Gary Dessler

tenth edition

Chapter 9 Part 3 Training and Development

Performance Management
and Appraisal
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. PowerPoint Presentation by Charlie Cook
All rights reserved. The University of West Alabama
 Comparing Performance Appraisal and
Performance Management
 Performance appraisal
– Evaluating an employee’s current and/or past
performance relative to his or her performance
standards.
 Performance management
– The process employers use to make sure
employees are working toward organizational
goals.

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–2

 Why Performance Management?
 Increasing use by employers of performance
management reflects:
– The popularity of the total quality management
(TQM) concepts.
– The belief that traditional performance appraisals
are often not just useless but counterproductive.
– The necessity in today’s globally competitive
industrial environment for every employee’s
efforts to focus on helping the company to achieve
its strategic goals.

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–3

 An Introduction to Appraising
Performance
 Why appraise performance?
– Appraisals play an integral role in the employer’s
performance management process.
– Appraisals help in planning for correcting
deficiencies and reinforce things done correctly.
– Appraisals, in identifying employee strengths and
weaknesses, are useful for career planning
– Appraisals affect the employer’s salary raise
decisions.

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–4

 Realistic Appraisals
 Motivations for soft (less-than-candid)
appraisals
– The fear of having to hire and train someone new
– The unpleasant reaction of the appraisee
– A company appraisal process that’s not conducive
to candor
 Hazards of giving soft appraisals
– Employee loses the chance to improve before
being forced to change jobs.
– Lawsuits arising from dismissals involving
inaccurate performance appraisals.

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–5

 Continuous improvement
 A management philosophy that requires
employers to continuously set and
relentlessly meet ever-higher quality, cost,
delivery, and availability goals by:
– Eradicating the seven wastes:
• overproduction, defective products, and unnecessary
downtime, transportation, processing costs, motion, and
inventory.
– Requiring each employee to continuously improve
his or her own personal performance, from one
appraisal period to the next.

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–6

 The Components of an Effective
Performance Management Process
 Direction sharing
 Role clarification
 Goal alignment
 Developmental goal setting
 Ongoing performance monitoring
 Ongoing feedback
 Coaching and support
 Performance assessment (appraisal)
 Rewards, recognition, and compensation
 Workflow and process control and return
Figure 9–2
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–7
 Defining Goals and Work Efforts
 Guidelines for effective goals
– Assign specific goals
– Assign measurable goals
– Assign challenging but doable goals
– Encourage participation
 SMART goals are:
– Specific, and clearly state the desired results.
– Measurable in answering “how much.”
– Attainable, and not too tough or too easy.
– Relevant to what’s to be achieved.
– Timely in reflecting deadlines and milestones.
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–8
 Performance Appraisal Roles
 Supervisors
– Usually do the actual appraising.
– Must be familiar with basic appraisal techniques.
– Must understand and avoid problems that can
cripple appraisals.
– Must know how to conduct appraisals fairly.

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–9

 Performance Appraisal Roles (cont’d)
 HR department
– Serves a policy-making and advisory role.
– Provides advice and assistance regarding the
appraisal tool to use.
– Prepares forms and procedures and insists that all
departments use them.
– Responsible for training supervisors to improve
their appraisal skills.
– Responsible for monitoring the system to ensure
that appraisal formats and criteria comply with
EEO laws and are up to date.

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–10

 Steps in Appraising Performance
 Defining the job
– Making sure that you and your subordinate agree
on his or her duties and job standards.
 Appraising performance
– Comparing your subordinate’s actual performance
to the standards that have been set; this usually
involves some type of rating form.
 Providing feedback
– Discussing the subordinate’s performance and
progress, and making plans for any development
required.

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–11

 Designing the Appraisal Tool
 What to measure?
– Work output (quality and quantity)
– Personal competencies
– Goal (objective) achievement
 How to measure?
– Graphic rating scales
– Alternation ranking method
– MBO

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–12

 Performance Appraisal Methods
 Graphic rating scale
– A scale that lists a number of traits and a range of
performance for each that is used to identify the
score that best describes an employee’s level of
performance for each trait.

