Performance appraisal systems - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

Performance appraisal systems

Group A1: Pauline, Swati,

Rasmus

and Fabienne.Slide2

CONTENTS

Introduction to Performance

Appraisal System

Positive and Negative Effects on Motivation

Positive

and Negative Effects on

Behaviours

and Teamwork

Summary of Disadvantages

ConclusionSlide3

Performance Appraisal Systems

Performance Appraisal (PA) organizes time set aside to discuss performance management within a company.

One-on-one discussions.

Two way relationships between leaders, managers and employees with the intention to guide individuals towards the organization’s goals.

The individual gets feedback on their

performance

.

Action

will be taken based on such feedback gathered through these discussions

.

The purpose of PA is to determine the performance level of individuals in the organizations and to improve the current performance through this feedback.Slide4

Positive and Negative Effects on Motivation

If

not

done right – creates

de-motivation

.

If done

right – creates motivation (Gomez- Mejia, 1990)

Positive effect

Negative

effect

Giving tangible

rewards has a positive effect on motivation

(Milne, 2007)

Appraisal

systems which focus on individuals creates a demotivated competitive team culture

(

Elmuti

,

Kathawala

, & Wayland, 1992)

Compliment those who gets motivated for being recognised (Becton, Giles, &

Schraeder

, 2007)

Appraisal systems can ruin the internal motivation some employees have (Becton, Giles, &

Schraeder

, 2007)

Setting,

the right goals and expectations motivates

(Gomez-Mejia, 1990)

Tangible rewards will increase over time- we simply want more (Shore, 2004)Slide5

Positive and Negative Effects on

Behaviours

and Teamwork

Positive effect

Negative

effect

Feeling of accomplishment

Creates Low Self-Esteem

Identifying

Training Needs/ Areas for Improvement

Pressure to perform

Leadership Development

Creates Biases

and Labels

Identifying areas of strength

encourages to working harder

The increasingly widespread teamwork focus in many industries is promoting self-monitoring as a 'people skill'. Thus, self-monitoring may affect performance ratings, particularly in cases where appraisals occur in a team setting in which social skills play a substantial role (Miller et al, 2000).

Documented History of Employee Performance

Competition

between team members

Creates

Fear

Richards

(2009)

Pearce

and Porter (1986)Slide6

Summary of Disadvantages

Encourages competitiveness, which may eventually demotivate and cause negative social effects between individuals, which will in turn, effect team work.

The PA standardizes the

individuals. Organizations are made up of different characters who respond differently to different methods of motivation.

All team may receive the same amount of credibility. Not a fair conclusion on the individuals in a team who’s work effort and standard may vary, despite their difference in contribution.

Negative feedback and pressure may affect the quality of work and cause decreased level of performance.Slide7

Conclusion

Any PA is successful if followed correctly.

However, the areas of difficulty will be due to the individuals varying characters and levels of discipline.

It should be up to the employee to be proactive. Employees should be engaged.

Employee Engagement

: win-win solution. It cannot be required, but only offered by the employee.

Employees must engage out of choice. They will promote the brand and be committed to the organization and its values.

Promote positive employer-employee relationship; which will help attract and retain employeesSlide8

References

Becton

, J. B., Giles, W. F., &

Schraeder

, M. (2007). Evaluating and rewarding OCBs: Potential consequences of formally incorporating

organisational

citizenship

behaviour in performance appraisal and reward systems. Employee Relations , 494-514.Pearce, J. L., Porter, L. W., (1986) Employee responses to formal performance appraisal feedback.Duarte, T. N, Goodson, R. J and

Klich

R. N (1994), ‘Effects of Dyadic Quality and Duration on Performance Appraisal’, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37, No. 3, 499-521

Smart Management (2010), Advantages and Disadvantages of Performance Management, available online at:

http://smartchurchmanagement.com/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-performance-management/

(accessed 02.02.2012)

Richards, L (2009) ‘The effects of performance appraisal on organizational performance’, available online at:

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/effects-performance-appraisal-organizational-performance-1762.html

(accessed 02.02.2012

)

Elmuti

, D.,

Kathawala

, Y., & Wayland, R. (1992). Traditional Performance Appraisal Systems: The Deming Challenge.

Management Decision

, 42-48.

Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (1990). Increasing Productivity: Performance Appraisal and Reward Systems.

Personnel Review

, 21-26.

Milne, P. (2007). Motivation,

Icentives

and

organisational

culture.

Journal of Knowledge management

, 28-38.

Janice S Miller

,

Robert L Cardy

.

Journal of Organizational Behavior

.

Chichester

:

Sep 2000

. Vol. 21,

Iss

. 6; pg. 609

Lam

, Simon S. K.;

Schaubroeck

,

J. Total quality management and performance appraisal: An experimental study of process versus Individual Approaches.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, Jul99, Vol. 20 Issue 4, p445, 12p

;

www.cipd.co.uk

/hr-resources/factsheets/employee-

engagement