rating techniques for comparing individual employees in a work group, in term of personal qualities or deficiencies and the requirements of their respective jobs. To quote dale Yoder," performance appraisal includes all formal procedures used to evaluate personalities and contribution and potential of group members in a working organization. It is a continuous process to secure information necessary for making correct and objective decisions on employees." The comparison of performance with job requirements helps in finding out the merit of individual employees in a week group. Supervisor or an independent appraiser may do rating.
Performance appraisal is a formal program in an organization, which is concerned with not only the contribution of the members who form part of the organization, but aims at spotting the potential also. The satisfactory performance is only a part of the system as a whole and the management needs more information than mere performance ratings of the subordinates. There are no two opinions about the necessity of performance appraisal, which can meet requirements of the management to achieve the organizational goals.
Performance appraisal is the systematic evaluation of the individual with respect to his performance on the job and his potential for development. Performance appraisal is concerned with determining the differences among the employees working in the organization. Generally, the individual's immediate superior in the organization and whose performance is reviewed in turn by his superior does the evaluation. Thus, everyone in Performance appraisal employs rating techniques for comparing individual employees in the work group, in terms of personal qualities or deficiencies and the requirements of their respective jobs
2.1.1 HUMAN RESOURCES PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM:
Always on Time
Marked to Standard
The strength of any organization is its people, If people are attended to properly by recognizing their talents, developing their capabilities and utilizing them appropriately, organizations are likely to be dynamic and grow fast. Ultimately the variety of tasks in any organization have to be accomplished by the people In any case one of the important process goals of any dynamic organization is to ensure that its people are capable of doing the variety of tasks associated with their roles/positions. Some of these tasks may be prescribed, well understood and defined well, whereas some of them may not be all that clear and the employees themselves may have to identify these. Therefore, achievement of this process goal requires the organization to be sensitive to the role requirements on the one hand and the employee capabilities on the other hand.
People may be treated as resources available for the organization. By nature, unlike other resources, these resources are dynamic. Unlike the physical resources, human resources have the capability of expanding to unlimited extents. This is because with proper investments the human capabilities can be multiplied. When the capabilities of people in any organization are multiplied, the organization has wide choices to make for performing different functions. Such as availability of resources also helps the organization in its growth in terms of diversification, expansion, vitality, dimensions, etc.
Human beings also have a need to grow and develop themselves professionally. Development needs to be monitored in terms of matching it with organizational requirements.
Therefore, any organization, interested in developing the capabilities of its employees, should understand the nature of capabilities required to perform different functions as well as the dynamics underlying the development of these capabilities in an organizational context.
There is a great degree of unhappiness all around with performance appraisals; rarely does one come across managers who are happy with the appraisal systems in their organizations. When such a great degree of unhappiness exists about them, why should we continue to have them? But managers find it difficult to do without them because in the absence of an appraisal mechanism, however weak it may be, it is difficult to get work out of people. It is a good mechanism to control people. Employees want promotions, they want salary increments, they want good work conditions, they would like to be placed in prestigious positions, and would like to be transferred to places of their choice and like jobs giving them maximum satisfaction, and so on. And performance appraisal is one mechanism to make sure that people at every level do things the way their bosses want them to do. Thus the bosses at every level strive for better ratings of their own performance by assessing the performance of their subordinates and thus controlling their behaviour. The bosses are also not happy because their bosses rate their performance confidentially rather than communicating and trying to help them improve. The bosses are unhappy because the form-filling has become a ritual. Year after year they have to fill the same forms for employee after employee The personnel departments are unhappy because most of the forms are never received on time. The personnel departments are also not happy because managers keep on making liberal recommendations and placing demands on the personnel departments without looking into the organizational constraints. The top managements are unhappy because in spite of their efforts the quality of personnel seems to be declining day by day.
2.1.2 Some basic ASSUMPTIONS:
The proposed system is based on the following assumptions:-
(i)The organization wishes to use the managerial appraisal system not only for making certain important administrative decisions such as those relating to promotion, salary increase or nomination for training program, but also for purpose of improving the individual manager's performance, for strengthening superior-subordinate relationships, and for achieving the company's business goals more effectively.
