Make Performance Appraisal Relevant - Article Example

Performance Appraisal Professor (Tutor) The Name of the School (University) The City and State 30 September, 2014 Performance Appraisal I found Winston’s (1972) article to be interesting and informative in terms of performance appraisal. While I tend to agree to most of the ideas presented in the article, I will also argue against some and offer recommendations for improvement in terms of performance appraisal. I begin by supporting the author’s position that performance appraisal programs can become more effective when management fits practice to purpose during goals setting and selecting appraisal methods to accomplish them. Moreover, I would also like to respond to the question posted in the beginning of the article ‘This management tool appear to be here to stay; the question is, how can it be tailored for better results? Organizations and management should focus on training managers on how effectively use performance appraisals by setting clear goals that align with actual practice in a bid to enhance performance and organizational behavior. The following paper seeks to offer a critical reflection on what Winston’s (1972) presents in his article Make Performance Appraisal Relevant in terms of performance appraisal. Moreover, the paper will also use further research to debate on the topic of performance appraisal by discussing issues discussed in each article. I agree that performance appraisal remains a significant tool for organizational success, but has proven to be ineffective or disappointing in several occasions. The success of performance appraisals depends on how well or effectively they are used within an organization. This concurs with Winston’s (1972, p.61) suggestion that based on the potential of performance appraisals, the concern should not be considering eliminating them, but should be improving them. Winston (1972 p. 62) indicates that one of the main reasons that performance appraisals disappointment is because organizations regularly select broadly from a wide range of appraisal methods without considering about which method is appropriate for a specific appraisal goal. Different performance appraisal methods have their own mixture of pros and cons, where none is able to realize all the objectives of a performance appraisal program exclusively. I also agree that none of the performance appraisal methods is able to avoid the drawbacks. This is because as much as performance appraisals are meant to make visible facilitating improvement in a set of important organizational activities; they still face personal judgments, unsound human views, and subjective values. I have personally experienced bias in my performance appraisal from a supervisor, where I received harsh remarks for being late on several occasions. I believe that performance appraisal methods have their pitfalls that often result in disappointment when one method is used exclusively within an organization. Firstly, performance appraisals do in fact consume a lot of time and energy from managers. I personally would be required to put in a lot to adequately track what ten or twenty employees are doing on a daily basis. This also includes offering employees feedback with the objective of creating improvement that may sometime require personal interviews with each employee. Managers or supervisors may also use the inappropriate standards for rating employee performance (Winston 1972 p. 62). Furthermore, lack of communication can significantly affect an employee’s ability to understand what is expected of them and how well they are performing to achieve organizational goals. Performance appraisals also face ineffectiveness where organizations fail to conduct effective recruitment, selection, and training programs (Winston 1972 p. 62). I have witnessed departments where employees are competent than other employees from a different department making it hard for managers to align their performance appraisals within the organization. In such cases, poor performance may be blamed on human resource or lack of investment in human resource for effective recruitment and training. I also agree to Winston (1972 p. 63) assertion that performance appraisals may also hurt a participative organizational culture a manager take up the role of a judge while undermining the important roles of coach and teacher. Performance appraisals sometimes confuse managers to the extent that they only concentrate on monitoring employee behaviors or performance and either rewarding or punishing accordingly. In Winston’s (1972) article, I found the discussion on how to use different performance appraisal methods for specific objectives interchangeably very informative. I agree that for supervisors to monitor their employees more closely and coach effectively the critical incident appraisal technique is perfect for this purpose. Nonetheless, I do not agree on supervisors gaining knowledge of performance standards that can be improved to eliminate bias. This is because the critical incident method can be time consuming, thus challenging to enhance its actual implementation (Winston 1972 p. 66). Performance standards require the input of both employees and the supervisor to effectively develop achievable, measurable, and mutual standards that illustrate the organizational behavior. Another goal for performance appraisals is motivating employees by offering feedback