TITLE: DISCUSS EFFECTIVE TECHNIQUES FOR CONDUCTING PERFORMANCE

APPRAISALS.

PRESENTED TO
PROFESSOR PERRY BARTON (TEAM PROJECT)

PREPARED BY: GODWIN ARMAH-AFFUL

PART II OF

SPRING 2015 TERM RESEARCH PROJECT FOR

TEAM PROJECT (MGMT 2215).

03/25/2015

Armah-Afful 36--1

How effective would an organization determine its workforces performance if its not
measured by using most effective techniques? This questions demands for effective management
of performance appraisal. According to former US secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld, Your
performance depends on your people. Select the best, train them and back them. When errors
occur, give sharper guidance. If errors persist or if the fit feels wrong, help them move on. The
country cannot afford amateur hour in the White House. Performance review discussions and
implementations are elements of effective performance management for workforce development.
The most critical goal of performance management is to ensure that the organization and all other
parts of the organization such as processes, departments, teams, and employees, are working
together in a manner that efficiently contributes to achievement of the organizations goals.
Effective performance management readdresses both individual and team efforts further than
activities toward results. With that said being busy cannot be translated into productivity. An
effective performance management involves several of these attributes such as identifying and
prioritizing desired results; setting standards and clear goals; measuring progress; providing
regular feedback; reinforcing activities that achieve desired results; and intervening through
performance evaluation to redirect any deviations relating tasks and objectives set forth for
employees. All things being equal, performance evaluation exercise are tailored to positively
boost performance, motivation and commitment of the employee, and create perfect
configuration between employee efforts and the needs of the organization. Although,
performance evaluation implementation has the potential to create completely positive results, in
many cases it results in the opposite. It hurts employees morale, and their commitment to
organizational goals. The purpose of performance review is to recognize employees efforts and
achievements, to specify expectations of future performance, identify areas of employees
development needs, to be used as a guideline on career development, to make decisions on
contract renewals and promotions; and for reevaluation of job functions within organization. An
effective and comprehensive employee appraisal should be composed of several different
methods of performance evaluation because no method is better than other. Though using one
evaluation technique is not a bad approach yet it is ideal to use multiple evaluation methods
because its able to reveal broader picture of the areas where the employee needs improvement
and what recommendations you should make to improve and support employee development.
Performance appraisal and career management are two vital tools mostly employed by
organizations to start the process of performance improvement. Performance appraisal is the
process of formally evaluating employees conduct or behaviors in order to determine the degree
to which the employee is performing his or her job effectively. In order to determine the
effectiveness or success of any performance-appraisal process, several tasks are necessary. Some
organizations involve peers, self-evaluation, and sometimes third party organizations and
ultimately involvement of management. The typical evaluation is normal done by the
organization, sometimes by the individuals who will be conducting the performance appraisal,
and in many organizations its dine by the self-evaluation or the individual whose performance
is evaluated self-evaluates himself or herself. In addition the fair evaluation, organizations must
follow-up and must incorporate discussion to accompany the process. Performance is also known
as task accomplishment. Performance management is a act of defining, measuring, appraising,
giving feedback on, in order to improve performance. Performance appraisals offers employees
feedback on performance by identifying the employees developmental needs, in order to