(ii)The company considers employees development through the process of achievement of organizational objective of appraisal.
(iii)The company considers it desirable and feasible to set goal/objectives/targets for individual managers, at lease at some levels, or at lease to periodically define expectations of tasks to be accomplished, and of levels of accomplishments, in reasonably precise terms.
This Essay is
a Student's Work
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.Examples of our work
(iv)The company is prepared to view the appraisal process as not just an end-of-the-year exercise, as a set of activities separate from the process of managing performance, but as an ongoing process of goal setting, work planning and performance review, culminating in an annual exercise of documentation.
Introducing an appraisal system in an organization is not an isolated event. It is not just designing a new form to be filled in at the end of the year. An appraisal system can have major, extensive and long-term implications for the effective functioning of an organization. A number of important aspects such as the needs, the concerns and the capabilities of the organization, its traditions, the styles and the climate will have to examine. The possible effects of a new system on the other sub-systems of human resources management, such as promotion and compensation policies, will have to be considered. The introduction of a new system of appraisal in an organization, therefore, calls for careful planning of strategy, and very considerable preparation. The effectiveness of a system will depend, to a large extent, on the process through which the system is developed and introduced.
2.1.3 Initiation and STIMULATION:
The need for a change in an existing appraisal system in an organization may arise from many sources and in many different ways. For example, the decision-makers may find the information contained in the appraisal reports to be inadequate or of poor quality, and they may find it difficult to make decisions on the basis of such information. The organization may decide to introduce new styles and process of management such as-
MBO, for example, for improving effectiveness and that may call for change in the appraisal system. Appraisers may find the system irrelevant the futile; appraises may find the system unfair and threatening. In public sector organizations, often the officers' Associations question the accuracy and objectivity of appraisals and demand change.
2.1.4 Commitment of the Top Management:
Whatever the sources of concern of initial stimulus for change, the decision to introduce change will always have to be made at the top. A move for a change in the performance appraisal system, which may not be just making certain cosmetic changes to make the thing look better, or adding some fancy frills here and there but may have fairly extensive and long range implications for managerial effectiveness, would require strong support and commitment from the top.
22.214.171.124 task FORCE:
Once the top management has made a decision to review the system, a task force should be appointed to critically examine the existing system and to design a new one. Typically, this would involve; (i) a thorough examination of the existing system in relation to its purposes and identification of its strengths and weaknesses; (ii) determining of the primary purposes or the different purposes for which the system can be, and should be used; (iii) exploration of various alternative systems and strategies; (iv) designing a new system; (v) preparations for introducing the new system; (vi) testing the system; and (vii) the implementation process.
After the Task Force has done its initial review and preparatory work, a series of work-shops should be organized in different units of the organization and at different levels of managerial hierarchy. The workshop participants will discuss the relevant issues, share and exchange their own experiences and problem and make their own suggestions for modifying the existing system or developing a new system.
126.96.36.199Approval of the Top MANAGEMENT:
Once a system has been designed and provisions have been made for alternative or collateral interventions for bringing about the necessary changes in the climate of the organization or in the relevant personal policies and procedures, the total package will need to be approved by the top management.
188.8.131.52 Preparations for installation of the SYSTEM:
In a large organization, a considerable amount of preparatory work will need to be done for introducing a new appraisal system. The amount of preparatory work will depend largely on the nature of the system proposed. It is observed that in many organization, system are sometimes introduced with the help of circulars, which are comprehensive in their descriptions and explanations of purposes, definitions of terminology used, rating classifications, procedures etc. But written communication in this area is usually ineffective unless it is backed up by carefully designed training programmes.
2.1.5 Communication and TRAINING:
Requirements of training programmes for introducing a new appraisal system in a large organization may be very considerable, indeed. Apart from explaining the purposes of the system, the contents of the appraisal from, the technology used, the mechanics and the procedure to be followed, the training efforts should particularly aim at the following :-
(1) To motivate the appraisers by promoting an awareness of the relationship of subordinate appraisal with their own effectiveness as managers.
