Ch 11 Perf Appraisal

training raters to rate more accuratel

rater error training, performance dimension training, performance standard training

recency error

allowing perf either - or + at the end of the review period play too large a role in determining an ee rating for the entire period

EEO and perf evaluation

and affirmative action influence HR decisions. EEO forces organizations to document decisions to ensure they are firmly tied to performance or expected performance. Performance appraisals are subject to the same scrutiny as employment tests. Brito v. Zia Company

Experts advise

applying total quality management to improve the process. Recognize the influence of work environment and system on performance. Identify strategies for understanding and better measuring performance

Central tendency error

avoiding extremes in ratings across ee

Leniency error

consistently rating higher than deserved

Severity error

consistently rating indivs lower than deserved

spillover error

continuing to downgrade an ee for perf errors in prior rating periods

Common errors

criterion contamination. Several factors lead to inaccurate appraisals. Guilt. Embarrassment about giving praise. Taking things for granted. Not noticing good or poor performance. The halo effect. Dislike of confrontation. Too little time spent on preparation.

Horn error

downgrading an ee across all perf dimensions exlusively bc of poor perf in one dimension

Performance dimension training

exposes supervisors to the perf dimensions to be used in rating (ie quality of work job knowledge) thus clarifying dimensions

Tying pay to subjectively appraised performance

"How do we get employees to view raises as a reward for performance?" Many companies view raises as a budgetary line item resulting in pay increase guidelines. General increases give equal increases to all employees, regardless of performance. Across-the-board increases are linked with cost-of-living and adjusts base pay for all employees. Seniority increases come close to tying pay to performance, progressive pre-set pay increases. REQUIRES 3 things: A definition of performance. A continuum showing levels from low to high. Awarded merit increase at each level. In its simplest form a guideline specifies pay increases permissible for different levels of performance.

First impression error

- or + opinion of an ee early in the review period and allowing that to - or + influence all later perceptions of perf

Evaluating performance appraisal formats

A good format scores well on five points. 1 Employee development criterion. Feedback impacts performance. 2 Administrative criterion - ease of use. 3 Personnel research criterion. Does it validate employment tests? 4 Cost criterion - is it expensive/time consuming? 5 Validity criterion - does it improve accuracy?

Strategy 2 360 degree feedback

Assesses performance from five points of view: Supervisor, peer, self, customer, and subordinate.

Performance evaluation process

Culture and strategy determine measure factors. Involve employees in all stage of the process. Raters should be trained and motivated. Raters should maintain a diary. Raters should conduct a pre-diagnosis. Feedback must be timely.

Strategies for better understanding and measuring job performance

Efforts to improve the process: Define job performance - what exactly should be measured? Managers can be grouped into one of three categories - based on their measurement focus. Either task performance, counterproductive performance, or both. Studies on specific factors focus on: Planning and organizing, training, coaching, developing subordinates, and technical proficiency.

Subordinate as rater

Employees want anonymous submissions, leaders should use feedback to modify their behavior

criterion-deficient

Just because something is quantifiable does not mean it is an objective measure of performance

Measures of performance

Most companies use multiple measures of performance linking to pay increases and bonuses.

Edward Deming

Opponent of Performance metrics He believed the work situation, not the individual, determined performance. Variations arose due to lack of information, technology, or control. Ratings rob employees of pride and self-esteem.

Errors in the rating process

Performance does actually play an important role, perhaps the major role, in ratings. Technically proficient employees tend to receive higher ratings. Performance-irrelevant factors influence ratings, and cause errors in the evaluation. Criterion contamination happens in all companies.

Role of performance appraisals in compensation decision

Performance reviews are used in a wide variety of decisions in organizations. One is to guide allocation of merit increases. Performance ratings are influenced by: behaviors observed by raters, organization values, competition among departments, status differences between departments economic conditions. Employees are often frustrated with the appraisal process. The biggest complaint from employees and managers is they are too subjective. There lurks the possibility of unfair treatment by supervisors.

Errors in the actual evaluation

Purpose of an evaluation influences results. Can send a political message. If the purpose divides a fixed pot of merit increases, ratings are less accurate. Providing face-to-face feedback to subordinates is daunting, leading to inaccuracies. When required in writing, ratings are more accurate

Errors in observation (attention)

Raters are influenced by: general appearance - gender and race. patterns and variability of performance. improved/declining performance.

Strategy 3 understand how raters process info

Raters follow this process: Observes behavior. Encodes the behavior. Stores the information in memory. While actually evaluating, the rater reviews the performance dimensions and retrieves from memory stored observations/impressions. reconsiders and integrates with other information. Decides on the final ratings.

Errors in storage and recall

Raters store and retrieve information in traits, regardless of accuracy. Memory decay - raters forget things.

Error tip

Recognizing and understanding errors is the first step to communicating and building a more effective appraisal process.

Ratings

Require raters to evaluate employees against a standard rather than against each other. Each performance standard is measured on a scale so variation falls along a continuum. Descriptors anchoring the continuum provide the major difference in rating scales. Adjectives. Behaviors. Outcomes.

Customer as rater

Surveys and mystery shoppers rate performance

Peers as rater

They have an undistorted perspective, however, they have no rating experience and are very lenient

Self as rater

They have complete knowledge of performance, yet they are the most lenient. Used for development rather than administration.

Supervisor as rater

They have experience rating employees and know the job requirements, however, they are prone to leniency errors.

Strategy 1 improve appraisal formats

Two categories of evaluation formats are: ranking and rating.

Standard rating scale

When adjectives are used as anchors, the format is called a standard rating scale.

Halo erros

favorable ratings to all job duties based on impressive performance in just one job function

clone error

giving better ratings to individuals who are like the rater in behavior and or personality

Rater error training

goal is to reduce psychometric errors (leniency, severity, central tendency, halo) by familiarizing raters with their existence

EEo and performance evaluation

instructions clear criteria sound job descriptions required feedback higher-level review consistent treatment The courts stress six issues in setting up performance appraisal systems.

Balanced scorecard approach

looks at what contributes value in an organization. Success depends on satisfied: Customers, and employees. If true, managers must focus on: Customer satisfaction. Employee internal growth and commitment. Operational efficiency in internal processes. Financial measures.

Management by Objectives

measures outcomes

Performance standard training

provides raters with a standard of comparison or frame of reference for making appraisals (what constitutes good, average and bad)

ranking

requires comparing employees against each other to determine the relative ordering of the group on some performance measure. The straight ranking procedure is just that: employees are ranked relative to each other Alternation ranking recognizes that raters are better at ranking people at extreme ends of distribution. Best and worst performers are rated first. The paired-comparison ranking method simplifies ranking by comparing pairs of people. Each individual is compared separately with all others in the group.

Performance Metrics

results oriented of behaviorally oriented? focus on individual ee, teams, or the whole org

Behaviorally anchored rating scales

seems to be the most common format using behaviors as descriptors.

More complex guideline

ties pay not only to performance but also to position in the pay range.