Armah-Afful 36--2

influence promotion and reward decisions, demotion and termination decisions, and information
about selection and placement decisions. Electronic performance-monitoring systems, goal
setting, and MBO are performance appraisal methods (Nelson and Quick 230). In this piece, a
thorough analysis of effective techniques for conducting performance appraisals will be
discussed. This discussions will involves pre-appraisal recommendations or techniques, actual
appraisal techniques, and post appraisal techniques.
In the first place, one pre-appraisal technique that works across board for all
organizations is for management to consider the process as performance improvement process
rather than seeing it as performance appraisal process. Performance review is perceived as
dreaded and loathed by many because it has in the past cost many their employment. The
performance review generally has a similar effect on managers and supervisors as well. When it
becomes appraisal raters will more likely perceive the process as performance trial whereas
ratees might also perceive the process as a persecution instead. As long as raters can see the
process as a follow-up and discussion of the way forward with regards to individual
performance, there will be strong cooperation among employees. Performance evaluation is an
integral part of how organizations manage the entire process. Avoiding discussion of
performance issues eventually decreases morale, decreases credibility of management, decreases
the organization's overall effectiveness and wastes more of management's time to do what isn't
being done properly. Conduct the following activities. Although some organizations might make
minor adjustments to reflect their values more closely, these general steps are almost always
followed.
Secondly, organizations must design a legally valid performance review process.
According to Christ Pearce, performance planning and appraisal, states that the law requires that
performance appraisals be: job-related and valid; based on a thorough analysis of the job;
standardized for all employees; not biased against any race, color, sex, religion, or nationality;
and performed by people who have adequate knowledge of the person or job. Be sure to build in
the process, a route for recourse if an employee feels he or she has been dealt with unfairly in an
appraisal process, e.g., that the employee can go to his or her supervisor's supervisor. The process
should be clearly described in a personnel policy ( ). When performance appraisals are used as
the basis for human resource decisions - as in the case of merit pay or promotion decisions, they
are considered the same as any other test under the law. This designation includes decisions
about layoffs based on performance. Therefore, appraisals that show evidence of disparate
impact must be validated the same as any selection technique
The third important pre-appraisal requirement to help raters to conduct efficient and fair
appraisal is to design a standard form for performance appraisals. Organizations must design a
standard appraisal form that offers all employees equal opportunity to be fairly evaluated. The
forms must include the name of the employee, date the performance form was completed, dates
specifying the time interval over which the employee is being evaluated, performance
dimensions (include responsibilities from the job description, any assigned goals from the
strategic plan, along with needed skills, such as communications, administration, etc.), a rating
system (e.g., poor, average, good, excellent), space for commentary for each dimension, a final
section for overall commentary, a final section for action plans to address improvements, and
lines for signatures of the supervisor and employee. Signatures may either specify that the
employee accepts the appraisal or has seen it, depending on wording on the form. Appraisals
perceived as fair are likely to receive employees full cooperation and support to achieve the
objectives of the exercise. It is also equally important that management must make sure appraisal

Armah-Afful 36--3

forms are updated periodically. Managers must add agreed-to commentary on to the form.
Managers must make room for employees to add written comment to the final form to make the
process more interactive in order to achieve the desired goals. The supervisor and employee must
sign the form. The form and its action plans must be periodically be reviewed every few months,
usually during one-on-one meetings with the employee.
Another pre-performance appraisal education for management is that organizations
planning to initiate appraisal process must establish and communicate expectations for
performance. Management must list three to five major responsibilities of each position; focus
the appraisal on employees responsibilities. Appraisals must make sure employees know and
understand what is expected of them. Also, involving employees in the process is essential since
most of them are most likely to understand and be committed to objectives they helped develop.
Moreover, Organizations intend to measure their employees performance must observe and
measure individual performance against standards. A supervisor should continuously gather
information about each employees performance. When preparing a performance appraisal, a
supervisor compares this information with the standards for the employee being appraised.
Also, the purpose of the interview performance appraisal interview must be communicate
information about an employees performance. In order to effectively prepare for performance
appraisal interview the appraiser must allow plenty of time for completing the appraisal form and
notify the employee about the appraisal interview ahead of time at an appropriate meeting place.
Next to designing a standard form is to periodically scheduling performance review
within a reasonable period of time. Schedule the first performance review for six months after
the employee starts employment. Firms must schedule another six months later, and then every
year on the employee's anniversary date. Doing this yearly and every six months makes it
possible for organizations to easily identify employees career developmental needs.
Moreover, in order to have legally feasible and defensible effective performance appraisal
system the following criteria must be well noted: Legally defensible appraisal Systems must
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. The organization must use
objective and uncontaminated data whenever they are available. The organization must provide a
formal system of review or appeal to resolve disagreements regarding appraisals. The
organization must use more than one independent evaluator of performance. Use a formal,
standardized system for personnel decisions. The organization must ensure that evaluators have
ample opportunity to observe and rate performance if ratings must be made. The organization
must avoid ratings on traits such as dependability, drive, aptitude, or attitude. The organization
must provide documented performance counseling prior to performance-based termination
decisions (Lawler, George, Michael, 197).
Again, it is very critical that organizations allow employees to make recommendations on
any updates to the job description and provide written input to the appraisal. Involving
employees in the process give them some sense of belongings and recognition in order to get
their full cooperation. Allowing employees opportunity to record their input enable them to even
understand the process. As employees record their input on their own sheets their feedback will
be combined on the official form later on in the process. This enables the rater and ratee the
chance to exchange each of their written feedback in the review meeting. The employee should
also be familiar with the performance appraisal procedure and form. By initiating the
performance review process through meeting and discussion forum to give them some sense of

