Ch 5 Evaluating employee performance

Pros of subjective performance criteria

are usually easy and relatively inexpensive to obtain and, thus, may be the preferred method of assessment for many organizations.

Supervisor appraisals

are usually quite knowledgeable about the job requirements and are often in a position to provide rewards for effective performance and suggestions for improvement for substandard performance.

Forced distributions

assigning workers to established categories of poor to good performance, with fixed limitations on how many employees can be assigned to each category

Individual methods

performance appraisal methods that evaluate an employee by himself or herself, without explicit reference to other workers

behavioral observation scales(BOS)

performance appraisal methods that require appraisers to recall how often a worker has been observed performing key work behaviors

graphic rating scales

performance appraisal methods using a predetermined scale to rate the worker on important job dimensions

checklists

performance appraisal methods using a series of statements about job performance

behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS)

performance appraisal technique using rating scales, with labels reflecting examples of poor, average, and good behavioral incidents

Con of peer appraisals

potential for conflict among employees who are evaluating each other, a particular problem when peers are competing for scarce job rewards.

self-appraisals

tend to be more lenient and focus more on effort exerted rather than on performance accomplishments

Criterion deficiency

the degree to which a criterion falls short of measuring job performance

Criterion usefulness

the extent to which a performance criterion is usable in appraising a particular job

criterion contamination

the extent to which performance appraisals contain elements that detract from the accurate assessment of job effectiveness

criterion relevance

the extent to which the means of appraising performance is pertinent to job success

performance appraisals

the formalized means of assessing worker performance in comparison with certain established organizational standards

Casual attribution

the process by which people assign cause to events or behaviors

Performance feedback

the process of giving information to a worker about performance level with suggestions for future improvement

actor-observer bias

the tendency for observers to overattribute cause to characteristics of the actor and the tendency for the actor to overattribute cause to situational characteristics

central tendency error

the tendency to give all workers the midpoint rating in performance appraisals

severity error

the tendency to give all workers very negative performance appraisals

Leniency error

the tendency to give all workers very positive performance appraisals

recent effect

the tendency to give greater weight to recent performance and lesser weight to earlier performance

Cons of ranking similar to paired comparisons

there are no absolute standards of performance. This is a problem if few or none of the entire group of workers are performing at "acceptable" levels.

Cons of 360

they are also time-intensive and costly.

Pros of objective performance criteria

First, because objective criteria typically involve counts of output or the timing of tasks, they are less prone to bias and distortion than subjective performance ratings. Second, objective criteria are usually more directly tied to "bottom-line" assessments of an organization's success, such as the number of products assembled or dollar sales figures.

Rankings

performance appraisal methods involving the ranking of supervisees from best to worst

360-degree feedback

a method of gathering performance appraisals from a worker's supervisors, subordinates, peers, customers, and other relevant parties

rusty halo or horns effect

an overall negative performance appraisal is made on the basis of one instance of failure or one negative characteristic.

halo effect

an overall positive evaluation of a worker based on one known positive characteristic or action

pros of narratives

appraisers have the freedom to describe performance in their own words and to emphasize elements that they feel are important.

pros of checklists

are easy to use and provide detailed appraisals of performance that are focused on job-related behaviors

Pros of Peer appraisals

are keenly aware of what constitutes good performance and have the most information about one's workplace contributions.

Pros of ranking and paired comparisons

both these comparative techniques have the advantage of being simple to use and of being applicable to a variety of jobs.

counterproductive work behaviors(CWBs)

deviant, negative behaviors that are harmful to an organization and its workers like stealing from employers, vandalism, sabotage, harassment of coworkers, deliberately missing work, and using drugs or alcohol on the job

Organizational citizenship behavior(OCB)

efforts by organizational members to advance or promote the work organization and its goals

cons of checklists

he development of such techniques is expensive and time-consuming, requiring the generation of applicable work-related statements and the assignment of accurate performance values. Also, checklists may limit the focus of a performance appraisal, because the rater must choose among a finite set of statements that might not capture all aspects of an individual's performance of a particular job.

Pros of 360

improved reliability of measurement because of the multiple evaluations, the inclusion of more diverse perspectives on the employee's performance, the involvement of more organizational members in the evaluation and feedback process, and improved organizational communication

Cons of objective assessments

is that they may focus too much on specific, quantifiable outcomes. Also performance data is time-consuming and costly

Objective performance criteria

measures of job performance that are easily quantified like number of units produced or dollar amount of sales

subjective performance criteria

measures of job performance that typically consist of ratings or judgments of performance

Performance Criteria

measures used to determine successful and unsuccessful performance

Con of forced distribution

occurs when there is an abundance of either very good or very poor workers in a supervisor's work group. This can create a situation where a supervisor might artificially raise or lower some employees' evaluations to fit them into the predetermined distribution. In some situations, forced distribution may lead to employee dissatisfaction if it is perceived as unfair and, if used in a layoff situation, may raise concerns about adverse impact

Narratives

open-ended written accounts of a worker's performance used in performance appraisals

paired comparisons

performance appraisal method in which the rater compares each worker with each other worker in the group

Comparative methods

performance appraisal methods involving comparisons of one worker's performance against that of other workers

Customers appraisals

they offer an interesting perspective on whether certain types of workers (salespersons, waitpersons, telephone operators) are doing a good job. Best used when their is an on-going relationship between customer and worker

cons of narratives

they offer no quantification of performance, which makes it very difficult to compare workers' performance. An additional problem with narratives is that the worker may misinterpret the meaning of the report.

Subordinate appraisals

used to assess the effectiveness of persons in supervisory or leadership positions.

pro of self-appraisals

useful in encouraging workers to be more committed to performance-related goals