Critical time at both ends...appraisee and appraiser ---- it is appraisal time

I would like to take some time to share about the function that happened yesterday... I thought of writing something on another burning topic ..... "Appraisals"

For the past two days we had several discussions on only one topic Appraisals... you can see different emotions, expressions, fundas, calculations from both appriasee and appraiser point of view. As an individual very few think about the one time task in a year "Appraisal" while performing their duties. Few of them only realize that they worked more than what they are supposed to only after comparing/looking their ratings with others ratings in a team.

Whoever rated well they try to defend for what they got if anybody raised it as a point or there will not be any conversations or there will not be any regular tea time meetings with other colleagues. It all depends on what kind of situation they are in emotionally or mentally. I heard from some matured (maturity in terms of understanding their situation in the company and team ) guys saying, "It quite common and I don't want to argue with my appraiser".

Whenever I try to think from appraiser point of view I don't end up with a balanced decision to appraise our own team members by satisfying the norms and company policies etc. Then realizes that it is hard time even for the appraiser too. But when you start a new assignment and new task or new company (could be the decision out of current company appraisals) again you don't remember exactly the situations that were there when you had the last appraisals. Again the journey begins towards the day of getting a call from your appraiser.....

I read some articles/blogs while surfing on the internet on appraisals and find out some interesting things on appraisals ( most awaited happening in our work journey) and tried to present here, I hope you also like them.....don't start this if you are pre-occupied with something else.

Few issues in management stir up more controversy than performance appraisal.

There are many reputable sources - researchers, management commentators, psychometricians - who have expressed doubts about the validity and reliability of the performance appraisal process. Some have even suggested that the process is so inherently flawed that it may be impossible to perfect it.

At the other extreme, there are many strong advocates of performance appraisal. Some view it as potentially "... the most crucial aspect of organizational life".

Between these two extremes lie various schools of belief. While all endorse the use of performance appraisal, there are many different opinions on how and when to apply it.

There are those, for instance, who believe that performance appraisal has many important employee development uses, but scorn any attempt to link the process to reward outcomes - such as pay rises and promotions.

This group believes that the linkage to reward outcomes reduces or eliminates the developmental value of appraisals. Rather than an opportunity for constructive review and encouragement, the reward-linked process is perceived as judgmental, punitive and harrowing.

For example, how many people would gladly admit their work problems if, at the same time, they knew that their next pay rise or a much-wanted promotion was riding on an appraisal result? Very likely, in that situation, many people would deny or downplay their weaknesses.
Nor is the desire to distort or deny the truth confined to the person being appraised. Many appraisers feel uncomfortable with the combined role of judge and executioner.

Such reluctance is not difficult to understand. Appraisers often know their appraisees well, and are typically in a direct subordinate-supervisor relationship. They work together on a daily basis and may, at times, mix socially. Suggesting that a subordinate needs to brush up on certain work skills is one thing; giving an appraisal result that has the direct effect of negating a promotion is another.

The result can be resentment and serious morale damage, leading to workplace disruption, soured relationships and productivity declines.

On the other hand, there is a strong rival argument which claims that performance appraisal must unequivocally be linked to reward outcomes.

The advocates of this approach say that organizations must have a process by which rewards - which are not an unlimited resource - may be openly and fairly distributed to those most deserving on the basis of merit, effort and results.

There is a critical need for remunerative justice in organizations. Performance appraisal - whatever its practical flaws - is the only process available to help achieve fair, decent and consistent reward outcomes.

It has also been claimed that appraisees themselves are inclined to believe that appraisal results should be linked directly to reward outcomes - and are suspicious and disappointed when told this is not the case. Rather than feeling relieved, appraisees may suspect that they are not being told the whole truth, or that the appraisal process is a sham and waste of time.

The Link to Rewards - Research has reported that appraisees seem to have greater acceptance of the appraisal process, and feel more satisfied with it, when the process is directly linked to rewards. Such findings are a serious challenge to those who feel that appraisal results and reward outcomes must be strictly isolated from each other.

There is also a group who argues that the evaluation of employees for reward purposes, and frank communication with them about their performance, are part of the basic responsibilities of management. The practice of not discussing reward issues while appraising performance is, say critics, based on inconsistent and muddled ideas of motivation.