on their performance. This can be effectively achieved by applying the management-for-objectives method. I do agree with this as management-for-objectives eliminates the past and assumes that employees are aware of their strengths, weaknesses, and abilities. Moreover, it offers increased autonomy by focusing on the results and not how they are achieved. Winston (1972, p.66) article presents interesting arguments and discussion on how performance appraisals can work. However, the author concentrates on the selection of performance appraisal methods based on their alignment to performance appraisal objectives. This does not exclusively answer the burning question of how can performance appraisals be designed for improved results? Perhaps I can offer a new insight into improving performance appraisal results through further research. Laird and Clampitt (1985, p.49) interviewed more than sixty managers who oversaw performance appraisal programs in a Fortune 500 company. After reading the article, I discovered that managers had numerous challenges that they believe hinder the success of performance appraisals. Laird and Clampitt (1985, p.51) indicate that managers face challenges where multiple application of appraisal documentation led to validity drawback in rating performance. I tend to agree with this conclusion as managers or supervisors may be overwhelmed with different methods for each appraisal performance objective, thus using appraisal data for different methods. Although Winston (1972, p.67) supports the idea of using different performance appraisal methods for specific appraisal methods, it may prove to be challenging based on the multiple use of appraisal data or documentation. This results to validity challenges when rating performance. Another major issue illustrated in Laird and Clampitt (1985, p.52) study is the lack of procedures for objectivity where appraisal methods are inflated and subjective. I believe that is a significant point expressed through the actual experiences of managers. Not most organizations are keen on offering training on how to conduct effective performance appraisals. I believe that organizations should offer training on different appraisal methods and their implementation especially in terms of ensuring increased objectivity. Leaving the critical role or training mangers on performance appraisal to individual managers may result in disappointment over the long-term. I believe that Winston’s (1972, p.67) argument of aligning performance appraisal methods to specific objective is convincing, but undermines the need to offer manager vital training on how to determine the best suited appraisal technique for particular appraisal objectives. Another major challenge facing manager in relation to performance appraisals as indicated by Laird and Clampitt (1985, p.53) is the lack of clearly defined objectives for performance appraisal methods. I believe that clearly defined goals are a significant ingredient in ensuring that a performance appraisal method is effective. As discussed earlier, it is important to use the appropriate appraisal method for a certain performance appraisal objective. Nevertheless, I believe it would be impossible to choose the best-suited appraisal method where objectives are unclear. I would recommend a proactive measure where organizations take time to identify the needs of managers who are tasked with ensuring that performance appraisal work effectively. This requires organizations to develop a culture of training their managers on performance appraisals methods and their implementation. I believe that managers can be able to apply different methods depending on specific objectives if they have the knowledge and training on developing realizable objectives and the different appraisal methods. Moreover, I would recommend that organizations engage employees in the objective setting procedures to ensure increased participation from the whole organization. In conclusion, I found Winston’s (1972) article to be interesting and informative. From my reflection and debate, I tend to agree with the idea of using multiple performance appraisal methods for specific appraisal objectives. This enables managers to avoid the common pitfalls found in every appraisal method by combining their strengths to work for the best situation or objective. Nonetheless, this alone does not guarantee the success or effectiveness of a performance appraisal program. Through further research, I discovered that managers also face challenges due to lack of training on performance appraisal methods and objective-setting procedures. I believe that with the proper training and knowledge, managers are capable of utilizing different performance appraisal methods for specific objectives that ensure increased performance improvement. As a recommendation, I believe that training managers on performance appraisal has been overlooked and requires increased emphasis. Performance appraisals remain a significant managerial tool that can be effective is all the necessary ingredients are provided including training. References Laird, A & Clampitt, P 1985, 'Effective Performance Appraisal: Viewpoints from Managers', Journal of Business Communication, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 49-57. Oberg, W 1972, 'Make performance appraisal relevant', Harvard Business Review, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 61-67. Read More