(2) To develop an understanding and acceptance of the relevance and the rationable of the criteria use and the methods proposed. This should indeed be quite easy if, in the first place, the criteria, the standards and the methods have been developed democratically on the basis of a general consensus arrived at through workshop.
(3) To promote an awareness of the sources, mechanics and effects or rater biases (This is extremely important for improving the objectivity of appraisals).
(4) Development of appraisal skills, including interviewing or counseling skills.
(5) In systems envisaging MBO or goal-setting processes, an important requirement would be training for purposes of developing goal-setting skills.
(6) Interventions bases on behavioural sciences may be required for introducing participative approaches in appraisal.
2.1.6 Monitoring and Audit:
It is extremely important to monitor the working of an appraisal system on a regular basis and in a systematic manner. The quality of the appraisal report should be scrutinized carefully and information collected about the experiences of the users.
After the new system has been worked for about two years, it would be desirable to investigate its working in some detail. The investigation should be basically in the following areas:
(1) Whether the system has been implemented as it was designed and whether it is working as it was intended, i.e. whether the prescribed procedures and processes are being observed;
(2) To what extent is the new system achieving the objectives for which it was set up; and
(3) Whether the new system has created any new or unforeseen problems.
This procedure is being suggested, keeping in view the normal requirements, resources and capabilities of large organizations. The prescribed procedure may appear to be lengthy and time-consuming. But if the appraisal system is seen as important not only for certain administrative decisions, but from the point of view of total performance of the organization, then these efforts will be surely worthwhile. In fact, this procedure is essential for developing and introducing an effective appraisal system in an organization. In recent years, several large organizations, such as the State Bank of India, ITC, BHEL etc. have gone through similar processes and they have found the experience rewarding.
2.1.7 Purpose of Performance Appraisal:
The objective of performance appraisal fall in two categories:
This is the most important administrative use of performance appraisal. It is to the common interest of both the management and employees to promote employees onto position where they can most effectively utilize their abilities. It is mismanagement to promote employees into position where they cannot perform effectively at the time in question. A properly developed and administered performance appraisal system can aid in determining whether individuals should be considered for promotions. The system must rate the rate for the present job and his potentialities for the higher job. A person performing the job well does not necessarily mean that he is fit for promotion.
In an organization, it may be necessary to consider various types of personnel actions such as transfer, layoffs, demotions and discharges. In some cases, such actions are called for because of unsatisfactory performance while in other cases it may be called for due to economic conditions over which the organization has no control because of changes in production process. Such actions can be justified if they are based on performance appraisal.
c) Wage and Salary Administration:
In some cases, the wage increases are based on the performance appraisal reports. In some cases, appraisals and seniority are used in combination.
d) Training and Development:
An appropriate system of performance appraisal can be helpful in identifying the areas of skills or knowledge in which certain employees are not up to par, thus pointing out general training deficiencies which presumably should be corrected by additional training, discussions, or counseling. Performance appraisal can also help in spotting the talented employees so as to train and develop them to create an inventory of executive skills. It can also provide the areas where the employees/executives could be further trained and positioned to meet retirement and expansion situations.
e) Personnel Research:
Performance appraisal helps in research in the field of personnel management. Various theories in human relationship are outcome of efforts to find out the cause and effect relationship between the personnel and their performance.
2) Self Improvement.
The performance appraisals bring out the deficiencies and shortcomings of the employees. Performance appraisal helps human resource development in a way. A promotion minded individual could ask for the target programmes of a position he seeks and use the information given by performance appraisal to prepare him for the job and enhance his candidacy.
Performance appraisal also helps to spot out a person's ability to see an organization problem, devise ways of attracting it, translate his ideas into action, incorporate new information as it arises and carry his plans through the results. It highlights a sort of total managerial action in contrast to things they customarily factor out as conceptual entities-things such as planning function, leadership ability, or financial knowledge. The manager's selection will often be improved by this emphasis on the whole managerial job.
