You are on page 1of 35

Performance Appraisal:

The Achilles Heel of Personnel?

Performance Appraisal: The Achilles Heel of Personnel?

Why evaluate the performance of employees?

Compensation (raises, merit pay, bonuses)

Personnel Decisions (e.g., promotion, transfer, dismissal)

Training (Identify specific requirements)

Research (e.g., assessing the worth/validity of selection tests

Breaking Down the Performance Appraisal Process

Observation

• Selective Attention • Timing • Structure • Frequency

Storage

Encoding of Information (e.g., categorization) • Short vs. Long-term • Memory

Evaluation

• Retrieve Information • Combine information • Decision-making (judgment)

Basic Performance Appraisal Process

Conduct a Job Analysis (e.g., specify tasks and KSAs)

Develop Performance Standards (e.g., define what is superior, acceptable, and poor job performance)

Develop Performance Standards (e.g., define what is superior, acceptable, and poor job performance)

Develop Performance Standards (e.g., define what is superior, acceptable, and poor job performance)

Develop or Choose a Performance Appraisal Approach

Criterion Domain

   

Objective data

 

Productivity measures,

  • absenteeism, tardiness, turnover, absenteeism

Subjective data

 
 

Performance ratings
(e.g., supervisor, co- workers, self, subordinates, clients

Contextual data

 
 

Assisting others, loyalty,

  • extra work/effort, emotional labor, volunteering, counterproductive behaviors (CWBs; tardiness, sabotage, gossiping)

Criteria Dimensionality

Static ---

Individual performance varies by performance criteria

Criteria Dimensionality Static --- Individual performance varies by performance criteria Decision­making Communication

Decision­making

Criteria Dimensionality Static --- Individual performance varies by performance criteria Decision­making Communication

Communication

Criteria Dimensionality (cont.)

Temporal ­­­ Performance varies as a function of time; importance of when performance is assessed

IQ

Criteria Dimensionality (cont.) Temporal ­­­ Performance varies as a function of time; importance of when performance

1st year

Specific work methods, interests, personality, interpersonal relationships

Criteria Dimensionality (cont.) Temporal ­­­ Performance varies as a function of time; importance of when performance

2nd year

Criteria Dimensionality (cont.)

Individual ­­­ Employees excel at different aspects of job performance

Criteria Dimensionality (cont.) Individual ­­­ Employees excel at different aspects of job performance Production Employee #

Production

Employee # 1

Criteria Dimensionality (cont.) Individual ­­­ Employees excel at different aspects of job performance Production Employee #
Criteria Dimensionality (cont.) Individual ­­­ Employees excel at different aspects of job performance Production Employee #

Client support & satisfaction

Employee # 2

Role

prescriptions,

organizational

impact

Criteria Challenges (cont.)

Observation ---

Variation due to methods used, who observes Low variability (e.g., production line speed, process limitations)?

Performance Dimensions ---

Uni­dimensional vs. multidimensional criteria (Over­reliance on supervisor ratings of performance; 879/1506)

Criteria Issues (cont.)

Contamination ---

a)

Error

  • b) Biases (e.g., rating scales, group membership, knowledge of predictor scores, self­fulfilling prophecy)

Criteria Issues

Relevance --- Generally considered the most important issue

Criteria Issues Relevance --- Generally considered the most important issue Objective data Subjective data r =

Objective data

Subjective data

r = .39

To Combine or Not to Combine Criteria?

Global criteria

3.0 GPA

Separate, multiple criteria

A

A

C

C

Is there a single, underlying dimension that “allows” combining separate criteria?

Purposes of the data (e.g., a) for personnel decisions or b) feedback, understanding psychological and behavioral processes

Sources of Information

1)

Supervisors (most common)

• Role Conflict (e.g., judge and trainer/teacher) • Motivation • Time availability • Friendship

2) Co-Workers (Peers)

Peer nominations: (Identifying those with highest and lowest KSAs) *Peer ratings: For providing feedback Peer rankings: For discriminating highest to lowest performance on various dimensions

Effects of poor peer ratings on subsequent task performance:

Lower perceived group performance

Lower cohesiveness

Sources of Information 1) Supervisors (most common) • Role Conflict (e.g., judge and trainer/teacher) • Motivation

Friendship bias Leniency High level of accuracy

Best used as a source of feedback

Sources of Information 1) Supervisors (most common) • Role Conflict (e.g., judge and trainer/teacher) • Motivation

Lower satisfaction

Sources of Information (cont)

3) Self

• Lots of knowledge

• Leniency effect

• Good preparation for performance appraisal meeting (conducive for dialog)

4) Subordinates

Biases (e.g., # of subordinates, type of job, expected evaluation from supervisor)

• Best if ratings are anonymous -- if not, leniency in ratings occur (Antonioni, 1994)

5) Clients

Can add information above and beyond other sources

(Conway, et. al 2001) Good source of feedback

• Negativity bias

• Customer ratings on the web (usage/role, accuracy,

Technology and Client/Customer Feedback

Technology and Client/Customer Feedback Other examples: Amazon, eBay, Trip Advisor, iTunes

Other examples: Amazon, eBay, Trip Advisor, iTunes

Technology and Client/Customer Feedback (cont.)

