Literature Review of Research related to Performance Appraisal

Literature Review of Research related to to execution estimateThis chapter served as the foundation for the development of this study. An overview of the extensive historical research related to death penalty idea,as tumefy as the theories of need related to doing appraisals is nonpluse.2.1 implementation Appraisal constitution2.1.1 Meaning of surgery at that place ar distinguishable views on what performance means.According to Brumbrach (1988, cited in Armstrong, 2000) execution can be cropions as well as their resultants. Behaviours originate from a per occasion and convert performance from a concept to an act. Not just the instruments for results, behaviours ar to a fault outcomes in their own right the product of mental and physical effort applied to tasks and can be judged apart from results.The above definition removes performance to be involving both the activitys, in other word behaviours, taken during the process in attempting to achieve remainders and returns obtained as a result from the effort.Following this, Armstrong (2000) emphasizes the need for managers to deal with the potential of employees and chance uponments while managing performance.To determine if performance has been achieved, measures nurse to be developed to appraise the accomplishments and establish the rate at which it has been accomplished. Above in either, performance should be well-nigh the decision and action taken with available information at any existing situation.2.1.2 Performance Management clay (PMS)Noe et al (2006) define performance counsel as the process through which managers ensure that employees activities and outputs ar congruent with the organisations goals.The concept of performance management has contributed a pass around in the development Human Resource Management in recent years. The concept was first coined by Beer and Ruh in 1976. How eer, it is barely in the mid mid-eighties that it had been accepted as a distinctive approa ch.Performance Management is widely being employ in organizations so as to obtain the best results by trying to improve performance of the cookforce. Goals and standards are being planned well beforehand in order to get satisfied outcomes.2.1.3 Performance Appraisal System (PAS)Performance appraisal alike known as performance appraise, formally documents the achievements of an individual with needs to hang targets. It is a comp nonpareilnt of PMS. The system has become an essential management tool in todays organizations. Managing employees performance can be said to be as main(prenominal) as any other work that all managers run away during the year.Grote (2002) describes performance appraisal as a formal management tool that helps evaluate the performance quality of an employee. Schneier and Beatty as cited in Patterson (1987) define it as a process which apart from evaluating also identifies and develops human performance.According to Karol (1996) performance appraisal inc ludes a communication event planned between a manager and an employee particularizedally for the purpose of measureing that employees past job performance and discussing areas for future improvement.2.1.4 History of PASThe history of performance appraisal is fairly concise. Appraisal really began with the Second World War. It was utilizationd to assess results.Dulewicz (1989) says that there is an indispensable human inclination to judge the work of other people as well as ones own work.It can thus be said that appraisal is both unavoidable and universal. Even without the existence of a planned appraisal system, one can have a magnetic inclination and find it natural to evaluate the job performance of another easily and subjectively.Performance appraisal was seen in the industry in early 1800. Randell (1994) identified its use in Robert Owens use of silent monitors in the cotton mills of Scotland. The Silent monitors were in terms of blocks of wood with different colours painte d on apiece visible side and it was hung above each employees work station. At the end of the day, the block was turned so that a particular colour, representing a grade of the employees performance, could be seen by everyone.(Weise and Buckley, 1998) Subjective evidence indicates that this practice had a facilitating influence on subsequent behavior.Spriegel(1962) and Weise and Buckley(1998) affirm that by the early 1950s, 61 per cent of organizations unbrokenly employ performance appraisals, compared with only 15 per cent immediately after World War II. DeVries et al. (1981) appointed out the primary tool to be the trait-rating system, which poree on past actions, using a standard, numerical scoring system to appraise people on the radical of a previously established suffice of dimensions. The briny tool, utilize under here was trait rating system.The concept of Management by Objective (MBO) was first proposed by Peter Drucker in 1954.Mcgreror then used it in the appraisal process in the year 1957. He suggested that, employees should be appraised on the basis of short-term goals, rather than traits, which are jointly set by the employee and the manager. Weise and Buckley (1998) affirm that this method was very advantageous as it lead to a transformation of a managers role from being a judge to a helper. It also showed that employees productivity ultimately leads to performance. However, when employees performance was measured on the basis of units, then MBO was ineffective. This lead to new development in the appraisal process and the employees were evaluated on the basis of behaviour base rating. Smith and Kendall (1963) designed the first tool to focus on behaviors and it was the Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS).2.1.5 Modern AppraisalTodays performance appraisal process has evolved into a to a greater extent(prenominal) planned and formal process. It is used as a means which helps identify and compare employees performances. The apprais als data are frequently being used to review several Human Resources decision. It can determine any need for career developments and trainings. For issues such as raise in salaries, rewards and promotions, employers are more and more do use of the appraisals results.Appraisals have now developed into a regular and intervallic system in organizations, normally carried out at least once a year. When talking about the modern approach to appraisal, the term feedback cannot be ignored. The one-to-one discussion between supervisors and hyponyms gives testify to feedback and is referred to as the feedback process. This process can improve communication all through the organization but also it can reinforce employees relationships with their superiors. This is so as the workers have the emotional stateing that they do matter to the organization and that their needs are being taken into consideration.The performance appraisal system has most likely become a future-oriented approach as i t aims to improve future performances by considering present problems.2.1.6 Purposes of PASThe most known purpose of performance appraisal is to improve performance of individuals. Cummings and Shwab (1973) held that performance appraisal has basically two important purposes, from an organizational point of view and these are1. The maintenance of organizational control2. The measurement of the efficiency with which the organizations human resources are being utilized.Still, there are also a compartmentalization of other declared purposes for appraisal as per