Performance Evaluation Procedures and Tools

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Literature Review
The text of the interview
Critical analysis
Recommendations
Conclusion
Reference List

Introduction

This paper aims to describe and evaluate performance appraisal techniques, used in the United States Army. We are grateful to Lieutenant John Carlyn who agreed to spend time on this interview and share his expertise with us.

Furthermore, in this paper we are going to make recommendations which can improve performance procedures and tools in this organizations. Despite the fact that a great number of scholarly works have been dedicated to the study of performance appraisal, there is no universal pattern that would guarantee an objective evaluation of performance.

Literature Review

In recent years, performance appraisal has become one of the most crucial tasks for many HR managers as it is instrumental for good employee retention and organizational performance. A well-developed remuneration system is crucial for the reduction of staff turnover because a person, who feels that he/she is valued by the management, is rather unlikely to search for a different job (Whiting et al 2008).

More importantly, an effective performance appraisal system helps to work out training programs for the employees. If the manager carefully monitors and evaluates a person’s performance throughout a certain period of time, for example, three or four months, he/she will be able to see which skills he should acquire or elaborate.

During the last decade, many leading companies decided to take a new approach to performance appraisal. It became evident that the evaluation of performance, which relies only on numerical data, leads to job dissatisfaction and high turnover rates.

The thing is that the volume of employee’s output often depends upon many out-of-control factors such the functioning of supply chain, the structure of organization, the efficiency of the managers and so forth.

Thus, quantitative assessment of performance does not fully reflect the skills of the employee and his contribution to the company’s successes. For this reason, both scholars and managers tried to map out more efficient performance appraisal methods.

On the whole, job performance is measured according to such parameters as quantity, quality, time and cost. One of the most important parts of performance assessment is job analysis. At this stage, the manager has to identify the skills, abilities and knowledge, required from a person (Goel, 2008, p 153). During job analysis it is vital to single out those quantitative and qualitative characteristics which can be measured.

At present, there are a great number of performance evaluation methods. In recent years, 360-degree feedback has become increasingly popular. It can be explained by the fact that many organizations attach much importance to quality management.

The essence of this technique lies in the following: the performance appraisal of an employee is based on the feedback, provided by his/her colleagues, customers, subordinates and the executive officers (Schneier et al, 1995, 208). In their article Steven Whiting and his colleagues (2008) maintain that a manager should focus not only on a task performance of an employee, but also on his interactions with other coworkers.

For example, if he/she helps other employees, who cannot cope with tasks, the manager ought to include this information in the assessment report.

Furthermore, the scholars argue that such criterion as organizational loyalty should also be taken into consideration by people, who conduct performance appraisal (Whiting et al, 2008). Overall, the framework, proposed by the authors, is supposed to enhance employee’s satisfaction with their job and motivate them.

This method aims to evaluate various qualitative characteristics of person’s performance such as teamwork, leadership, customer satisfaction. There are other strategies for assessing the quality of employee’s job performance; yet this one is the most accurate and objective.

The greatest challenge, faced by both managers and employees is subjectivity and bias. There is no performance appraisal technique that completely eliminates them. 360-degree assessment seems to us as the most useful tool for performance assessment.

Thus, we have analyzed theoretical approaches to performance appraisal. At this point, it is vital for us to show how it is done in practice. For this purpose, we have interviewed Lieutenant John Carlyn of the United States Army, who explained the principles of performance appraisal in this organization.

The text of the interview

During this interview, we have asked Lieutenant John Carlyn about performance appraisal strategies, applied in the United States Army. In particular, we inquired about various stages of performance of appraisal and the dimensions according to which job performance is measured.

The transcript of the interview

How many individuals work for the organization?

At the moment, the personnel of the US Army number more than half a million people. It is one of the largest organizations in the world. I assess the performance of fifty people, who are under my command.

How often are appraisals conducted?

The appraisals are performed on an annual basis.

Are appraisals formal, informal, or a combination of both?

Well, I try to combine both formal and informal assessment. There is a standard evaluation form that helps measure task performance.

Each member of the personnel receives my performance appraisal report at the end of October. However, I also try to discuss the results with each of my subordinates. You know, the person needs to know exactly which areas of his performance need improvement and in some cases, a standardized report is not sufficient.

Is a standard evaluation form that is used? If so, is it used consistently?

Yes, I’ve said before, we do use performance evaluation form; it is a tool, used to monitor and document performance of each personnel member.

What dimensions of performance are evaluated? Why?

There are several dimensions which ought to be measured: task or mission performance, interpersonal skills, leadership qualities, technical efficiency, and the behavior, which is not directly related to a person’s duties.

While evaluating the performance of each subordinate, do you employee a 360 degree assessment?

Well, yes, I’m aware of this technique, I do take into consideration the feedback, provided by a person’s peers. This helps to better evaluate his teamwork and interpersonal skills. However, the use of 360 degree assessment is not mandatory; it is optional.