Armah-Afful 36--4

awareness. Tell the employee that you're initiating a scheduled performance review. Remind
them of what's involved in the process. Schedule a meeting about two weeks out.
Also, it is very pertinent raters document their input by referencing the job description
and performance goals. Management must understand and be more familiar with the job
requirements and have sufficient communication with the employee being evaluated in order to
make valid judgments. Performance evaluator must also understand the legal framework of their
duties. With that said, evaluators must refrain from elaborating on the employee's race, sex,
religion, nationality, or disability status. Instead management must make sure to document vitals
areas such as major accomplishments, strengths and weaknesses according to the scopes on the
appraisal form. Also, after those documentations, evaluators should recommend any areas of
employees developmental needs to improve performance. As part of recommendation, managers
must rely on factual behavioral dimensions noted during the evaluation to help avoid basing
arguments on hearsay. It is ideal to concentrate always on addressing behaviors instead of
characteristics of employees personalities though personality traits can be identified.
Another pre-appraisal technique that sensitizes employees about the objectives of the process is
to hold the performance appraisal meeting to inform the entire workforce about the process.
Management must outline the purpose of the meeting is to seek their cooperation and exchanging
feedback for smooth appraisal process. In the meeting, management must allow employees to
freely make suggestions if possible. Mangers can guide this discussion by holding such meetings
according to departments and also offering their own inputs. Though managers can freely
respond to their disagreements but must do their best to avoid defensiveness. Performance
appraiser should always avoid final terms such as "always," "never," etc. Managers should
instead encourage participation and be supportive. Come to terms on actions, where possible
while trying to end the meeting on a positive note.
The last pre-performance appraisal education is that managers must be honest and fair in
their reportage to prevent surprises from employees. Nothing should be surprising to the
employee during the appraisal meeting. Any performance issues should have been addressed as
soon as those issues occurred. So nothing should be a surprise to the employee later on in the
actual performance appraisal meeting. Surprises will appear to the employee as if the supervisor
has not been doing his/her job and/or that the supervisor is not being fair. This can create
problem of employee job satisfaction instead of boosting their morale.
Furthermore, apart from aforementioned pre-appraisal education, the most popular
appraisal technique is self-evaluation. The self-evaluation is often effective when teamed up with
other forms of performance review techniques. The employee is asked to assess his own
performance by using a form that requires multiple choice answers, essay-type answers or a
combination of the two. One of the benefits of a self-evaluation is that a manager can compare
the self-evaluation to the manager's own appraisal and see the areas where there is a discrepancy
in an understanding of employee performance. This opens up conversation between the manager
and the employee that can be beneficial to employee development. According to Nelson and
Quick, Performance appraisal and career management are the most important apparatuses used
by organizations to initiate the process of performance improvement (92). Performance appraisal
is the specific and formal evaluation of an employee conducted to determine the degree to which
the employee is performing his or her job effectively so it very urgent that management realizes
the relevance of employee involvement. The ultimate goal for any organization using
performance appraisals is to improve performance on the job. The organization, primarily
through the work of its HR function, develops the general performance-appraisal process,

