I RECENTLY STUMBLED across a phrase that read, “the bad news is time flies; the good news is you’re the pilot”.
What bearing does such a quote have on performance appraisals and their relevance, especially in contemporary times? Consider this analogy in the interim: one day, a prospective employee sits in an interview and professes their abilities and intention to their prospective employer; the employee is recruited and five years later everything that was discussed in the initial interview never materialised. Who should be held responsible?
Performance appraisals are there to eliminate occurrences of the above scenario. It may be defined as the process by which a manager, supervisor or consultant: one, examines and evaluates an employee’s work behaviour by comparing it with “present standards”; two, documents the results; and three, use the said results to provide feedback to the employee with the aim of improvement. Simply put, performance appraisals measure and improve the performance of employees with a focus to increase their future potential and value to the company.
When one reflects upon the revolutionary era of performance appraisals and the ability of such a system, its creation was primarily to justify employee income with little consideration given to the numerous possibilities for employee development and enterprise growth.
Today, we still see the presence of this original attitude relating to performance appraisals and performance management whereby, some individuals and employers believe that a pay cut or a raise should provide the only impetus for employees to perform or improve.
However, if one recalls or conforms to Maslow’s theory on the hierarchy of needs, it is clear that persons are motivated differently.
Present day performance appraisal systems have definitely evolved as seen from the many objectives the appraisal is being utilised to achieve. For example, providing feedback, facilitating promotion decisions, encouraging performance improvement, setting and measuring goals, facilitating layoff or restructuring decisions, counselling poor performers, determining compensation changes, encouraging coaching and mentoring, supporting manpower planning, identifying training needs, validating recruitment decisions, reducing employee grievances and improving overall organizational performance.
One myth that must be clarified is that which says performance appraisals are there to punish or penalise.
A performance appraisal is in fact the backbone and assurance for an organisation’s success. How do you improve or expand if you have no benchmark to measure against? The presence of a performance appraisal within an organisation is beneficial for both the employer and the employee.
For the employer, it shows the worth of the employee; it helps to streamline work process; it helps managers to know the potential of the employees; it assesses employee retention and loyalty and it reduces risk.
For the employees, it gives the chance to interact with management and express their concerns and suggestions; it creates a sense of job satisfaction and motivation; it’s a tool for performance improvement; and finally, it inspires work with team spirit.
The question of relevance has become prevalent due to the challenges with the process.
Recent interactions with some of the professionals within the human resource arena have suggested that organisations are consistently budgeting for performance incentive programmes and bonuses; however, they see no change in productivity. I implore you to consider rectifying the process and refrain from changing the tool. In fact, research suggests that to achieve organisation effectiveness, the extent of enhancing and managing productivity is crucial, with the essence of such productivity being skill and motivation. How else would you propose to measure skill and increase motivation? In such times as the present where the labour market is becoming more competitive, job security and the traditional methods adopted to threaten the concept is no longer an issue of concern for the new professionals.
Therefore, without attempting to explain the various types of appraisals, here are a few recommendations that may provide guidance throughout the process. One, organisations should attempt to strike a balance between standardisation and localisation. We often see persons adopt the overall corporate approach without modification to ensure best-fit within the specific local environment.
Two, provide adequate training to the appraisers both in performance management as well as cross cultural training; especially in light of globalisation. Three, seek to develop a clear method or performance improvement plan to deal with poor performance. Four, develop standards and systems and enforcement controls to ensure the system is followed. What good is a system if no one uses it. I would want to encourage you however, to try where possible to have a system that allows for a minimum of two appraisal reviews a year and not one, as once a year can sometimes be frustrating for managers and their employees and may encourage poor quality reviews and financial leakages when inappropriate or unjustifiable bonuses or incentives.
Additionally, such standards and systems will address the human inclination to judge which in itself creates serious challenges within the workplace, whether these challenges be ethical, legal, or motivational. Having a structured appraisal system ensures that such judgments are fair, defensible, lawful and accurate.
Once we all seek to fulfill our end of the contract and deliver on our jobs and functions, the appraisal process should prove less controversial. We must have the mindset that every job is a self-portrait of the person who did it. I encourage you to autograph your work with excellence.
Have a productive day!