Technology and Client/Customer Feedback (cont.)

Other Examples of Internet-Based Performance Information

Other Examples of Internet-Based Performance Information Amazon

Amazon

Other Examples of Internet-Based Performance Information Amazon
Other Examples of Internet-Based Performance Information Amazon

Other Examples of Internet-Based Performance Information

Expedia

That's the second time I stay in this hotel. The location is fantastic and the rooms, in general are very comfortable. The view from the top, at the breakfast place is superb. Rating: 4.0

The standard rooms are very, very small, I had only one bag and no place to put it. you could barely turnaround in the bathrooms. I love the decor/ art deco style but a little updating is definitely do. Rating: 2.0

Subjective Appraisal Methods

(can be used with any type of job)

Relative Methods

• Ranking

1 st _____ 2 nd _____ 3 rd _____

• Pair Comparison Employee-1 _____

versus Employee-2 _____

Employee-1

_____

versus Employee-3

_____

etc.

Both are difficult to use with a large number of subordinates

Subjective Appraisal Methods

Absolute Methods

1) Narrative essays • Unstructured (e.g., content, length)

• Affected by the writing ability of supervisors and time availability

• Cannot validate selection devices (no numbers)

2) Graphic Rating Scale (most common) _____

_____

_____

_____

_____

Very

Average

Excellent

Poor

Common Rating Scale Errors

Leniency (positive bias)

X

_____

_____

_____

_____

_____

Very

Average

Excellent

Poor

Central Tendency (midpoint)

X

_____

_____

_____

_____

_____

Very

Average

Excellent

Poor

Both lead to a restriction in the range of performance scores

Halo Error

Observation of specific behavior (s) (e.g., volunteers to work overtime)

High ratings on other performance dimensions

Responsibility

Commitment

Initiative

Sensitivity

Judgment

Communication

Subordinate

Characteristics (e.g., age, gender, race,

attractiveness)

Labels for Subordinate

Supervisor

Characteristics

Subordinate Characteristics (e.g., age, gender, race, attractiveness) Labels for Subordinate Supervisor Characteristics (positive or negative) Expectations
  • (positive or negative)

Subordinate Characteristics (e.g., age, gender, race, attractiveness) Labels for Subordinate Supervisor Characteristics (positive or negative) Expectations
Subordinate Characteristics (e.g., age, gender, race, attractiveness) Labels for Subordinate Supervisor Characteristics (positive or negative) Expectations
Expectations for Subordinate

Expectations

 

for

Subordinate

Expectations for Subordinate
 

(e.g., gender, race, age)

Attitudes,

Stereotypes

Liking of subordinate

Subordinate Characteristics (e.g., age, gender, race, attractiveness) Labels for Subordinate Supervisor Characteristics (positive or negative) Expectations

Self-Fulfilling Prophecy Process and Performance Ratings

Subordinate Characteristics (e.g., age, gender, race, attractiveness) Labels for Subordinate Supervisor Characteristics (positive or negative) Expectations
Selective Attention
Selective
Attention

Encoding of Information

Subordinate Characteristics (e.g., age, gender, race, attractiveness) Labels for Subordinate Supervisor Characteristics (positive or negative) Expectations

Observation of

Subordinate Job

Performance

   
Subordinate Characteristics (e.g., age, gender, race, attractiveness) Labels for Subordinate Supervisor Characteristics (positive or negative) Expectations

Recall

Information

   
Subordinate Characteristics (e.g., age, gender, race, attractiveness) Labels for Subordinate Supervisor Characteristics (positive or negative) Expectations

Evaluate

Performance

Subjective Appraisal Methods

Behavioral Methods (use of critical incidents; examples of good and poor job behavior collected by job experts over time)

Behavior Observation Scales (BOS)

• Rate the frequency in which critical incidents are performed by employees

• Sum the ratings for a total “performance” score

1) Assists others in job duties. _____

_____

_____

_____

_____

Never

Usually

Always

2) Cleans equipment after each use. _____

_____

_____

_____

_____

Never

Usually

Always

Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS) Process

1) Generate critical incidents (examples of good and poor job performance)

2) Place Critical Incidents Into performance dimensions (e.g., Responsibility, Initiative, Safety)

3) Retranslation Step (do step # 2 again with a separate group of job experts. Discard incidents where disagreement exists as to which dimension in which they belong)

4)Calculate the mean and standard deviation of each critical incident (discard those with a large standard deviation) 5) Place critical incidents on a vertical scale

BARS (Pros and Cons)

Process involves various employees (increases likelihood of usage)

• Job specificity (different BARS need to be developed for each position)

• Not any better at reducing common rating scale errors (e.g., leniency, halo)