In many organizations, this inconsistency is aggravated by the practice of having separate wage and salary reviews, in which merit rises and bonuses are decided arbitrarily, and often secretly, by supervisors and managers.

Basics of Conducting Employee Performance Appraisals

Yearly performance reviews are critical. Organization's are hard pressed to find good reasons why they can't dedicate an hour-long meeting once a year to ensure the mutual needs of the employee and organization are being met. Performance reviews help supervisors feel more honest in their relationships with their subordinates and feel better about themselves in their supervisoral roles. Subordinates are assured clear understanding of what's expected from them, their own personal strengths and areas for development and a solid sense of their relationship with their supervisor. Avoiding performance issues ultimately decreases morale, decreases credibility of management, decreases the organization's overall effectiveness and wastes more of management's time to do what isn't being done properly. Conduct the following activities.

1. Design a legally valid performance review process - The law requires that performance appraisals be: job-related and valid; based on a thorough analysis of the job; standardized for all employees; not biased against any race, color, sex, religion, or nationality; and performed by people who have adequate knowledge of the person or job. Be sure to build in the process, a route for recourse if an employee feels he or she has been dealt with unfairly in an appraisal process, e.g., that the employee can go to his or her supervisor's supervisor. The process should be clearly described in a personnel policy.

2. Design a standard form for performance appraisals - Include the name of the employee, date the performance form was completed, dates specifying the time interval over which the employee is being evaluated, performance dimensions (include responsibilities from the job description, any assigned goals from the strategic plan, along with needed skills, such as communications, administration, etc.), a rating system (e.g., poor, average, good, excellent), space for commentary for each dimension, a final section for overall commentary, a final section for action plans to address improvements, and lines for signatures of the supervisor and employee. Signatures may either specify that the employee accepts the appraisal or has seen it, depending on wording on the form.

3. Schedule the first performance review for six months after the employee starts employment - Schedule another six months later, and then every year on the employee's anniversary date.

4. Initiate the performance review process and upcoming meeting - Tell the employee that you're initiating a scheduled performance review. Remind them of what's involved in the process. Schedule a meeting about two weeks out.

5. Have the employee suggest any updates to the job description and provide written input to the appraisal - Have them record their input concurrent to the your recording theirs. Have them record their input on their own sheets (their feedback will be combined on the official form later on in the process). You and the employee can exchange each of your written feedback in the upcoming review meeting. (Note that by now, employees should have received the job descriptions and goals well in advance of the review, i.e., a year before. The employee should also be familiar with the performance appraisal procedure and form.)

6. Document your input -- reference the job description and performance goalsBe sure you are familiar with the job requirements and have sufficient contact with the employee to be making valid judgments. Don't comment on the employee's race, sex, religion, nationality, or a handicap or veteran status. Record major accomplishments, exhibited strengths and weaknesses according to the dimensions on the appraisal form, and suggest actions and training or development to improve performance. Use examples of behaviors wherever you can in the appraisal to help avoid counting on hearsay. Always address behaviors, not characteristics of personalities. The best way to follow this guideline is to consider what you saw with your eyes. Be sure to address only the behaviors of that employee, rather than behaviors of other employees.

7. Hold the performance appraisal meeting - State the meeting's goals of exchanging feedback and coming to action plans, where necessary. In the meeting, let the employee speak first and give their input. Respond with your own input. Then discuss areas where you disagree. Attempt to avoid defensiveness; admitting how you feel at the present time, helps a great deal. Discuss behaviors, not personalities. Avoid final terms such as "always," "never," etc. Encourage participation and be supportive. Come to terms on actions, where possible. Try to end the meeting on a positive note.

8. Update and finalize the performance appraisal form - Add agreed-to commentary on to the form. Note that if the employee wants to add attach written input to the final form, he or she should be able to do so. The supervisor signs the form and asks the employee to sign it. The form and its action plans are reviewed every few months, usually during one-on-one meetings with the employee.

9. Nothing should be surprising to the employee during the appraisal meeting - Any performance issues should have been addressed as soon as those issues occurred. So nothing should be a surprise to the employee later on in the actual performance appraisal meeting. Surprises will appear to the employee as if the supervisor has not been doing his/her job and/or that the supervisor is not being fair. It is OK to mention the issues in the meeting, but the employee should have heard about them before.