Scribd
Upload
108 views31 pages

Chapter 7 Performance

GELAGAT ORGANISASI

Uploaded by

Mishalini Vythilingam
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
108 views31 pages

Chapter 7 Performance

GELAGAT ORGANISASI

Uploaded by

Mishalini Vythilingam
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 31

Human Resource Management

Fifteenth Edition, Global Edition

Chapter 7
Performance
Management

Chapter 7
Martocchio (2019)

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Learning Objectives
7.1 Describe performance management, the performance
appraisal, and the performance appraisal process.
7.2 Explain the uses of performance appraisal and
performance criteria.
7.3 Describe the choice of various performance appraisal
methods.
7.4 Explain how to conduct the appraisal interview.

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Performance Management (PM)
• Goal-oriented process ensuring processes are in place to
maximize productivity at employee, team, and
organizational levels
• Close relationship between incentives and performance.
• Dynamic, ongoing, continuous process
• Each part of the system is integrated and linked for
continuous organizational effectiveness

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Performance Appraisal
• Formal system of review and evaluation of individual or
team task performance

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Performance Appraisal Process

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Uses of Performance Appraisal
• Human resource planning
• Training and development
• Career planning and development
• Compensation programs
• Internal employee relations
• Assessment of employee potential

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Establish Performance Criteria (Standards)
• Traits
• Behaviors
• competencies
• Goal achievement
• Improvement potential

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Traits
• Employee traits such as attitude, appearance, and initiative are basis for some
evaluations

• May be unrelated to job performance or be difficult to define

• Certain traits may relate to job performance

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Behaviors
• Organizations may evaluate employee’s task-related behavior or competencies

• Examples are leadership style, developing others, teamwork and cooperation, or


customer service orientation

• If certain behaviors result in desired outcomes, there is merit in using them in evaluation
process

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Competencies
• Broad range of knowledge, skills, traits, and behaviors

• May be technical in nature, business oriented, or related to interpersonal skills

• Should be those that are closely associated with job success

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Goal Achievement
• Use if organizations consider ends more important than means

• Should be within control of individual or team

• Should be those results that lead to firm’s success

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Improvement Potential
• Many criteria used focus on past

• Cannot change past

• Should emphasize future

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Responsibility for Performance Appraisal
• Immediate supervisor
• Employees
• Peers and team members
• Self-appraisal
• Customer appraisal
• 360-degree feedback

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Performance Appraisal Systems
• Trait systems
• Comparison systems
• Behavioral systems
• Results-based systems

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Trait Systems
• Evaluate employees based on traits (for example):
– Quality of work
– Dependability
• Limitations (e.g., traits represent a predisposition for
behavior, but not behavior itself)

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Trait-Oriented Performance Appraisal
Figure 7.2 A Trait-Oriented Performance Appraisal Rating Form

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Comparison Systems
• Evaluate an employee’s performance against that of
another
• Employees ranked from the best performer to the poorest
performer
– Forced distribution: stacked rating system
– Paired comparison: variation of ranking system

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Forced Distribution System (1 of 2)
Refer Figure 7.3 A Forced Distribution Performance Appraisal Rating
Form

Instructions: You are required to rate the performance for the previous
3 months of the 15 workers employed as animal keepers to conform with
the following performance distribution:
• 15 percent of the animal keepers will be rated as having exhibited
poor performance.
• 20 percent of the animal keepers will be rated as having exhibited
below-average performance.
• 35 percent of the animal keepers will be rated as having exhibited
average performance.
• 20 percent of the animal keepers will be rated as having exhibited
above-average performance.
• 10 percent of the animal keepers will be rated as having exhibited
superior performance.
Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved
Forced Distribution System (2 of 2)
Use the following guidelines for rating performance. On the basis of the
five duties listed in the job description for animal keeper, the employee’s
performance is characterized as:
• Poor if the incumbent performs only one of the duties well.
• Below average if the incumbent performs only two of the duties well.
• Average if the incumbent performs only three of the duties well.
• Above average if the incumbent performs only four of the duties well.
• Superior if the incumbent performs all five of the duties well.

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Paired Comparison System
Figure 7.4 A Paired Comparison Performance Appraisal Rating Form

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Behavioral Systems
• Rates extent to which employees display successful job
performance behaviors
• Three types:
– Critical Incident Technique (CIT)
– Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS)
– Behavioral Observation Scale (BOS)

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Critical Incident Technique (CIT)
Figure 7.5 A Critical Incidents Performance Appraisal Rating Form

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales
(BARS) (1 of 2)
Table 7.1 BARS for Factor: Ability to Present Positive Company Image

Clearly Outstanding Makes excellent impression on college


Performance: recruits. Carefully explains positive aspects of
the company. Listens to applicant and
answers questions in a very positive manner.
Excellent Performance: Makes good impression on college recruits.
Answers all questions and explains positive
aspects of the company. Answers questions
in a positive manner.
Good Performance: Makes a reasonable impression on college
recruits. Listens to applicant and answers
questions in knowledgeable manner.
Average Performance: Makes a fair impression on college recruits.
Listens to applicant and answers most
questions in a knowledgeable manner.

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales
(BARS) (2 of 2)
Table 7.1 [Continued]

Slightly Below Average Attempts to make a good impression on


Performance: college recruits. Listens to applicants but at
times could be expected to have to go to other
sources to get answers to questions.

Poor Performance: At times makes poor impression on college


recruits. Sometimes provides incorrect
information to applicant or goes down blind
avenues before realizing mistake.

Very Poor Even with repeated instructions continues to


Performance: make a poor impression. This interviewer
could be expected to turn off college applicant
from wanting to join the firm.

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Behavioral Observation Scales
• Similar to BARS in its development
• Compared to BARS, BOS focuses exclusively on positive
performance behaviors
• Appropriate for jobs that require observable behaviors
• Requires observation of job behaviors on a regular basis

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Results-Based Systems
• Focuses on measurable outcomes such as sales, accident
rates, and productivity
– Management by objective (MBO)
– Work standards method

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Work Standards Example
Figure 7.6 Calculation of a Piecework Award for a Garment Worker

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Problems in Performance Appraisal (1 of 2)
• Appraiser discomfort
• Subjectivity
– Bias errors
 First-impression effect
 Halo effect (positive halo)
 Horn effect (negative halo)
 Similar-to-me effect
 Illegal discriminatory bias

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Problems in Performance Appraisal (2 of 2)
• Subjectivity
– Contrast errors
– Errors of central tendency
– Errors of leniency or strictness
• Employee anxiety

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Characteristics of Effective Appraisal System
• Reliability and validity
• Job-related criteria
• Performance expectations
• Standardization
• Trained appraisers
• Continuous open communication
• Performance reviews
• Due process

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved


Appraisal Interview
• Achilles heel of entire evaluation process
• Scheduling interview
• Interview structure
• Use of praise and criticism
• Employee’s role
• Concluding interview

Copyright © 2019 Pearson Education, Ltd. All Rights Reserved

You might also like