You have mentioned the behavior, which is not associated with immediate duties. What exactly do you mean?

You know, a soldier of the US Army must be perfect not only in terms of professionalism but in terms of ethics. Every incident that can affect the public image of this organization is documented and taken in account by the performance assessor.

You have mentioned interpersonal skills. What kind of skills do you refer to?

Well, I mean person’s willingness to help those people, who lag behind, or leadership skills such as ability to motivate others.

What do you like and dislike about conducting performance appraisals?

You know, I don’t like the fact that performance appraisal has to be based on someone’s subjective opinion. Although, appraisal methods are standardized, there is still a room for bias.

In fact, there are many cases, when people disagree with the results of assessment, and in the long term it can give rise to many workplace conflicts. This is why I combine both formal and informal assessment. It’s important to discuss the results of performance appraisal with the subordinates.

What components of the evaluation process need improvement?

It seems to me that performance appraisals should be conducted more than once a year. Annual assessments can overlook many important details. Some of person’s achievements can go unregistered and this often leads to job dissatisfaction. Besides, I think that mission-based performance assessment does not reflect personal progress.

Could you please speak more about this mission-based assessment

As you know, the performance is evaluated according to a certain grading scale that includes such points as Excellent, Adequate, Satisfactory and Unsatisfactory.

When you evaluate the soldier’s performance from a mission-based point of view, there are basically only two grades, excellent and unsatisfactory. The thing is that the results of any task or mission usually depend on many out-of-control factors. This is why it is sometimes quite difficult to conduct performance appraisals.

Critical analysis

This interview indicates that such an organization as the United States Army has a very complicated system of performance appraisal. It includes both quantitative and numerical data, which helps to measure a person’s reflection throughout a certain period of time, namely a year.

Yet, as John Carlyn pointed out the performance appraisal, conducted on an annual basis, does not fully reflect the achievements that an employee has made during this time. Probably, this is the reason why so many companies carry out performance appraisals at least twice or thrice a year (Goel, 2008).

The second aspect, which requires in-depth examination, is the so-called mission-based assessment. Overall, this approach is based on the premise that an individual performance can be measured according to the outcomes of a certain task or mission. This method is more suitable for evaluation of team performance, rather than that one of an individual.

As John has outlined in his interview, the outcomes of a mission or operation are influenced by many external factors, such as the reliability of intelligence data, meticulousness of planning, or time available for this mission. Those people, who work in the army, are usually dependent on someone else. Therefore, we can say that mission-based performance appraisal is not the most effective tool.

Recommendations

On the basis of this discussion, we can make the following recommendations. First, it might be prudent to conduct performance appraisal two or three times a year. It has to be admitted that this change would entail a great deal of paperwork but in this way a person will be better able to see which areas of his skills need improvement.

Besides, an annual assessment can be too superficial, it does not register the development of employee’s skills or his/her minor achievements. As a result, it forces a person to a belief that he/she is not valued according to his merits and this is one of the problems, which any organization should avoid.

Secondly, one has to find an alternative to a mission-based performance appraisal. Although this technique is not used very often, it may influence a person’s attitude toward the organization, itself. Such approach to performance evaluation can be regarded as unfair and biased because it aims to evaluate the outcomes of a mission or a task, but it cannot measure individual contribution of each member of the staff.

Finally, we can argue that the US Army should make a more efficient use of 360 degree appraisal. This strategy is registering and evaluating qualitative aspects of an employee’s work. It appears that this method will be quite applicable for the needs of a military institution.

Conclusion

Thus, in this paper we have discussed strategies of performance evaluation, used by modern organizations. Much more attention is now being paid to the qualitative dimensions of performance but in fact, there are only very few methods, which enable to measure these qualitative characteristics. This is one of the key difficulties, faced by HR managers.

This research focuses on a very specific type of organization: the United States Army. This is one of those cases, when a performance appraisal has to be based mostly on qualitative characteristics. The interview, which we have conducted, shows that evaluation of performance is one of the most challenging tasks, faced by the commanding officers.

The problem is that an annual performance appraisal does not always include the progress that a person made during this time. In this paper, we have proposed a framework, which relies on 360-degree assessment. This model can improve the organizational performance and enhance job satisfaction.

Reference List

Goel V. (2008). Performance Appraisal and Compensation Management: A Modern Approach. NY: PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd.

Muchinsky, P. M. (2009) Psychology applied to work: An introduction to industrial and organizational psychology. Summerfield, NC.: Hypergraphic Press

Schneier. C. E. Shaw. D. Beatty. R. & Baird L. 1995 Performance measurement, management, and appraisal sourcebook. Ney Jersey: Human Resource Development.

Whiting, S. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Pierce, J. R. (2008). Effects of task performance, helping, voice, and organizational loyalty on performance appraisal ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 9(1), 125-139.

Click Here To Order Now!