Over my years of teaching I often ask the class, \"How many of you think organiz
ID: 461591 • Letter: O
Question
Over my years of teaching I often ask the class, "How many of you think organizations should conduct performance reviews?" Typically, about 80% think we should. However, I follow by asking "How many of you agree that your organization accurately measures your performance?" This time, only 20% agree. Thus, why do we do performance reviews if so few people agree with them? A common answer is "Because we have to do something to review workers." My reply is, "Is it better to have a bad review system than no review at all? Furthermore if you had the chance of either being inaccurately reviewed or skipping it, what would you choose?" Likewise, consider that a full time employee is working over 2,000 hours per year. Meanwhile, most employee reviews are a mere two to three pages. Doesn't this seem incongruent? Other organizations have very long, thorough reviews but evidence suggests that a worker's performance increases for (roughly) ten days before and after the review. Meanwhile, managers are often faced with the directive "Your department can have a 3% raise overall, you decide who gets it. And make sure you document the reasons why." For this discussion I would like for you to discuss any/all of the following: 1) Items listed above 2) Performance reviews that you have been involved with, either as a manager or as a subordinate 3) Advice for what organizations should do 4) Further evidence of what shouldn't be done 5) Pros and cons of ranking systems 6) Whether or not annual reviews have a positive or negative effect on a) the individual b) the organization 7) Other comments related to this topic/chapter that you agree or disagree with
Explanation / Answer
Ans:- 1)
First of all I feel that it is better to have no performance review at all rather than having a bad review system. This is because a bad review system may have lots of errors and biases and may not precisely evaluate the performance of the employees. Sometimes the employees who have really worked hard and performed may not get the right promotion or proportionate amount of increment. They may even be bypassed and promotion and higher increment given to the not-so deserving employees, that is, the employees may not have worked that hard or performed that well but had spent more time in impressing their boss. This will result in demotivation among the sincere and hard-working employees and they may stop working that hard or performing that well next time onward. Further, if this situation continues, the sincere and hard-working employees may even leave the organization. Also this type of performance review system nurtures an unhealthy work environment, because the appraisal is not linked to performance.
Secondly, I would choose skipping performance review rather than being inaccurately reviewed, especially if it is known that the review is going to be a biased one. Knowing beforehand that you would be inaccurately reviewed, brings in a lot of frustration. Hence, one can avoid that frustration by skipping the review process. One can then think of even switching a job, and go to an organization with good HR practices and having proper performance review system in place.
Ans:- 2)
As a subordinate, I have been involved with annual performance reviews. I have undergone annual performance appraisals in one of my previous organizations. I had been reviewed by my immediate superior, my Departmental Head and the HR Manager.
Ans:- 3)
Following are my advices for what organizations should do to have a good performance review system –
(i) An organization should make it very clear to a new employee how the performance review is to be carried out. Often it is mentioned in the Appointment Letter or in Service Rules Guidelines.
(ii) Performance review should be totally objective.
(iii) Multiple performance criteria should be evaluated with respect to a job position.
(iv) Evaluator (s) should focus on performance and not personality traits of employees.
(v) Maintain a file for each employee where special achievements of the employee, or any instance of misconduct, should be recorded on a regular basis.
(vi) Take follow-up action, that is actually give increment or promotion to the employee as per his/her performance.
(vii) Take feedback from all the employees about improvement of the existing performance review system.
Ans:- 4)
Following things should not be done by an organization –
(i) Performance review should not be subjective.
(ii) A single criterion should not be used for evaluation.
(iii) Evaluator should avoid Leniency Error, i.e., he/she should not give very high or very low rating.
(iv) Evaluator should avoid Halo Error, i.e., he/she should not assess an employee on different factors based on that employee’s performance on only one factor.
(v) Evaluator should avoid Similarity Error, i.e., he/she should not appraise an employee with respect to his/her (evaluator’s) self-perception.
(vi) Evaluator should not carry out assessment in the area where he/she does not have the proficiency.
Ans:- 6)
Annual reviews will have a positive effect on the individual if it is carried out accurately, without any biasness; otherwise it will have a negative effect on the individual leading ultimately to his/her leaving the organization.
Similarly, organization will be benefited positively if annual review is carried out accurately, without any biasness, in the form of increased performance by the employees and a happy atmosphere, and where there is less of employee attrition.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.