Transcript Chapter 7 Slides

Chapter 7
Appraising and Managing Performance
Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
7-1
Chapter 7 Objectives
Identify advantages/disadvantages of
various performance rating systems
Manage impact of rating errors/bias
on performance appraisals
Identify major legal issues related to
appraising & managing performance
Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
7-2
What is Performance Appraisal?
Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
7-3
Uses of Performance Appraisals
 Administrative purposes
 Developmental purposes
 Question: Better to
combine or separate? [Your
experiences/opinions?]
Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
7-4
Measurement: Type of Judgment

Relative judgments




Compares employees to each other
Ranks employees in a given work area
May ignore actual performance levels
Absolute judgments
 Assesses actual performance levels
 Performance based standards [anchors]
 Easier to defend in court [?]
Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
7-5
Measurement: Focus of Measure

Traits



Focus on individual, not performance
Subject to perceptual biases
Behaviors
 Focus on actual worker behaviors
 BARS [see text] or BABARS [in class]

Outcomes
 Focus on specific outcomes
 MBO
Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
7-6
Measurement Tools
Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
7-7
Measurement


Rater factors largely determine
accuracy [so train your supervisors
and review their results!]
Use primarily supervisor ratings, but
also [particularly for development]:





Self-ratings
Peer reviews
Subordinate reviews
Customer/client reviews
360 feedback
Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
7-8
Measurement Challenges

Rater errors




Halo effect
Range restriction [e.g., central tendency]
Influence of “liking” [personal bias]
Frame-of-reference (FOR) training
 Scenarios, role-playing, videos, etc.
 To “calibrate” raters to same standards
 Reduces inter-rater unreliability
Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
7-9
Measurement: Groups & Teams




Assess group and individual contributions
Use behavioral measures for individuals
Develop individual measures with team input
Keep team measurements balanced
 Financial outcomes are not the only measures
 Look at both outcome and process measures
Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
7-10
Measurement: Legal Issues


Anti-discrimination laws apply to
performance appraisals [as “tests”]
Factors influencing judges’ decisions:





Use of job analysis
Consistency/providing written instructions
Employees can review appraisal results
Agreement among multiple raters
Presence of rater training
Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
7-11
Performance Improvement

Performance results from:




Ability, motivation and situational factors
Performance management should be
an ongoing, day-to-day process
Keep a performance log or diary
When problems arise, explore causes
 Including situational or system factors
 Fundamental Attribution Error
(Actor/Observer Bias)
Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
7-12
How to Determine and Remedy Shortfalls
Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
7-13
Summary and Conclusions





Identify the dimensions of the job that
determine effective performance
Recognize and avoid rating biases
Provide useful, constructive feedback
Keep a performance log or diary with
specific behavioral examples
Manage performance regularly [i.e., don’t
save “laundry list” for annual appraisal]
Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
7-14