Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

No description
by

Emma De Giorgio

on 9 October 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

Notes
Halo Effect
Recency Effect
Relationship Effect
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
Introduction-
What is performance Appraisal?
Performance appraisal is the evaluation of employee performance against a set of criteria. Key objective is to provide employees with feedback about their performance (Prowse and Prowse 2009; Stone 2013)

Must be integrated as part of a performance management system and aligned toward achieving corporate goals (Karimi, Malik and Hussain 2011)

Show where employees excel, where they can improve and how well they work to achieve strategic objectives (Kondrasuk 2011)

By evaluating employees at regular intervals, it can make a business more efficient and increase employee motivation (Kondrasuk 2011)
Fairness in Performance Appraisal
Activity One
1. Please get into five groups
2. Open the Employee profiles on your desks
3. Read and review all information in the profiles
4. Complete Performance Appraisal
5. Class discussion

Rater Errors
Biases and errors have become an inherent part of Performance appraisal processes at many organisations

Most common are 'Rater Errors'

Rater errors are biases made in performance appraisal by the supervisor, manager or superior who is evaluating the performance

There are six different Rater Errors

(Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012; Vipanchi and Roch 2013)

Activity Two
Rater Errors cont.
1. Work with each of the people on your table. Read each of the parts in order and answer
the question(s) that follow


FUN QUOTES!
Conclusion
References
THANK YOU!
Central Tendency
Leniency/Strictness bias
Prejudice
Increased commitment to organisational activities

Higher job satisfaction. Satisfied employees play a critical role in achieving organisational success

Renewed motivation amongst employees to achieve strategic objectives

Improved employee retention, productivity and workplace culture

Perceptions of Performance Appraisal as biased or unfair is a source of frustration and extreme job dissatisfaction to employees

(Karimi, Malik and Hussain 2011; Salleh et. al 2012; (Thurston and McNall 2010)
Supervisor's rating of a subordinate based on one single factor biases the rating of that same individual based on other factors (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012)

Attractive people are perceived to more likeable, friendly, intelligent, successful and competent than their non-attractive counterparts (James 2000)

Employees with visible body decorations including tattoos and piercings experience more bias during performance appraisal than other employees. Perceived as unintelligent, untrustworthy and unprofessional- negatively impacting their performance appraisal (Dean 2010; Sarlak 2012)
Occurs when an employee’s most recent events have a greater influence on the performance appraisal than overall performance (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012)

One single unfavourable recent event has a negative impact on Performance Appraisal even if overall performance was very favourable (Cintrón and Flaniken 2011)

Very misleading as employees tend to extremely hard leading up to a Performance Appraisal (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012)
When the nature of the rater-ratee relationship influences the performance appraisal more than the subordinate's overall performance (Stone 2013)

Rater is more likely to give a better appraisal to someone they like rather than someone they don't like, even though their performance may be identical (Kondrasuk 2011)

Subjective criteria such as likeability, trustworthiness, ability to get along with others and dependability become more influential in the performance appraisal than the subordinate's actual performance (Duart, Goodson and Klich 1994)
Occurs when a supervisor consistently gives average ratings to subordinates and avoids the favourable and unfabourable ends of the rating scale (Cintrón and Flaniken 2011)

Affects employee morale as average employees are over-compensated and good performing employees are under-compensated (Curtis, Harvey and Rayden 2005)

Consequently affects employee motivation, productivity and commitment to organisational activities

Supervisors may consistently give average ratings to all subordinates because the supervisor believes the performance appraisal process is a waste of time or he/she lacks adequate information and knowledge of the subordinates (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012)


Leniency bias occurs when supervisors consistently give better performance appraisals to subordinates than their performance justifies (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012)

Lenient performance appraisals reduce employee motivation, and make it difficult to provide accurate performance feedback, terminate poor performing employees and identify areas for employee development improvements (Shore and Strauss 2008). Creates feelings of inequity amongst employees (Vipanchi, Mishra, and Sylvia G. Roch 2013)

Raters tend to be more lenient in performance appraisals to not damage their relationship with subordinates or when rating a subordinate for a merit increase or promotion (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012; Stone 2013)

Strictness bias error occurs when supervisors consistently give poorer performance appraisals to subordinates than their performance justifies. Supervisors mainly give deflated appraisal to subordinates due to concerns that employees with consistently good appraisals may replace them in the future (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012)
When a supervisor clearly establishes a positive or negative bias towards a particular individual or group during a performance appraisal (Stone 2013)

