subject: Why Traditional Performance Appraisals Are Ineffective [print this page] Coming in at close second only to showing the employee the door (firing an employee), managers consider performance appraisal as the task they are most uncomfortable with. There is nothing surprising about this, though, since the traditional practice of performance appraisal is considerably in need of improvement. As it is, it is not in line with the participation-oriented work environments thriving under the implementations of values, visions, and missions most forward-thinking companies prefer these days. Performance appraisals are often dated practices of a management, operating under an autocratic mode whereby employees are treated like company possessions.
How does a traditional performance appraisal process take place?
The process of review in traditional performance appraisals requires the manager to indite his opinions of a particular staffers performance on a document provided by the HR services department. For some organizations, the staffer is likewise requested to fill-out a self-review to be shared with the supervisor.
As is often the case, appraisals reveal events committed to the managers memory, most of which are recent occurrences. Usually, an appraisal is opinion-based since the measure of true performance would require time and follow-up for proper execution. Most documents used in many organizations require the supervisor to render judgment limited to generalized descriptions like excellent performance (In what way?), displays enthusiasm (How?) and achievement ratings from 1-5, with 1 being the highest.
Taking on the role of judge does not come easy for managers. The discomfort it brings often prompts them to delay the performance appraisal task until it is long overdue. For the HR personnels part, his duties involve developing the form, keeping an official file for the employee, informing supervisors of the due date, and then persistent notification ensues should the review performance be stalled for too long.
An overdue performance appraisal results to a delay in the annual salary increment the employee is supposed to receive since the latter is tied to the evaluation of performance. A delayed wage increase deals a serious blow to the involved staffers motivation. He would begin contemplating his value in the company, thinking that his manager does not care enough to attend to his annual raise.
Why is performance appraisal ineffective?
Performance appraisals pains everyone involved. For the manager, dealing with the discomfort of taking on the judges role affects him negatively. The need to express his opinions on the staffers performance should the latter ask makes him uncomfortable. Also, he may not be skilled enough in giving feedbacks that he may come across as defensive during the evaluation meeting, thus giving the employee the wrong impression that he is being antagonized. As a consequence, most managers withhold their honest feedbacksand this nullifies the purpose of the performance appraisal.
On the part of the staffer whose performance is being appraised, feeling antagonized when his manager comes across as defensive when asked of his opinions, incites him to be defensive as well. If the manager rates his performance below the level he expected, he might be led to think that his manager is castigating him.