Why we need Performance Appraisal?
The important reasons or benefits, which justify the existence of a system of performance appraisal in an enterprise, are as under:
1) A good system of performance appraisal helps the supervisor to evaluate the performance of his employees systematically and periodically. It also helps to assign that work to individual for which they are best suited.
2) Performance rating helps in guiding and correction of employees. The supervisor may use the results of rating for the purpose of constructively guiding employees in the efficient performance of work.
3) The ability of the staff is recognized and can be adequately rewarded by giving them special increments.
4) Performance appraisal can be used as a basis of sound personnel policy in relation to transfers and promotions. If the performance of an employee is better than others, he can be recommended for promotion, but if a person is not doing well in a job, he may be transferred to some other job.
5) Ratings can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of training programmes. Merit rating reveals weaknesses of employees and the training programmes can be modified accordingly.
6) Performance appraisal provides an incentive to the employees to better their performance in a bid to improve their rating over others.
7) Systematic appraisals will prevent grievances and develop confidence amongst the employees if they are convinced of the impartial basis of evaluation. The record of merit rating is available in permanent form to protect the management against subsequent charges of discrimination, which might be leveled by the trade union leaders.
Performance Appraisal has a beneficial effect on both the persons doing the appraisal and being appraised. The appraisal brings prominently to the attention of supervisors or executives the importance of knowing their subordinates as human being. The necessity of performance appraisal leads the appraiser to a thoughtful analysis of people rated and tends to make him more alive to opportunities and responsibilities in developing the subordinates.
2.1.8 METHODS OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
Performance appraisal may be undertaken either in terms of the attributes or traits of the employees i.e. skill, knowledge, experience, etc. (known as the trait approach) or with reference to the results achieved by the employees (appraisal by results).
Forced choice method
Forced distribution method
Critical incident method
Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS)
Appraisal by results or management by objectives (M.B.O)
Appraising Managers as Managers
1. MODERN Methods of Performance Appraisal:
Appraisal by Results of Management by objectives.
Appraising manager as Manager.
Human Asset Accounting Method.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS)
So far we have been talking about assessing past performance. But in several promotion decisions prediction of future performance becomes necessary more so if the selection is to be for a job from among a group of candidates, none of whom has done the job or one like it ever before. In these situations may organization use assessment centers to predict future performance were accurately.
An assessment centre is a multiple assessment of several individuals performed simultaneously by a group of trained evaluators using a variety of group and individual exercise.
Typically, individuals from different departments are brought together to spend two or three days working on individual or group assignment similar to the ones they will be handling if they are promoted. The period judgement of observers leads to an order of merit ranking for each participant.
There is a good deal of research evidence that people chosen by this method prove better than those chosen by other methods. The centre also makes it possible for unknown people who are working in comparatively less important or low status departments of an organization to compete with people from more well-known departments. This has the effect of equalizing opportunity, improving morals and enlarging the pool of possible promotion candidates.
Appraisal by Results or Management by objectives (MBO):-
A popular technique of performance appraisal of managers now days are MBO. The first original work on MBO can be found in Peter Drucker's book. The Practice of Management, published in 1954. In 1965 George Odiorne* made a major contribution of MBO.
Management by objectives is a process whereby performance goals and objectives are set by each subordinate in collaboration with his superior at the start of the appraisal period. Progress is then tracked and results are evaluated periodically.
Important elements of an MBO Programme are:-
1. Each Manager identifies his key effectiveness areas where he should show results.
2. Each Manager establishes his objectives (both long-term as well as short term) in such effective areas.
Such objectives should be quantified and time- bound.
They should be horizontally linked up with the objectives of the peers in the department, and vertically aligned with the objectives of the boss and the subordinates.
They should be related to and be part of the total organizational plan.
They should be established by the job holder and the boss together. In other words, goal setting should be participative. Unilateral imposition of goals by the boss is totally alien to the spirit of MBO.