Armah-Afful 36--5

including issues of timing, for its managers and employees to use. The organization is also
responsible for ensuring that clear and specific performance standards are available to managers
and employees (Nelson and Quick, 94).
Moreover, probably the simplest method of performance appraisal besides self-evaluation is
the simple ranking method, which involves having the manager simply rank-order, from top to
bottom or from best to worst, each member of a particular work group or department. The
individual ranked first is presumed to be the top performer, the individual ranked second is
presumed to be the second-best performer, and so on. The ranking is generally global or based on
overall performance. A variation on the ranking method is the paired-comparison method of
performance appraisal, which involves comparing each individual employee with every other
individual employee, one at a time. This technique is simply an alternative way to generate
rankings, however. Although ranking techniques are simple and easy to implement, there are
some serious shortcomings. It is true that organizations that are seeking to make relatively simple
decisions such as which person to promote can obtain clear and useful information about the
most promotable, but even in such cases where an organization must then turn to the secondmost promotable, ranking methods provide no information about the difference between the
persons ranked first and second. The absence of such information is even more problematic for
the employee who might be told that she or he is the second best but is not given any
information about how to become the best (Pearce, 21 ).
Another form of ranking method is forced distribution method. This is a ranking technique
where raters are required to allocate a certain percentage of rates to certain categories such as
superior, above average, average) or percentiles such as top 10 percent, bottom 20 percent and so
on. Both the number of categories and percentage of employees to be allotted to each category
are a function of performance appraisal design and format. The workers of outstanding merit
may be placed at top 10 percent of the scale, the rest may be placed as 20 % good, 40 %
outstanding, 20 % fair and 10 % fair (Gill, 72).
A variation on the ranking method is the paired-comparison method of performance
appraisal, which involves comparing each individual employee with every other individual
employee, one at a time. This technique is simply an alternative way to generate rankings. On
the other hand, ranking methods provide no information about the difference between the
persons ranked first and second. The absence of such information is even more problematic for
the employee who might be told that she or he is second best but is not given any information
about how to become the best.
In addition, to the above method is confidential report technique for evaluating top officials.
This method is very popular in government departments to appraise IAS officers and other high
level officials. In this method the senior or the boss writes a report about the junior giving him
details about the performance about the employee. In this report, traits and responsibilities are
handled on the job and recommendations for future incentives or promotions. The report is kept
highly confidential and access to the report is limited. Thus the system of confidential reports has
two principal objectives. First and foremost is to improve the performance of the subordinate in
his present job. The second one is to assess his/her potentialities and provide him/her appropriate
feedback and guidance for correcting his deficiencies and improve his performance. Confidential
reports are of immense importance in the career of government employees, efficiency of service,
for the work, conduct, character and capabilities of the officer reported upon can be accurately
judged from the recorded opinion (Nelson and Quick, 97)..

Armah-Afful 36--6

The forced-distribution method involves grouping employees into predefined frequencies of

