†††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† 4. PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

 

What does it mean to do a good job, and how can you determine if someone is doing one?

 

CRITERION

 

Standard of judging; a rule or test by which anything is tried in forming a

†††† correct judgment respective it.A standard.

In I/O definition (operationalization) of good performance.

 

COMPOSITE CRITERION

 

Brogden & Taylor (1950) Dollar Criterion

1. Job analysis to define subcriteria

†††††† Ft2

†††††† Damage to equipment

†††††† Time of other personnel consumed

†††††† Accidents

†† ††††Quality of finished product

†††††† Errors in finished product

††††††† Ft2 laid

2. Determine which to use

3. Affix dollar amounts

4. Calculate value of employee

 

MULTIDIMENSIONAL

 

CHARACTERISTICS OF CRITERIA: Contamination, Deficiency, Relevance

 

 

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

 

Determination and Documentation of Individual's Performance

Should be tied directly to criteria

 

USES

 

Administrative decisions (promotion, firing, transfer)

 

Employee development and feedback

 

Criteria for research (e.g., validation of tests)

 

Documentation for legal action

 

Training


METHODS

 

Objective Methods

†††

Advantages

†††† Consistent standards within jobs

†††† Not biased by judgment

†††† Easily quantified

†††† Face validity‑bottom line oriented

 

Disadvantages

†††† Not always applicable (teacher)

†††† Performance not always under individual's control

†††† Too simplistic

†††† Performance unreliable--Dynamic

††††††††††† Criterion

 


Subjective Methods:Rating Scales

 

Trait based graphic rating scale

Behavior based:Critical incidents

††††††††††† Mixed Standard Scale

††††††††††† Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale

††††††††††† Behavior Observation Scales

 

Problems:

 

†† Rating errors:Leniency, Severity, Halo

†† Supervisor subversion of system--leniency as a strategy

†† Mixed purposes (feedback vs. administrative)

†† Negative impact of criticism


SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEM OF RATER ERRORS

 

ERROR RESISTANT FORMS

 

Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale, BARS

Behavior Observation Scale, BOS

Mixed Standard Scale, MSS

 

Research does not show these forms to be successful in eliminating errors

 

RATER TRAINING

 

Rater error training: instructs raters in how to avoid errors

 

Reduces halo and leniency error

Less accuracy in some studies

 

Frame of reference training: Give raters examples of performance and correct ratings

Initial research promising in reducing errors (Day & Sulsky, 1995, Journal of Applied Psychology), but too new to tell for certain


SOUND PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL PRACTICES TO REDUCE PROBLEMS

 

Separate purposes

†††† Raises delt with separately from feedback

 

Consistent feedback, everyday

 

Limit criticism to one item at a time

 

Praise should be contingent

 

Supervisors should be coaches

 

Appraisal should be criterion related, not personal


TECHNOLOGY

 

Technology helpful for performance appraisal

 

Employee performance management systems

††††††††††† Web-based

††††††††††† Automatedóreminds raters when to rate

††††††††††† Reduces paperwork

††††††††††† Provides feedback

 

360-degree feedback systems

††††††††††† Ratings provided by different people

††††††††††††††††††††††† Peers

††††††††††††††††††††††† Subordinates

††††††††††††††††††††††† Supervisors

††††††††††††††††††††††† Self

††††††††††† Big clerical task in large organizations to track/process ratings

††††††††††† Web makes 360s easy and feasible

††††††††††† Consulting firms available to conduct 360s

††††††††††††††††††††††† Performaworks

 


LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

 

Barrett and Kernan defensible performance appraisal system

 

Job analysis to define dimensions of performance

Develop rating form to assess dimensions from prior point

Train raters in how to assess performance

Management review ratings and employee appeal

Document performance and maintain detailed records

Provide assistance and counseling

 

Werner and Bolino (1997, Personnel Psychology) analysis of 295 court cases

 

Organizations lost 41% of discrimination cases overall

Organizations using multiple raters lost only 11%

Safe system

††††††††††† Job analysis

††††††††††† Written instructions

††††††††††† Employee input

††††††††††† Multiple raters

 

Employee input leads to better attitudes, even when ratings are lower

 

Copyright Paul E. Spector, All rights reserved,July 22, 2002.