Performance Management and Performance Appraisal - Essay Example

Running Head: Performance Management and Performance Appraisal Performance Management and Performance Appraisal Customer’s Name: Customer’s Course: Tutor’s Name: 8th April, 2012.   Difference between performance management and performance appraisal Though the two terms are used inter-changeably they differ a lot. Performance appraisal is mainly concerned with the setting of job standards and it assesses past performance of the employees in relation to the already set standards. Performance management on the other hand is mainly concerned with the management of employee performance and it is mainly on a real-time basis, this ensures that employee performance reaches the organization desired level (Armstrong, 1998). One of the major differences between the two concepts is in terms of their scope. The two concepts deals with the setting of performance goal, a constant evaluation of targets and finding more better ways to assist the employees in achieving the targets (Boswell & Boudreau, 2000). The two concepts also clearly stipulates what the staff are expected to do, put in place the procedures on what really makes up successful job performance and aim at all cost to spot any barriers that may hinder effective performance within an organization. In relation to scope performance appraisal is limited and termed as reactive function that assesses the past performance of the employees and it usually takes place perhaps once or twice within an year and have no direct involvement with the day to day operations of the employees. Performance management on the other hand is a continuous as well as an ongoing practical process that is used to administer the employee performance and it aims at ensuring that the set goals are achieved and on real time basis, without evaluation at a later date. Employee performance management is a line activity and remains embedded to the day to day operations of the employees. Another difference between the two concepts is in terms of the approach. When it comes to performance management, managers or the supervisors in an organization always assumes the roles of coaches or that of a mentor while in terms of performance appraisal the manager or the supervisors will always play the role of a judge. In terms of methodology performance appraisal have a propensity of been official and prearranged. The modern day performance appraisal used allow for the customization based on the organization key performance sectors or at times based on what comprises performance based on an individual employee, performance appraisal nonetheless maintains its rigidity through the laid down processes as well as the rating constraints that binds all the staff member together and equally. Performance management on the other hand is a reasonably more informal and bendable technique of assessing the employees performance (Randell, 1994). Similar to performance appraisals, performance management set up guiding principle on what comprises optimal performance in an organization, though it allows substantial relaxation based on the exert job condition and the time. While Performance management is usually customized based on individual employee work, performance appraisal is more often than not identical in regard to an employee’s title. Both performance appraisal and performance management mainly assists an organization in increasing its productivity despite the fact that performance management has room for real-time alterations to increase productivity. The two concepts reveal the notions of both hard HRM and soft HRM. Performance Management deals with the control of staff activities making it a hard HRM while performance appraisal falls under the category of soft HRM (Roberts, 2003). The table below summarizes the main differences between performance management and performance appraisal Table 1: Performance Management versus Performance Appraisal Performance management Performance appraisal Can easily be linked to total rewards Mainly linked with financial rewards Sets to achieve long term goals Sets to achieve short term goals Solely owned by manager Solely owned by the HR mainly concerned with individual employee growth Mainly concerned with an employee’s past mistakes as well as misbehavior Deals with the qualitative feature of performance Deals with the quantitative features of performance (Freeman, 2002). Forward looking Retrospective Holistic Individualistic Process System Practical and at the same time effective Bureaucratic as well as superficial (Pettijohn et al., 2001) Constant Episodic Integrated with the core business needs secluded from the core business needs Strategic Operational Applies management by agreement Applies management by command Supple and malleable Rigid and unbendable Characteristics of an unsuccessful versus a successful performance management system Successful organizations in the modern day bsu8iness world acknowledge the aspect of attracting, retaining and developing the proactive employees with their organization. Most successful organization obtains their spirited edge through the use of a performance management system. The system mainly assists the firm in a lot of activities some of which includes aspects such as: hiring the talented people to fill the vacant position in the organization, placing the hired individuals at the right positions within the organization, developing employee abilities, rewarding performance correspondents as well as aligning an employee individual performance with that of the organization (Wiese & Buckley, 1998). Performance management system mainly comes in a diverse range of varieties and organization tends to customize their performance management system so as to fulfill the organization specific needs. The characteristic of unsuccessful as well as those of the successful performance management system are many, one of them is related to standardization. Most successful performance management system is standardized. The criteria as well as the methods used in assessing the organization employees are standard thus there is uniform measurements for all employees. The unsuccessful performance management system tends to have no standard method or criteria of assess the employees. Hence the employees tend to lack confidence with top level managers and also in the system used to assess them, thus making the system unsuccessful (Wilson & Western, 2000). The success or failure of a performance management system can also be assessed based on the validity and conciseness of the system. An unsuccessful performance management system is one which that assesses the employee based on their core duties and not deviating to other duties that they rarely perform. Thus an unsuccessful performance management system is one that does not measure what is valid. For example a performance management system that tests a receptionist ability to operate heavy machines will be termed as unsuccessful thus making validity a core characteristic of successful performance system. Another characteristic that is associated with successful performance management system is lack of bias on rewards. The evaluators ought to be rewards regardless of the results they give this will ensure that they give accurate results at all times. Most unsuccessful system rewards the evaluator’s in instances where they give positive results, thus the evaluators will be inclined to making certain decisions that