Maintenance Engineering & Asset Management

Module M03
MAINTENANCE SYSTEMS

SHORT/IN UNIT ASSESSMENT

Name: Hernn Quiroz

Company: Ternium Siderar

Performance Appraisal
1. Similarities and differences
Similarities

The problem is that the performance appraisal focuses on the end product rather
than on leadership to help people. The organization undermines the appraisal
process, minimizing rather training/accountability and overlooking the
employee.

The subjective rating accuracy of the performance appraisal produces:

Unfair feeling, lose motivation and commitment to the organization.

Superficial and culprit oriented approach to problem solving.

Tends to establish an aggregate of safe goals, and ceiling of mediocrity in an

organization.

Creates losers, cynics and wasted human resources.

Demolish teamwork, nourishes rivalry and politics.

Differences

On the one hand Crow Robert says that You cannot improve my performance
by measuring it! In this article the author focuses to describe the weakness
part of merit rating and the bud effects that performance appraisal produces on
the organizations. He believes that attempting to measure performance and tie
pay to performance can actually add variation to a system and therefore is less
predictable. He says that the variation in the performance within a group is the
natural variation occurring within any system. The people in question are all
performing within the system and should be compensated equally.
On the other hand Giover Regina trays to understand why are we ignoring
performance appraisal research. She analysis the process, the rating accuracy
problem and propose a new model and makes recommendations. She
concentrates into improve the appraisal process rather than to see only the bad
part. She believes that the results of an effective performance appraisal system
are well worth the time and effort.
2. Authors Perspective
Crow Robert perspective

He believes that disregard variability in the system, increase variability in the

system
If the organization tries to measure performance and tie pay to performance, it
produces a negative effect in the individual that: encourages a superficial and

culprit oriented approach to problem solving, create losers, cynics, promote

mediocrity and wasted human resources.
Crow Robert says that performance appraisal and pay for performance system
ignore the interdependence of the various components and the necessity of
working together for the company to be successful. Because of that he
expresses that the people are all performing within the system and should be
compensate equally. It is a job of management to reduce variation of the
system that will make it more predictability.
Glover Regina B. perspective

She believes that the organization undermines the appraisal process by giving
it little attention, minimizing rater training/accountability and overlooking the
employee in the appraisal process. The subjective rating (grade inflation or
deflation) produces dissatisfaction in the individuals. Because of that the
employee may lose motivation and commitment that affect to the organization.
Glover Regina B. says that the organization and managers are responsible for
improving the performance appraisal system.

3. Personal opinion
In my opinion the article of Glover Regina B. is the most useful because it
expresses the same problems as I have today. Every year I feel that the
performance appraisal process is another task to complete; my company
undermines the appraisal process by giving it little attention. I received training
only one time. I used this process as a moment to rewards and punishment. At
the moment I am rating to my supervisor and I will apply the Glover Reginas
recommendations.
In addition to this, I think that it is necessary to differentiate the performance
of the workers because not everybody contribute in the same manner to the
business, not everybody has the same compromise, the same commitment. It is
unfair if the companies do not recognize this differentiation. As we see in M03
Section 4.8, In any population of people doing the same job there will be a
normal distribution of competence (figure 4.3). In my opinion if the
companies do not recognize the differentiation they will promote the
mediocrity. As a consequence of that the organizations will lose effectiveness.
At the moment the companies could not achieve the perfect system for the
performance appraisal process, but I complete agree with Glover Regina B.
that we must never give up hope, keep reading, and keep trying. The results of
an effective performance appraisal system are well worth the time and effort.

References

Glover Regina B. (1996) . Parks & Recreation.

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Why+are+we+ignoring
+performance+appraisal+research%3f-a018944634

Crow Robert (1996) . Journal for Quality and

Participation
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3616/is_199601/
ai_n8745214