performance ratings. Those frequencies are determined by the organization in advance and are
imposed on the rater. For example, an organization could decide, similar to the traditional
approach at General Electric, that approximately 20 percent of the employees are not performing
to standard, while 60 percent are meeting expectations and standards, and only 20 percent are
truly outstanding An advantage of this system is that it results in a normal distribution of
performance ratings, which many people see as inherently fair. On the other hand, the
distribution that is being imposed may have no relationship to the true distribution of
performance in the work group. It is possible, for example, that all the employees are performing
at acceptable levels, but the forced-distribution methods, as well as the other ranking methods,
force the rater to make distinctions that might not really be meaningful. As a result, most
organizations rely instead on some type of absolute judgments and employ a system of
performance ratings rather than rankings (Nelson and Quick, 100).
One of the most popular and widely used performance-appraisal methods is the graphic
rating scale. A graphic rating scale simply consists of a statement or question about some aspect
of an individual's job performance. Following that statement or question is a series of answers;
the rater must select the one that fits best. For example, one common set of responses to a
graphic rating scale is strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, and strongly
disagree. These descriptors or possible responses are usually arrayed along a bar, line, or similar
visual representation and this representation is marked with numbers or letters that correspond to
each of the descriptors. According to the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United
Nations, the graphic scale of performance evaluation is one of the more common ones used by
managers. The employee's performance in various areas of her job duties is graded on a scale.
The value in a graphic evaluation system is that it allows managers to compare the performance
of several employees simultaneously. The system can be done with numbers or letters, and it
usually consists of a range, running from poor to excellent. The specific dimensions measured by
graphic rating scales should be based on job analysis, but this approach is not typically taken.
Instead, to have a single instrument that can be used with all or most employees in an
organization, graphic rating scales typically measure performance relative to traits or behaviors
such as initiative or problem-solving capabilities or even attitudes. In addition, a number of
problems have been associated with the use of graphic rating scales, but these will be discussed
later when we consider various types of rating errors (Lawler, George, Michael, 196).
The critical incident method relies on instances of especially good or poor performance on
the part of the employee. A critical incident is simply an example or instance of especially good
or poor performance on the part of the employee. This technique provides rich information for
feedback to the employee and defines performance in fairly clear behavioral terms. In other
cases, managers are asked to keep a log or diary in which they record examples or critical
incidents that they believe reflect good and bad performance on the part of individual employees.
A proactive manager keeps an ongoing log throughout the year of an employee's performance,
and then uses that information to fuel discussion during the employee performance review. This
method of keeping a list of good and bad incidents of employee performance is known as critical
incident evaluation
Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) are appraisal systems that represent a
combination of the graphic rating scale and the critical incident method. They specify
performance dimensions based on behavioral anchors associated with different levels of
performance. A BARS system has the significant advantage of dramatically increasing reliability

Armah-Afful 36--7

by providing specific behavioral examples to reflect effective and less effective behaviors.
Developing BARS is a complicated and often expensive process. For example, the managers
themselves develop the scales, they tend to be more committed to using them effectively, and the
process of developing the scales helps raters develop clearer ideas about what constitutes good
performance on the job (Pearce, 21).
Behavioral Observation Scales (BOS) are developed from critical incidents like BARS, but
use substantially more critical incidents to specifically define all the measures necessary for
effective performance. Although the BOS approach is an improvement over the limitations of the
BARS approach, it takes even more time and can be even more expensive to develop.
A goal-based or management-by-objectives (MBO) system is based largely on the extent to
which individuals meet their personal performance objectives. Specifically, the kinds of
behaviors specified in the goal-setting process are exactly what the employee will tend to focus
on, so it is critical that the organization really wants to encourage these particular behaviors. For
example, a customer service representative may have goals stated in terms of how many
customers are served in a day. But, in order to maximize the number of customers served, the
representative may need to be curt or even rude to some customers who are taking too much
time. This may result in lower levels of customer satisfaction which, in the long run, could be
devastating. The only real solution to this type of dilemma is to emphasize the need to be careful
in setting goals to make sure that such a situation never arises (Nelson and Quick, 97)..
One comparatively new innovation in performance-appraisal methods is the use of computer
monitoring. This technique is sometimes called performance test. Employees can now be
monitored electronically to see how they spend their time and how productive they are. These
systems are now used widely with customer-service representatives and reservations clerks. In
fact, you may have heard a telephone recording after you pressed the right numbers to get the
service you wanted stating (Jenks, 45).
Another effective technique for evaluating employee performance is far from the use of
computer software monitoring is the use of behavioral checklist. A behavioral checklist
evaluation method is simplistic but effective. It consists of a series of performance questions that
are traditionally given the option of yes or no, according to online educational resource Open
Learning World. An excessive number of negative responses indicate developmental training is
needed for that employee. The checklist can be used as a quick way to identify employees that
have deficiencies in too many performance areas (Pearce, 21).
Above and beyond the checklist technique is comparative method. The multiperson
comparison method and forced distribution methods are two common comparison appraisal
techniques. These approaches compare the subject employee's performance to peers. This allows
you to communicate to an employee area in which he over- or under-performs relative to others
in similar positions. This can motivate performance in competitive workplaces and among
competitive employees. The risks of these methods include the potential of in-fighting and the
lack of harmony you might see in your employee ranks.
The last of the techniques which is popular and ideal for providing feedback after evaluation
is the 360-degree feedback. An employee's development consists of progress made within his
own department, and the effectiveness of his interaction with the rest of the company. A 360
degree performance evaluation is one that involves input from managers in other departments