will ensure that they are rewarded and it may lead to mistrust within the organization Another characteristic of successful system is one that has properly trained evaluators. It is highly acknowledged that the performance system that are unsuccessful use evaluators who are not trained. The evaluators should have a clear understanding of the roles and responsibilities of those been evaluated. This can be done my making the evaluators work in the same position and under the same circumstances for a short period of time. By having taken part in the duties they will be able to evaluate the employees in the right manner and deliver accurate results (Verbeeten, 2008). The last characteristic of successful system is one that complies with the legal considerations of the country in which the organization is operating in. with a clear and concise knowledge about the professional as well as the legal guidelines an organization will have a basis to argue on or defend itself in faced by a legal challenge. Most unsuccessful performance management system has no compliance to the legal rules and guidelines that governs the design as well as the implementation of the system. Thus legality of the system is also another characteristic of most successful performance management system. Thus prior to evaluating the employees with a questionable method or criteria the evaluator or the organization ought to consult an attorney so as to be directed on what to do. Common errors in performance management and how can they be eliminated Performance management systems are said have a diverse range of errors and there are also various ways in which these errors can be eliminated. One of the major errors is central errors. This error is termed as situation where a great number of employees within the organization are rated in the middle. This means that the evaluators were ignorant of the suppress differences. This error is solved by making sure that all visible behavior in the entire assessment cycle is documented (Dessler, 2000). Another error that is common in most performance management system is the comparison error. This error occurs in instances where the evaluators rate an individual by comparing to others other than using the documented goals and competencies. It is usually unfair in instance where an individual is compared to a person who is a super star. This error can be eliminated by the establishment of clear performance goals prior to the starting of the evaluation process as well as clear S.M.A.R.T goals. Another way to eliminate the error making sure that the performance of all employees is evaluated against those set goals. The other error that is common in performance management system is the horn error. This error mainly occurs in instances where the rating given to an individual was evaluated using one goal. The error mostly affects the employees who are either weak or strong in one aspect. This error can be eliminated by the identification and documentation of certain behavioural aspects that offers support to the rating given to a certain individual. The error can also be solved by the establishment of clear and precise standards governing the evaluation (Dessler, 2000). Another error that is common to the performance management system is the similar to me effect error. It refers to inclination of rating individual who have similar characteristics to yours. Most evaluators tend to rate those employees that differ from them lower and rate those who are similar to them higher. This error can be avoided by various means such as: an evaluator been aware of their own challenges, clear goals, and regular collection of data that was observed during the whole review period. The other error is the primacy error. This error occurs when the evaluator rates an individual based on the first observation of the behavior. Most evaluators find it hard to overcome the first impression they had about an individual. This error can be avoided by the documentation of the visual behavior over the given evolution period and offering a well though consideration. The problem can also be eliminated by a clear check if there is divergence between the initial perception and final perception of the individual. The evaluator should ensure that he view the employee behavior objectively (Mondy & Noe, 2008). Another error that is common with the performance management system is the recency error. The rating given to the employee has an implication that the evaluator selected the most current observations of the employee behavior or performance. This error can be eliminated by documentation of the employee’s observable behavior during the whole evaluation cycle and the evaluator is supposed to offer a balanced considerations. Another way to eliminate this error is by asking for the opinion of other evaluators as well as employees over a given span of time so as to see if the other possesses similar or diverse views from you (Mondy & Noe, 2008). The last error that is depicted by most performance management system is the leniency error. This error is mainly depicted in instances where a large number of employees are rated at the end side of the scale. This error can be avoided by measuring the performance of the employees based on the already established standards and with expectation which are reasonable and at the same time attainable. Also the evaluator ought to compare his rating with those of his peers and check whether his ratings are higher as compared to the rating of other evaluators. When all measures that are mentioned above have been implemented, the performance management system will seems as an effective and reliable tool in measuring the performance of the employees within the organization (Dessler, 2000). . References Armstrong, M. (1998). Performance management: The new realities. London: Institute of personnel and development. Boswell, W., & Boudreau, J. (2000). Employee satisfaction with performance appraisals and appraisers: The role of perceived appraisal use. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 11 (3), 283. Dessler, G. (2000). Human Resource Management. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Freeman, J. (2002). How to improve the effectiveness of performance management and appraisal by overcoming the root cause of the problem. The HRM Guide Network. Mondy, W., & Noe, R. (2008). Human Resource Management. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Pettijohn, C., Pettijohn, L. Taylor, A., & Keillor, B. (2001). Are performance appraisals a bureaucratic exercise or can they be used to enhance sales-force satisfaction and commitment? Journal of Psychology & Marketing, 18(4): 337–364. Randell, G. (1994). Employee appraisal, in Sisson, K. (Ed.), Personnel Management: A Comprehensive Guide to Theory and Practice in Britain. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd. Roberts, G. (2003). Employee performance appraisal system participation: A technique that works. Journal of Public Personnel Management, 32(1): 89. Verbeeten, F. (2008). Performance management practices in public sector organizations. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 21, (3), 427-454. Wiese, S., & Buckley, M. (1998). The evolution of the performance appraisal process. Journal of Management History, 4(3), 233-249. Wilson, J., & Western, S. (2000). Performance appraisal: an obstacle to training and development? Journal of European Industrial Training, 24(7), 384-91. Read More