3. Such mutually agreed objectives are then used for evaluating performance. Periodic review and updating of these objectives is also done by the boss and the subordinate together. In case of failure, data-let objective consideration reveals whether the target was carelessly fixed or whether other reasons are responsible for inadequate performance.
At their simplest, the elements of MBO in actual practice are three : Setting objectives, trucking progress, and evaluating results.
A document called the 'Management Guide' or 'Results Guide or 'Management Job Description' is usually prepared to facilitate the administration of MBO programme. It consists of 3 parts. The First Part is the title page in which there is a concise statement of the purpose of the job, the job holder's position in the organization, as well as his responsibilities. The Second Part is called the Key Results Analysis. This part consists of 4 different columns. The first column names the key result areas of the job. In the second column the agreed objectives or performance standards are mentioned against each identified key area. In the third column, the job-holder mentions the source and frequency of the control information which he proposes to use in checking his progress against standards. In the fourth column suggestions are made for improving results.
The Third Part of Management Guide is the job Improvement Plan. This is a check-list agreed on by the manager and his boss covering the tasks which the manage is going to carry out in the nest few months. This list is usually drawn up at the performance review, but it can be amended at any time. It is important that each item in this list is given a date by which the Manager undertakes to complete the assignment.
Human Asset Accounting METHOD:
The human asset accounting method refers to activity devoted to attaching money estimates to the value of a firm's internal human organization and its external customer goodwill. If able, well-trained personnel leave a firm, the human organization is worthless; if they join it, its human assets are increased. If distrust and conflict prevail, the human enterprise is devalued. If teamwork and high morale prevail, the human organization is a very valuable asset.
The current value of a firm's human organization can be appraised by developed procedures, by understanding periodic measurements of "Key causal" and "intervening enterprise" variables. The intervening variables reflect the internal state and health of an organization. They include loyalties, attitudes, motivations and collective capacity for effective interaction, communication and decision making. These two types of variables measurement must be made over several years to provide the needed data for the computation of the human asset accounting.
This method is not yet very popular in India.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS):
This is a new appraisal technique which has recently been developed. Its supporters claim that it provides better, more equitable appraisals as compared to other techniques. The procedure for BARS is usually five stepped.
a) Generate Critical Incidents. Persons with knowledge of the job to be appraise (job-holders/supervisors) are asked to describe specific illustrations (critical incidents) of effective and ineffective performance behaviour.
b) Develop Performance Dimensions. These people then cluster the incidents into a smaller set (or say 5 or 10) of performance dimensions. Each clusters (dimensions) is then defined
c) Reallocate Incidents. Any group of people who also know the job then reallocate the original critical incidents.
d) Scale of incidents. This second group is generally asked to rate (7 or 9 point scales are typical) the behaviour described in the incident as to how effectively or ineffectively it represents performance on the appropriate dimension.
e) Develop final Instrument. A subset of incidents (usually 6 or 7 per cluster) is used as "behaviour anchors" for the performance dimensions.
Though BARS techniques is more time-consuming and expensive than other appraisal tools. Yet it has got certain advantages, such as :
1. A more accurate gauge, since BARS is done by persons expert in the technique, the results are sufficiency accurate.
2. Clear Standard - The critical incidents along the scale help to clarify what is mean by "extremely good" performance. "average" performance and so forth.
3. Feedback - The use of critical incidents may be more useful in providing feedback to the people being appraisal.
4. Independent dimensions - Systematically clustering the critical incidents into 5 to 6 performance dimensions helps in making the dimensions more independent of one another.
Traditional Methods of Performance Appraisal
Straight Ranking Method:
The oldest and simplest method of performance appraisal yield a ranking or ordering from best to worst of all individuals comprising the group. The rater simply picks out the individual he considers best, the one he considers nest best, etc. and ranks them in order on the basis of their work. The ranking method usually takes into account rating by more than a single rater. The ranks assigned by raters are then averaged and each member in the group is determined.
