Performance Appraisal

3 Categories of Performance
Appraisal Methods
1. The judgemental Approach
2. The Absolute Approach
3. The Results-Oriented Approach
4 Widely used Judgemental
Approaches
1.Graphic Rating
Scales
2.Ranking
3.Paired Comparison
4.Forced Distribution
 Paired Comparison

-A modification of the ranking procedure is

the paired comparison technique.
-The method overcomes the problem
associated with differentiating between
subordinates in the middle range of
distribution – that is the average
employees.
 Paired Comparison
-Raters compare only two
subordinates at a time until all two-
way comparisons have been made
among all employees.
-The administrators can put the
subordinates into a rank order by
counting up the number of times
each employee has been judged
superior.
 Forced Distribution

“Grading on a curve”
-- is a good example of the forced
distribution method of performance
appraisal.
-- the rater places a predetermined
percentage of ratees into 4 or 5 performance
categories.
 Forced Distribution

Example
5% - unacceptable
25% - needs improvement
40% - acceptable
25% - in the commendable
5% - outstanding
Absolute Standards Approach

Most appraisal measures that employ an

absolute standards approach are based on
job analysis.
This type of analysis can provide a more
detailed description of the actual behavior
necessary for effective performance.
Absolute Standards Approach

School administrators compare the

performance of each employee to a
certain standard instead of to the
performance of other employees.
-- they rate the degree to which
performance meets the standard.
The most common performance
appraisal processes in this group
are:
1. Checklists
2. Essays
3. Critical incidents
4. Behaviorally anchored rating
scales
 Checklists

 The most common technique in the absolute

standards group.
 Tend to be more behaviorally based than either
graphic rating scales or other employee-comparison
methods.
 
Table 15-5 A Guide to Appraisal School Administrators’ Performance

Performance       Low Satisfactory  

Factor Outstanding High Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

Quality Leaps Tall buildings Needs running start to Can only leap small Crashes into Cannot recognized
with a single bound jump tall buildings buildings buildings buildings

Timeliness Is faster than a Only as fast as a Somewhat slower Can only shoots Wounds self with
speeding bullet speeding bullet than a bullet bullets bullets

Initiative Is stronger than a Is stronger than a bull Is stronger than a bull Shoots the bull Smells like a bull
locomotive elephant

Adaptability Walks on water Walks on water in Washes with water Drinks with water Passes water in
consistently emergencies emergencies

Communication Talks with God Talks with angels Talks to himself Argues with Loses those
himself arguments

Relationship Belongs in general Belongs in executive Belongs in rank and Belongs behind a Belongs with
management ranks file broom competitor

Planning Too bright to worry Worries about future Worries about Worries about Too dumb to worry
present past
 Checklists

 Specific weights are assigned to a list of work

behaviors in the weighted checklist.
 A forced choice checklist consists of job-behavior
statements with two to five response items in each set
that correlate with high and low performing
employees.
 The end result is a single numerical rating that is useful
for personnel decisions such as salary and promotions.
 Essays

 Essay method requires the rater to describe in wrting

each employee’s strenghts and weaknesses, along
with suggestions for ways to improve performance.
 Variations in writings skills of raters is another
limitation.
 Thank you……
 Lilibeth M. Porol