Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Introduction:Managing performance is an important issue with the public and other stakeholders expecting as
the norm and not the exception, good service, integrity, transparency and accountability.
Government institutions are often held to a higher level of accountability, and understandably so
as the public requires value for taxes paid. People implement plans, programs and policies and
therefore the contribution of human effort to an organizations success is as important as any
other resource input. The quality of the performance of civil servants is critical to achieving the
outcomes sought by government, the general development of the country and the expectations of
the people. In light of this, the Performance Management and Appraisal System (PMAS) have
been introduced as a means of managing and improving staff performance and accountability in
the Public Service.
The PMAS is an improved system of performance management and evaluation. It clearly
defines how your work contributes to the achievement of the organizations goals and identifies
what needs to be done to ensure each person is given the opportunity for personal growth and
development in their work life. Properly implemented, this is a win-win system. The employees
skills, talents and interest will be honed and guided for maximum performance and the
organization will benefit from the combined performance of all staff. Proper management of the
System is therefore critical to ensure that the expected benefits are realized. The Human
Resource Management Division is a key guardian of the system as well as an important conduit
for feedback that will inform changes to the System.
Performance management:
Performance management is a holistic process that ensures employees performance contributes
to business objectives. It brings together many of elements of good people management practice,
including learning and development, measurement of performance, and organizational
development.
Performance Management can be defined as a strategic and integrated approach to delivering
sustained success to organizations by improving the performance of the people who work in
them and developing the capabilities of teams and individual contributors. " (Armstrong and
Barron: 1998).(1)
Fletcher (1993: 35) pointed out that the real concept of performance management was associated
with an approach to creating a shared vision of the purpose and aims of the organization, helping
employees to understand and recognize their part in contributing to them and, in so doing,
enhancing the performance of both individuals and the organization.
In 2000, Armstrong identified two senses in which performance management is integrated;
vertical integration which links objectives with core competencies and horizontal integration
which links different aspects of human resource management to achieve a consistent approach to
the management and development of people. He later renamed horizontal integration as HR
Integration and identified two other senses in which it can be integrated; functional integration
which links functional strategies in different parts of the business and lastly, the integration of
individual needs with those of the organization (2001).
Elements of Performance Management
Armstrong identifies the five elements of performance management as agreement (of employee,
unit, and organizational goals), measurement, feedback, positive reinforcement and dialogue (2).
These elements ensure that the performance management process is positive, successful and a
spur to employee improvement. Key to the performance management process are continued
feedback and assessment, depicted shown in the performance management cycle (Figure 1).
Performance appraisal:
Performance appraisals are reviews of employee performance over time, so appraisal is just one
piece of performance management. A performance appraisal (PA) is a method by which the job
performance of an employee is documented and evaluated. Performance appraisals are a part of
career development and consist of regular reviews of employee performance within
organizations. PA also referred as a performance review, performance evaluation, development
discussion, or employee appraisal.
A performance appraisal is a systematic and periodic process that assesses an individual
employee's job performance and productivity in relation to certain pre-established criteria and
organizational objectives (4).Other aspects of individual employees are considered as well, such
as organizational citizenship behavior, accomplishments, potential for future improvement,
strengths and weaknesses, etc.
Thus, its very important to choose the correct measuring techniques. Its also important to focus
on a desired performance (standardized performance) and then compare the desired performance
to the actual performance of the employee. Although the process may be tedious, the end result is
one of great importance. Some of the positive results of performance appraisals are:
Traditional Methods:
Ranking Method:
It is the oldest and simplest formal systematic method of performance appraisal in
which employee is compared with all others for the purpose of placing order of
worth. The employees are ranked from the highest to the lowest or from the best to
the worst.
In doing this the employee who is the highest on the characteristic being measured
and also the one who is L lowest, are indicated. Then, the next highest and the next
lowest between next highest and lowest until all the employees to be rated have
been ranked. Thus, if there are ten employees to be appraised, there will be ten
ranks from 1 to 10.
