Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
In this file, you can ref useful information about performance appraisal ratings such as
performance appraisal ratings methods, performance appraisal ratings tips, performance
appraisal ratings forms, performance appraisal ratings phrases If you need more assistant for
performance appraisal ratings, please leave your comment at the end of file.
Other useful material for you:
performanceappraisal123.com/1125-free-performance-review-phrases
performanceappraisal123.com/free-28-performance-appraisal-forms
performanceappraisal123.com/free-ebook-11-methods-for-performance-appraisal
But that was hopefully an isolated incident. Goals and objectives are thus set for the year, and
when the annual performance appraisal comes around, each employee is rated based on the scale
of "does meet expectations" to "exceeds expectations." Sometimes numbered scales are used,
such as 1 (low) to 5 (high). These ratings are generally done by the supervising manager, and as
in the case above, frequently reviewed with the management one level above that. Then a set
organization's managers get together to review everyone's ratings again, and the ranking begins.
This is where it tends to get, shall we say, interesting.
Some of what takes place depends on the size of the organization where the ranking is taking
place. This varies by company, but I've seen it done with a group as small as 15 and as large as
50. When you are ranking professional, white collar positions, it becomes extremely difficult to
determine if employee X, who was a sales person, should be ranked higher or lower than
employee Y, who produces marketing collateral. It is also difficult when one manager wants to
measure on pure counts, such as how many customized pricing approvals were created, and
another wants to measure how much revenue was brought in. Both are quantifiable measures, but
when a salesperson is dependent on the pricing organization producing customized pricing that is
within a reasonable range for their client, the quantity of pricing advisories becomes less
important than the quality of them. These kinds of situations virtually always lead to heated
discussions, even acrimony.
These ranking sessions, though, can hold the future of each employee in their hands. This was
the case with my downsizing example above. It is also the case when the company goes further,
and always eliminates the bottom X percentage (usually 10 percent) of the rankings in each
organization. Yes, there will always be laggards who underperform, and maybe it is best to
simply fire them. However, often, with good management and some training, these laggards can
become good, solid performers. But beyond that, if you continue to eliminate the bottom 10
percent each year, it is not long before you are no longer cutting fat; you are now cutting bone.
Does this continue to make sense? I think not.
As noted in the Bloomberg BusinessWeek article, performance reviews should not be done once
a year. They need to be done frequently, with determinations made on the need for additional
training or perhaps a transfer to a different organization that better suits the skills of an employee
before it gets to the point that the employee may be slated for firing. A manager's job is not
simply to get work done through others; a manager is also responsible for developing his or her
employees, helping them reach their full potential, whether it is within that organization or
another one. This is not a once-a-year item to check off a list. Good managers, those who are true
leaders, are constantly evaluating their employees, having developmental conversations with
them, and working with them to constantly improve performance and perhaps taking on more
responsibility and gaining additional exposure within the company.
In many companies today, performance appraisals are all about what is going wrong. That should
be turned around, so that there is more of a conversation of what is going right, and if it isn't,
how that can be fixed. It should not be about simply getting rid of those who aren't up to par; let's
work to see if we can help those employees through training or additional education before we
determine the next round of layoffs.
==================
1. Essay Method
In this method the rater writes down the employee
description in detail within a number of broad categories
like, overall impression of performance, promoteability
of employee, existing capabilities and qualifications of
performing jobs, strengths and weaknesses and training
needs of the employee. Advantage It is extremely
useful in filing information gaps about the employees
that often occur in a better-structured checklist.
Disadvantages It its highly dependent upon the writing
skills of rater and most of them are not good writers.
They may get confused success depends on the memory
power of raters.
3. Rating Scale
4. Checklist method
Under this method, checklist of statements of traits of
employee in the form of Yes or No based questions is
prepared. Here the rater only does the reporting or
checking and HR department does the actual evaluation.
Advantages economy, ease of administration, limited
training required, standardization. Disadvantages Raters
biases, use of improper weighs by HR, does not allow
rater to give relative ratings
5.Ranking Method
The ranking system requires the rater to rank his
subordinates on overall performance. This consists in
simply putting a man in a rank order. Under this method,
the ranking of an employee in a work group is done
against that of another employee. The relative position of
each employee is tested in terms of his numerical rank. It
may also be done by ranking a person on his job
performance against another member of the competitive
group.
Advantages of Ranking Method
Employees are ranked according to their
performance levels.
It is easier to rank the best and the worst
employee.
Limitations of Ranking Method
The whole man is compared with another
whole man in this method. In practice, it is very difficult
to compare individuals possessing various individual
traits.
This method speaks only of the position where an
employee stands in his group. It does not test anything
about how much better or how much worse an employee
is when compared to another employee.
When a large number of employees are working,
ranking of individuals become a difficult issue.
There is no systematic procedure for ranking
individuals in the organization. The ranking system does
not eliminate the possibility of snap judgements.