"Similar to me" error describes the tendency for superiors to give better performance appraisals to subordinates who are similar to them in terms of gender, age, race, or religion. For example, female superiors tend to give poorer performance appraisals to males than females (Boachie-Mensah and Seidu 2012)
Fairness in Performance Appraisal is critical to achieve job satisfaction and consequently organisational success

The most common sources of error in Performance Appraisals are made by the superior completing the appraisal- Known as Rater Errors

There are six types of Rater Errors:
1. Halo Effect
2. Recency Effect
3. Relationship Effect
4. Central Tendency
5. Leniency
6. Prejudice
Boachie-Mensah, Francis and Peter Awini Seidu. 2012. "Employees' Perception of Performance Appraisal System: A Case Study." International Journal of Business and
Management 7 (2): 73-88. http://search.proquest.com/docview/932073648?accountid=10382.

Cintrón, Rosa and Forrest Flaniken. 2011. "Performance Appraisal: A Supervision Or Leadership Tool?" International Journal of Business and Social Science 2 (17). http://
search.proquest.com/docview/904522995?accountid=10382.

Dean, Dwane H. 2010. "Consumer Perceptions of Visible Tattoos on Service Personnel." Managing Service Quality 20 (3): 294-308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09604521011041998. http://
search.proquest.com/docview/198031702?accountid=10382.

Duarte, Neville T., Jane R. Goodson, and Nancy R. Klich. 1994. "Effects of Dyadic Quality and Duration on Performance Appraisal." Academy of Management Journal 37 (3):
499. http://search.proquest.com/

James Poon, Teng Fatt. 2000. "Attractiveness and Outcomes of Job Interviews." Management Research News 23 (1): 11-18. http://search.proquest.com/docview/223541740?
accountid=10382.

Karimi, Rabia, Muhamad I. Malik, and Saddam Hussain. 2011. “Examining the relationship of performance appraisal system and employee satisfaction”. International
Journal of Business and Social Science 2 (22): 243-248. http://search.proquest.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/906488218/1408BE316CC3746C57A/2?accountid=10382

Kondrasuk, Jack N. 2011. "So what would an Ideal Performance Appraisal Look Like?" The
Journal of Applied Business and Economics 12 (1): 57-71. http://search.proquest.com/docview/866754224?accountid=10382.

Prowse, Peter, and Julie Prowse. 2009. “The dilemma of performance appraisal”. Measuring
Business Excellence 13 (4): 69-77. http://search.proquest.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/208747266/1408C14EFA71BD09131/2?accountid=10382

Salleh, Munir, Aziz Amin, Shaladin Muda, and Muhammad Abi Sofian Abdul Halim. 2013. "Fairness of Performance Appraisal and Organizational Commitment." Asian Social
Science 9 (2): 121-128. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1346924710?accountid=10382.

Sarlak, Mohammad A. 2012. “Emerging Behavioural Challenges in Organisations: Performance Evaluations of Tattooed Employees”. International Journal of the Academy of
Organisational Behaviour Management 2(2): 117-140

Shore, Ted and Judy Strauss. 2008. "The Political Context of Employee Appraisal: Effects of Organizational Goals on Performance Ratings." International Journal of
Management 25 (4): 599-612,778. http://search.proquest.com/docview/233229673?accountid=10382.

Stone, Raymond J. 2013. Managing Human Resources. Queensland, Australia: Wiley & Sons
Australia

Thurston,Paul W.,,Jr and Laurel McNall. 2010. "Justice Perceptions of Performance
Appraisal Practices." Journal of Managerial Psychology 25 (3): 201-228. http://search.proquest.com/docview/215870618?accountid=10382.

Vipanchi, Mishra, and Sylvia G. Roch. 2013. “Assessing the Effects of Rater Self-Construal on Performance Ratings”. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied
147:4, 325-344. http://www.tandfonline.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1080/00223980.2012.694377


‘Since my last report, this employee has reached rock bottom and has started to dig.’

‘I would not allow this employee to breed.’

‘This employee is depriving a village somewhere of an idiot.’

‘This employee is really not so much of a has-been, but more of a definite won’t be.’

‘He would be out of his depth in a parking lot puddle.’

Derived from: www.wesfriesen.com
Full transcript