Criticism of Performance appraisal The rating system is fundamentally flawed.

Critically this method is used highly throughout the workplace because it is a quick system; which can mean that many organisations are failing to complete accurate performance appraisal. The reason is that it uses a numerical rating to determine the performance of employees. The problem is how can one determine if an employee should be rated as a one or as a five? The systems do not give a clear indication of the set criteria in which to rate an employee, and fail to provide clear reasons as to why an employee received a certain rating. One article indicates that problem with giving an example of halo effect. (Performance Appraisals, Rating scales, n.d., 13) An example is the supervisor who believes that an employee is inherently good (halo effect) and so ignores evidence that might suggest otherwise. Instead of correcting the slackening employeeAnother problem is legal issues. Poor ratings resulting dismiss without a clear explanation of the basis of decision may lead a legal actions taken by external factors such as unions. Hansen (Performance appraisal tips, n.d. 16) indicates that traditional systems mainly concerned with the overall organization where developmental approach views the employees as individuals and has been forward looking through the use of goal setting. Hansen`s opinions seems still valid where most of the journal articles, reports addresses the same problem. One of the UN (United Nations) reports on performance appraisals indicated by Othman (1994, p.5) says The performance appraisal system should be structured to provide clear communication between staff and supervisors about expected and actual performance. Even though fifteen years have passed since this report was released, it appears that we are still experiencing the same problems and concerns. Performance appraisals aim to be a positive element of human resources as it gives a means for communication to let employees know how well their efforts are conforming to the organizations main objectives. Through the years, satisfying that important objective has not been changed. Mainly this is due to a lack in communication and feedback between managers and employees, and as mangers perceiving it as an annual formality which is time consuming on their behalf. Most of the managers do not spend enough time and effort on complement performance appraisals. Have more time to complete these and also, have more personal relationship with the employees. The rating system: The persistent problem with performance appraisals.

Also, instead of numerical ratings, some systems also use common words such as excellent, very good or keep doing what you are doing, therefore it is too general for the employee and does not provide constructive and developmental feedback. If an employee receives a bad rating or comment, this method does not provide adequate information on what they were doing wrong or what should be implemented on how to improve. It appears that duties and responsibilities of an employee are not clearly outlined in the job description. Schermerhorn, Campling J., Poole, D., & Wiesner (2004, p.327) describes job description as: Job description is a written statement of job duties and it details responsibilities of a job holder. After the process of performance appraisal employees may be surprised with the results displayed within the appraisal. Therefore managers should not wait for performance appraisals to give feedback. An example of this could be a response like I didnt know that I was expected to perform that duty. In order to avoid that, managers need to communicate more and need to show employees that they are interested in their work, so that employees will feel valued, and in turn they will perform at a higher rate thus the performance appraisal was successful. Even though this method of performance appraisal is used, feedback is still essential. To most of the employees receiving a negative feedback is better than not receiving any at all. Hence, developing strategies for improvement of employee`s performance will lead to greater productivity and higher motivation to achieve goals and organization`s objectives. W.Edwards Deming is probably the most famous and harsh critic against performance appraisals. In his words Annual ratings are a disease annihilating long term planning, demobilizing teamwork, nourishing rivalry and politics, leaving people bitter, battered, desolate, despondent, unfit for work for weeks after receipt of rating, unable to comprehend why they are inferior (Deming, 2000, p. 102). Deming perhaps is right concerning the rating system, but to him, there should be no performance appraisal methods because it is an external-control mechanism. Yet, it is well know that discipline plays a vital role in meeting a organisation`s objectives. Hence there should be always a performance measurement which should lead to training, communication, and rewards. For the system to work it needs to work in conjunction with good communication throughout the year.

Conclusion

Critics may have valid points against the system itself; however they also assume some conditions and circumstances. Hence, organizations sooner or later can create an appropriate performance appraisal method that fits their objectives and culture, along with good communication.