However, the greatest limitations of this appraisal method are that:
(i) It does not tell that how much better or worse one is than another,
(ii) The task of ranking individuals is difficult when a large number of employees are
rated, and
(iii) It is very difficult to compare one individual with others having varying
behavioural traits. To remedy these defects, the paired comparison method of
performance appraisal has been evolved
Paired Comparison:
In this method, each employee is compared with other employees on one- on one
basis, usually based on one trait only. The rater is provided with a bunch of slips
each coining pair of names, the rater puts a tick mark against the employee whom
he insiders the better of the two. The number of times this employee is compared
as better with others determines his or her final ranking
However, the greatest limitations of this appraisal method are that:
One obvious disadvantage of this method is that the method can become unwieldy
when large numbers of employees are being compared.
Grading Method:
In this method, certain categories of worth are established in advance and carefully
defined. There can be three categories established for employees: outstanding,
satisfactory and unsatisfactory. There can be more than three grades. Employee
performance is compared with grade definitions. The employee is, then, allocated to
the grade that best describes his or her performance.
Modern Methods:
As with other methods, it also suffers from some limitations as catalogued below:
(i) Setting Un-measurable Objectives:
One of the problems MBO suffers from is unclear and un-measurable objectives set
for attainment. An objective such as will do a better job of training is useless as it
is un-measurable. Instead, well have four subordinates promoted during the year
is a clear and measurable objective.
(ii) Time-consuming:
The activities involved in an MBO programme such as setting goals, measuring
progress, and providing feedback can take a great deal of time.
(iii) Tug of War:
Setting objectives with the subordinates sometimes turns into a tug of war in the
sense that the manager pushes for higher quotas and the subordinates push for
lower ones. As such, goals so set are likely to be unrealistic.
Assessment Centers:
The introduction of the concept of assessment centres as a method of performance
method is traced back in 1930s in the Germany used to appraise its army officers.
The concept gradually spread to the US and the UK in 1940s and to the Britain in
1960s.
The concept, then, traversed from the army to business arena during 1960s. The
concept of assessment centre is, of course, of a recent origin in India. In India,
Crompton Greaves, Eicher, Hindustan Lever and Modi Xerox have adopted this
technique of performance evaluation.
In business field, assessment centres are mainly used for evaluating executive or
supervisory potential. By definition, an assessment centre is a central location
where managers come together to participate
well-designed simulated exercises. They are assessed by senior managers supplemented by the psychologists and the HR specialists for 2-3 days.
Assessee is asked to participate in in-basket exercises, work groups, simulations,
and role playing which are essential for successful performance of actual job.
Having recorded the assessees behaviour the raters meet to discuss their pooled
information and observations and, based on it, they give their assessment about the
assesee. At the end of the process, feedback in terms of strengths and weaknesses
is also provided to the assesees.
The distinct advantages the assessment centres provide include more accurate
evaluation, minimum biasedness, right selection and promotion of executives, and
so on. Nonetheless, the technique of assessment centres is also plagued by certain
limitations and problems. The technique is relatively costly and time consuming,
causes suffocation to the solid performers, discourages to the poor performers
(rejected), breeds unhealthy competition among the assessees, and bears adverse
effects on those not selected for assessment.
Encourage Discussion:Employees are also more likely to feel that the appraisal process is fair if they are given a chance
to talk about their performance.
Constructive Intention:it is very important that employees recognize that negative appraisal feedback is provided with a
constructive intention, i.e., to help them overcome present difficulties and to improve their future
performance. Employees will be less anxious about criticism, and more likely to find it useful,
when they believe that the appraiser's intentions are helpful and constructive.
Appraiser Credibility:It is important that the appraiser (usually the employee's supervisor) be well-informed and
credible. Appraisers should feel comfortable with the techniques of appraisal, and should be
knowledgeable about the employee's job and performance.
Appendix:-
[1] Performance management: the new realities, Michael Armstrong, Angela Baron, Institute of
Personnel and Development, Institute of Personnel and Development, Aug 1, 1998
[2] Evans, G. Edward. Performance Management and Appraisal: a How-to-Do-It Manual for
Librarians. New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers, 2004.
[3] Muchinsky, P. M. (2012). Psychology Applied to Work (10th ed.). Summerfield, NC: Hyper
graphic Press.
[4] Manasa, K. & Reddy, N. (2009). Role of Training in Improving Performance. The IUP
Journal of Soft Skills, 3, 72-80
[5] Understanding the Importance of Performance Appraisals BY ATESSA BENEFITS ON
SEPTEMBER 20, 2012