This method has two advantages that the simplicity and naturalness. There are two disadvantages-first of all the task of ranking a group of individuals becomes difficult when there are over twenty or thirty cases. Secondly, the magnitude of the difference in ability between ranks in not equal at different positions.
Paired Comparison Technique:
Although ranking method required some comparisons among individuals to be rated, there is not system in it. This is achieved well by a paired comparison technique in which each employee is compared every trait with all the other persons in pairs one at a time. With this technique, Judgement is easier and simpler than with the ordinary ranking method. The number of times each individual is compared with another is tallied on a piece of paper. These numbers yield the rank order of the entire group
The result of these comparisons is tabulated and a rank is assigned to each individual.
This method is not suitable when a group is large because, in that case, the number of judgements becomes excessively large.
Man-to-Man Comparison Method:
This technique was used by the USA army during First World War. By this method certain factors are selected for the purpose of analysis (such as leadership, dependability, and initiative), and a scale is designed by the rater for each factor. A scale of man is also created for each selected factor. The each man to be rated is compared with the man in the scale, and certain scores for each factor are awarded to him. In other words, instead of comparing a "whole man" to a whole man, personnel are compared to the key man in respect of one factor at a time. This method is used in job evaluation, and is known as factors comparison method. In performance appraisal, It is not of much use-because the designing of scales is a complicated task.
Under this system, the rater considers certain features and marks them accordingly to a scale. Certain categories of worth are first established and carefully designed. The selected features may be analytical ability, Co-operative-ness, dependability self expression, job knowledge, Judgement, Leadership and organizing ability etc. They may be : (A) outstanding, (B) Very Good, (C) Good, (D) Fair or Average, (E) Poor : - E (or E-) very poor or hopeless.
Graphic or Linear Rating Scale :
This is most commonly used method of performance appraisal. Under it, a printed form; One for each person to be rated is used. According to Jucius, these factors are: employee characteristics and employee contribution. In employee characteristics are include such qualities as initiative, leadership, cooperativeness, dependability attitude, enthusiasm, loyalty, creative ability, emotional ability and co-ordination. In the employee contribution are included the quantity and quality of work, the responsibilities assumed, specific goals achieved regularity of attendance leadership offered, attitude towards superiors and associates, versatility, etc..
The rating-scale method is easy to understand and easy to use, and permits a statistical tabulation of scores A ready comparison of scores among the employees is possible. These scores indicate the worth of every individual. It is the most common evaluation tool in use today. Besides when ratings are objectively given, they can provide useful feed back
However this method suffers from a serious disadvantage, for it is arbitrary and the rating is generally subjective often the rating clusters on the high side when this method is used. Another severe limitation is that it assumes that each characteristic is equally important for all it assumes every one's definition of 'dependable' is the same.
Forced Choice Description Method:
This method was evolved after a great deal of research conducted for the military services during the World War II. It attempts to correct a raters tendency to give consistently high or consistently low ratings to all the employees. The use of this method calls for objective reporting and minimum subjective judgement. Under this method the rating elements are several sets of pair phase or adjectives (usually sets of four phrases two of which are positive, two of which are negative) relating to job proficiency or personal qualifications.
The method has certain advantages such as while choosing two statements from each series, the rater is unable to introduce personal bias or 'halo effect;* as only one of the favorable and of the unfavorable phrases in each series is related to success or failure on the job.
However this method is not clearly superior to other traditional rating methods. Trained technicians are required to prepare sets of series for each occupational group. And most managers do not like to 'rate in the dark'. Further such tests are expensive to develop, because of the particular job and company. Finally, the results of evaluation do not prove useful for counseling and training purposes because the rater is ingrate how he is evaluating the individual.