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–13

 Graphic
Rating Scale
with Space
for
Comments

Figure 9–3
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–14
 Portion of an Administrative Secretary’s Sample
Performance Appraisal Form

Source: James Buford Jr., Bettye Burkhalter, and Grover Jacobs, “Link Job Description
to Performance Appraisals,” Personnel Journal, June 1988, pp. 135–136.
Figure 9–4
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–15
 Performance
Management Outline

Source: www.cwru.edu.
Figure 9–5a
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–16
 Performance
Management
Outline
(cont’d)

Figure 9–5b
Source: www.cwru.edu.
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–17
 Performance
Management
Outline
(cont’d)

Figure 9–5c
Source: www.cwru.edu.
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–18
 Performance Appraisal Methods (cont’d)
 Alternation ranking method
– Ranking employees from best to worst on a
particular trait, choosing highest, then lowest,
until all are ranked.
 Paired comparison method
– Ranking employees by making a chart of all
possible pairs of the employees for each trait and
indicating which is the better employee of the
pair.

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–19

 Alternation Ranking Scale

Figure 9–6
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–20
 Ranking Employees by the
Paired Comparison Method

Note: + means “better than.” − means “worse than.” For each chart, add up
the number of 1’s in each column to get the highest-ranked employee.
Figure 9–7
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–21
 Performance Appraisal Methods (cont’d)
 Forced distribution method
– Similar to grading on a curve; predetermined
percentages of ratees are placed in various
performance categories.
– Example:
• 15% high performers
• 20% high-average performers
• 30% average performers
• 20% low-average performers
• 15% low performers
 Narrative Forms

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–22

 Performance Appraisal Methods (cont’d)
 Behaviorally anchored rating scale (BARS)
– An appraisal method that uses quantified scale
with specific narrative examples of good and poor
performance.
 Developing a BARS:
– Generate critical incidents
– Develop performance dimensions
– Reallocate incidents
– Scale the incidents
– Develop a final instrument

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–23

 Performance Appraisal Methods (cont’d)
 Advantages of using a BARS
– A more accurate gauge
– Clearer standards
– Feedback
– Independent dimensions
– Consistency

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–24

 Appraisal-
Coaching
Worksheet

Source: Reprinted with permission of

the publisher, HRnext.com; copyright
HRnext.com, 2003.
Figure 9–8
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–25
 Examples of Critical Incidents for
an Assistant Plant Manager

Table 9–1
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–26
 Example of a
Behaviorally
Anchored Rating
Scale for the
Dimension
Salesmanship Skill

Source:Walter C. Borman, “Behavior

Based Rating,” in Ronald A. Berk (ed.),
Performance Assessment: Methods and
Applications (Baltimore, MD: Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1986), p. 103.
Figure 9–9
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–27
 Management by Objectives (MBO)
 Involves setting specific measurable goals
with each employee and then periodically
reviewing the progress made.
1. Set the organization’s goals.
2. Set departmental goals.
3. Discuss departmental goals.
4. Define expected results (set individual goals).
5. Performance reviews.
6. Provide feedback.

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–28

 Computerized and Web-Based
Performance Appraisal
 Performance appraisal software programs
– Keep notes on subordinates during the year.
– Electronically rate employees on a series of
performance traits.
– Generate written text to support each part of the
appraisal.
 Electronic performance monitoring (EPM)
– Having supervisors electronically monitor the
amount of computerized data an employee is
processing per day, and thereby his or her
performance.
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–29
 Potential Rating Scale Appraisal Problems
 Unclear standards
– An appraisal that is too open to interpretation.
 Halo effect
– Occurs when a supervisor’s rating of a subordinate
on one trait biases the rating of that person on
other traits.
 Central tendency
– A tendency to rate all employees the same way,
such as rating them all average.

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–30

 A Graphic Rating Scale with Unclear Standards

Note: For example, what exactly is meant by

“good,” “quantity of work,” and so forth?

Table 9–2
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–31
 Potential Rating Scale Appraisal Problems
(cont’d)
 Strictness/leniency
– The problem that occurs when a supervisor has a
tendency to rate all subordinates either high or
low.
 Bias
– The tendency to allow individual differences such
as age, race, and sex to affect the appraisal
ratings employees receive.

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–32

 How to Avoid Appraisal Problems
 Learn and understand the potential problems,
and the solutions for each.
 Use the right appraisal tool. Each tool has its
own pros and cons.
 Train supervisors to reduce rating errors such
as halo, leniency, and central tendency.
 Have raters compile positive and negative
critical incidents as they occur.

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–33

 Who Should Do the Appraising?
 The immediate supervisor
 Peers
 Rating committees
 Self-ratings
 Subordinates
 360-Degree feedback

© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–34

 Advantages and Disadvantages of Appraisal Tools

Table 9–3
© 2005 Prentice Hall Inc. All rights reserved. 9–35