Armah-Afful 36--8

that the employee works with on a regular basis, according to the Missouri Small Business and
Technology Development Centers. Employees are evaluated on their effectiveness within their
own department based on their job descriptions, and they are also evaluated based on how
effectively they work with the rest of the company. The feedback interviews and meetings that be
conducted most effectively is 360-Degree Feedback. This is an approach to performance
appraisal that involves gathering performance information from people on all sides of the
manager: above, beside, below, and so forth. This approach is potentially helpful, and is typically
ideal for feedback purposes. Feedback does not always have the desired effect on performance.
Sometimes providing feedback can hurt subsequent performance. Adding a systematic coaching
component can improve 360-degree feedback. By focusing on enhanced self-awareness and
behavioral management, feedback coaching improves performance, satisfaction, and
commitment, and reduces turnover. Separating the performance feedback component from the
management development component also improves the 360-degree method. The feedback
component contains quantitative feedback and performance measures, while the management
development component emphasizes qualitative feedback and competencies for development
(Nelson and Quick, 99).
Summarily, the process of performance must draw guidelines to establish and communicate
expectations for performance, establish and communicate standards for measuring performance,
observe and measure individual performance against standards, and reinforce performance or
provide remedies. The following are the techniques used by the organizations for performance
appraisals of their employees: Self-Evaluation, Ranking, Paired Comparison, Forced
Distribution, Confidential Report, Essay Evaluation, Critical Incident, Checklists, Graphic
Rating Scale, Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS), Forced Choice Method,
Management-By-Objectives (MBO), Behavioral Observation Scales (BOS), Field Review
Technique and performance Test (computer based technique).
In conclusion, although there are clearly problems with performance appraisals as they are
conducted in most organizations if ideal techniques aforementioned are applied appropriately
they provide critical information for the organization and the employee and are not likely to
disappear. One way to use this information is by providing the feedback that employees need to
develop in order to reach their potential through their careers. In the long run, however, the
outcome of performance evaluation will be less effective to the organizational goals unless they
translate into some improvement in overall firm performance. Qualities of effective performance
appraisal techniques includes basing criteria on objectives, job-related, based on behaviors,
within employees control, and must be related to specific tasks communicated to employees.
Once the performance-appraisal and performance-management systems are yielding results they
were designed to do, the organization as a whole should perform better as the workforce
improves in their performance of their responsibilities.

Armah-Afful 36--9

Works Cited
Gill, Brian. "Effective Performance Appraisals." American Printer 221.5 (1998): 72. Business
Source Complete. Web. 28 Mar. 2015.
Jenks, James M. "Do Your Performance Appraisals Boost Productivity." Management Review
80.6 (1991): 45. Business Source Complete. Web. 28 Mar. 2015.
Lawler, Edward E., George S. Benson, and Michael McDermott. "What Makes Performance
Appraisals Effective?." Compensation & Benefits Review 44.4 (2012): 191-200.
Business Source Complete. Web. 28 Mar. 2015.
Nelson, Debra L., and James C. Quick. "9 Learning and Performance Management." ORGB 4.
4th ed. Stamford: Cengage Learning, 2015. 86-101. Print.
Pearce, Chris. "Ten Steps To Conducting Appraisals." Nursing Management - UK 14.6 (2007):
21. Business Source Complete. Web. 28 Mar. 2015.