Forced Distribution Method:
This method was evolved by Joseph Tiffin after statistical work. This system is used to eliminate or minimize raters' bias, so that all personnel may not be placed at the higher end or at the lower end of the scale. It requires the rater to appraise an employee according to a pre-determined distribution scale. Under this system it is assumed that it is possible and desirable to rate only two factors viz. job performance and promo ability. For this
The 'halo' effect:
Experimental evidence shows that some raters have a tendency to rate an individual either high or low on many factors because the rater knows (or thinks) the individual to be high or low on some specific factor. This tendency is known as the 'halo' effect.
Check List Method:
This is the adaptation of a method developed by Thurston for measuring attitudes. Under this method, the rater does not evaluate employee performance, he supplies report about it and the final rating is done by the personnel department. A series of questions are presented concerning on employee to his behaviour. The rater then checks to indicate is the answers to a question about an employee positive or negative. The value of each question may be weighted more heavily than others.
This method suffers from bias on the part of the rater because he can distinguish positive and negative question. Secondly a separate check list must be developed for different classes of jobs .This process is expensive and time consuming. Thirdly it is difficult to assemble analyses and weight a number of statements about employee characteristics and contributions.
Free Easy Method:
This technique is very common for appraising individuals for professional positions. In his technique the rater, who may be the former employer, teacher or associate of the candidate is requested to give in writing an informed and honest account of the candidates strengths, weaknesses, potentials and so on. The biggest drawback of this technique is the accounts' variability in length and content to compare two essay appraisals.
Critical Incident Method:
This method was developed following research conducted by armed forces in the United States during World War-II. The essence of this system is that it attempts to measure employees performance in terms of certain 'events' or episodes that occur in the performance of the appraises job. These events are known as critical incidents. The basis of this method is the principle that "there are certain significant acts in each employee's behaviour and performance which make all the difference between success and failure on the job."
The appraiser keeps a written record of the events (either good or bad) that can easily be recalled and used in the course of a periodical or formal appraisal. Feed back is provided to the appraises about the incidents during performance review session.
This method provides an objective basis for conducting a discussion on and individuals performance. Vague impressions and general remarks are avoided, for supervisor is trained to record accurately the actual incidents from the daily activities of the employee. This approach reduces 'recency' effect of most performance rating.
However this method has significant limitations. These include (i) Negative incidents are generally more noticeable than positive ones. (ii) The recording of incidents is a core to supervisor and may be put off and easily forgotten. (iii) Very close supervision may result which may not be to the liking of an employee. (iv) The managers may unload a
series of complaints about incidents during annual performance review session. The feedback may be too much at one time and appear as punishment.
Group Appraisal Method:
Under this method employees are rated by an appraisal group, consisting of their manager and three or four other managers who have some knowledge of their performance. The manager explains to the group the nature of his subordinates duties. The group then discusses the standards of performance for the job, the actual performance of the job-holder, and the causes of their particular level of performance, and offers suggestions for future improvement,
The advantage of this method is that it is thorough, very simple and is devoid of any bias, for it involves multiple judges. But it is very time consuming.
Field Review Method:
Under this method a trainer employee from the personnel department interviews line supervisors to evaluate their respective subordinates. The appraiser is fully equipped with definite test questions, usually memorized in advance, which he puts to the supervisor. The supervisor is required to give his opinion about the progress of his subordinates, the level of performance of each subordinate, his weaknesses, good points, outstanding ability, promotability and the possible plans of action in cases requiring further consideration. The success of this system depends upon the competence of the interviewer.
This system is useful for a large organization. It relieves the supervisor of the need for filling out appraisal forms .The main defect is that it keeps two management representatives busy with appraisal.
While performance counseling should take place at least once in a year as an integral part of the appraisal system it could be carried out more frequently by manager. It is at advisable to have performance counseling discussions. Quite frequently depending upon the needs of each appraise and the time availability of the counselor. In fact, the more attention a manager pays to counseling his subordinate, the more time he is likely to gain in the long run as a result of improved capabilities of his subordinates.
Any organization interested in using a good performance appraisal and review system that aims at developing employees has to practice and pay enough attention to performance counseling. Performance appraisal does not serve the purpose of developing employees unless an effective system of performance counseling is introduced and practiced in the organization.