• Time consuming

3. Problem Solving/Troubleshooting Definition: Uses a logical, step-by step approach to identify and solve process problems

 

1

2

3

4

5

Well Below Expectations

Below

Meets Expectations

Consistently Exceeds

Outstanding

 

Expectations

Expectations

 

Fails to understand how equipment and processes interrelate Does not complete checklists or other required forms

 

Uses available resources (e.g., drawings, checklists, forms, people —engineers, data historian) to determine the root cause of

 

Develops novel, safe and effective solutions to current problems Anticipates problems before they occur and suggests solutions

Is not able to identify root causes of process deviations

problems Selects and interprets

Takes ownership in problem solving and sees

Does not consistently meet A2E expectations Depends on others to solve problems

data to solve problems Investigates the nature of equipment and process malfunctions on an ongoing basis Participates in A2E efforts

it through to completion Effectively leads problem solving efforts (e.g., A2E, handles complicated analysis requests on one’s own)

Behavioral Examples of Rating: _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ ___

4. Teamwork Definition: Strives to build and maintain a good working relationship with one’s work group; shares information with team members; accepts ideas and opinions of others

 

1

2

3

 

4

5

Well Below Expectations

Below

Meets Expectations

Consistently

Exceeds

Outstanding

 
 

Expectations

Expectations

 

Does not respond to work requests from other team members Fails to share information and/or resources with others Refuses to help co-workers Conflicts with coworkers on 'yours not mine' work situations, or is known to say "that's not my job“ Frequently complains or

   

Considers alternative solutions provided by team members Accepts and provides feedback to others Shares information (e.g., trends, status updates) and/or resources with others when asked Readily offers to help other team members on tasks

 

Anticipates other team members’ needs (e.g., training, tools, equipment, information) Resolves conflicts between team members Supports company objectives and volunteers for work duties within and outside of one’s work area Sacrifices one’s own needs for the need of the team

makes negative or derogatory remarks about site initiatives, leadership, and/or fellow workers Is slow to respond to work requests from other team members or management

Works with support services and other areas (e.g., maintenance) to resolve shift problems in a timely manner

Initiates team building activities (e.g., organizing outside group activities, breakfasts)

Behavioral Examples of Rating: _____________________________________________________________________

Objective Appraisal Data

1) Production Data (e.g., sales volume, units produced)

• When observation occurs (timing), and how data is collected

• Fairness and relevancy issue

• Potential limited variability

• Limitations regarding supervisory personnel

2) Personnel Data

Absenteeism (excused versus unexcused)

• Tardiness

• Accidents (fault issue)

360 Degree Performance Appraisal

360 Degree Performance Appraisal

Performance Appraisal Training: Best Practices

1) Frequent observation of performance and feedback (both positive and negative)

2) Recordkeeping (ongoing if possible)

3) Encourage self-assessment of employees

4) Focus on behaviors (not traits)

5) Use specific behavioral criteria and standards

6) Set goals for employees (specific and challenging ones)

7) Focus on how to observe job behaviors and provide incentives to do so

Legally Defensible Appraisal Systems

1) Ensure that procedures for personnel decisions do not differ as a function of the race, sex, national origin, religion, or age of those affected by such decisions.

2) Use objective and uncontaminated data whenever they are available.

3)

Provide a formal system of review or appeal to resolve disagreements regarding appraisals.

4) Use more than one independent evaluator of performance.

5)

Use a formal, standardized system for personnel decisions.

6) Ensure that evaluators have ample opportunity to observe and rate

performance if ratings must be made.

7) Avoid ratings on traits such as dependability drive aptitude or

Legally Defensible Appraisal Systems (cont)

9) Communicate specific performance standards to employees.

10) Provide raters with written instructions on how to complete

performance

evaluations.

11) Evaluate employees on specific work dimensions, rather than on a single overall or global measure.

12) Require documentation in terms of specific behaviors (e.g., critical incidents) for extreme ratings.

13) Base the content of the appraisal form on a job analysis.

14) Provide employees with an opportunity to review their appraisals (e.g., several days prior to formal feedback session).

15) Educate personnel decision-makers regarding laws on discrimination.

Factors Affecting Employees Acceptance of Performance Evaluations

• Asking for (and using) performance information/input from employees

(importance of using employee self-evaluations)

• Ensure a 2-way interaction during the performance appraisal

meeting

• Provide a way for employees to counter or challenge the appraisal

• Sufficient detail and knowledge of employee performance by supervisors

Factors Affecting Employees Acceptance of Performance Evaluations • Asking for (and using) performance information/input from employees

Importanc e of rater training

Consistent use of performance standards across employees

Satisfactory

Performance

Criterion

Unsatisfactory

Non minority Minority Reject Accept Predictor Score
Non minority
Minority
Reject
Accept
Predictor Score

Equal validity, unequal criterion means

  • - Equal test scores; Minorities performing less well on job (over predicting performance)

  • - Minorities hired same as non minorities but probability of success is small. Can reinforce existing stereotypes.