Bratton and Gold (2003) and Bowles and Coates (1993) and some are improving motivation and morale of the employees, clarifying the expectations and reducing the uncertainty about performance, find rewards, identifying training and development needs, improving communication, selecting people for promotion, discipline, planning corrective actions and setting targets.Furthermore, Bowles and Coates (1993) conducted a postal survey of 250 West Midland companies in June 1992, where organizations were asked questions pertaining to the use of Performance management in the organization. These questions included the apparent purpose of PA in the management of work, its strengths and weaknesses. Through their survey they found out that PA was beneficial in the following ways PA was favorable in developing the communication between employer and employee It was useful in defining performance expectations It helped identified training needs.Performance appraisal can thus be used as an effective tool to improve employees job performance by identifying strengths and weaknesses, meeting of targeted goals and providing training if needed.2.1.7 Techniques of PASThere are several commonly used techniques of performance appraisal as reviewed by Oberg (1972). They are as followsEssay Appraisal, Paired Comparison, Graphic Review Scale, dull Checklist, Person to Person Rating, Forced Ranking, Critical Incidents.The above techn iques were the traditional ones but the methods most widely used today are Management by ObjectivesEmployees are requested to put up their own performance objectives. They are then judged through these objectives by verifying whether they were satisfied or not. However, in many cases organizations themselves set their standards and goals even after consulting employees. 360 Degree Feedback360 Degree Feedback is a process in which employees receive private and anonymous feedback from the people who work around them.Kettley (1997) says that when an individual receives feedback from different sources of the organization, including peers, subordinate staff, customers and themselves, the process is called 360 degree feedback or appraisal. The employee is then assessed using those received feedback2.1.8 FeedbackFeedback about the effectiveness of an individuals behavior has long been recognized as essential for acquire and for motivation in performance-oriented organizations. Ilgen et al .(1979) stated that feedback is considered as an important tool in performance appraisalprocess. Feedback can be a useful tool for development, especially if it is specialised and behaviorally oriented, as well as both problem-oriented and solution-oriented according to Murphy and Cleveland (1995). One of the basic purposes of formal appraisal process is the provision of clear and performance based feedback to employees. Carroll and Scheiner(1982) affirmed that some organisations use feedback as a development tool,while in some organizations it is used for merit evaluation and compensation adjustment. McEvoy and Buller(1987),Wohlers and Gallagher( 1990) contributed that feedback is very essential for the employees because it forms a baseline for the employees which help them to get a review of their past performance and chance to improve their skills for the future. Ashford (1986) says that when feedback is considered as a valuable resource, then only the individuals feel motivated to seek it, which helps in reducing uncertainty and provides information relevant to ego-evaluations. There is also evidence that performance feedback (if given appropriately) can lead to inviolable improvements in future performance (Guzzo et al., 1985 Kopelman, 1986 Landy et al., 1982)Fedor et al. (1989) Ilgen et al. (1979) identified that it is commonly accepted that negative feedback is perceived as less accurate and thus less accepted by recipients than positive feedback.Furthermore, Fedoret al. (1989) found that negative performance appraisal feedback was less accepted and perceived as less accurate than positive performance appraisal feedback.2.1.9Views Organisations Employees have on P.A.SEvans (1986) asserts that many employees believe that their promotion or salary increments depend mostly on their performance. Employees therefore are in a dilemma and consider this situation as survival of the fittest. They know for a fact that, their performance will only be taken into consideration at the end of the day. So, in order to grow in the company they need to be proactive towards their work. The feedback the employee receives from his superior, may simply describe the level of performance achieved.Hence, it becomes important for the managers to conduct the appraisal technique correctly. Employees can only accept criticism if it is useful and important to them. Managers should therefore know how to give information regarding progress made in performance and how to present criticism as well.Meyer et.al (1965) carried out a study in General Electric Company where certain points relating to performance feedback was highlighted. In this study, 92 employees were appraised by their managers on two occasions over two weeks. The study was carried out using questionnaires, interviews and observation. The first appraisal highlighted performance and salary while the second one underlined performance and improvement. It was observed that lots of criticisms were poi nted out by the managers, which lead to defensive behaviour of the employees. The conclusion of the study was that criticism leads a negative impact on the motivation and performance of the employees. Also feedback sessions designed to improve performance should not at the same time consider salary and promotion issues.Ilgenet. al (1979) make up that employees who believe that the appraisal system is under any kind of prejudice, are most likely to be dissatisfied by their work and can also leave their jobs.On the other hand Murphy and Cleveland highlighted one possible reason for the widespread dissatisfaction with performance appraisal in organization as the systems used by these help neither them nor their employees in meeting the desired goals.Landy et al. (1978), Klasson et al. (1980), and Tang and Sarsfield-Baldwin (1996) found evidence that the assignment of raters influences perceptions of fairness and accuracy in performance appraisals and and so about the whole process i tself.Nevertheless, according to Jacobs, KafryZedeck (1980) employees perceive PA to give them a proper understanding of their duties and responsibilities towards the organization. Likewise, organization sees it as a tool to assess employees on a common ground and one which helps in salary and promotions decisions, training and development programs.In many circumstances appraisal plans are understand by managers as a system that helps an organization to change regular priorities and usual ways of working and in so doing to alter its strategic direction. Hence, in circumstances where change cannot be attained by managerial proclamation, appraisal takes on the character of an engine of change. When managers look at appraisal from this angle they consent that it will bring about a change in strategic direction and organizational behaviour.Researchers have suggested that reaction to performance appraisal is critical to the word sense and use of a performance appraisal system (Bernard in Beatty, 1984 Cardy Dobbins, 1994 Murphy Cleveland, 1995). Reactions may even contribute to the validity of a system (Ostroff, 1993). Cardy and Dobbins (1994) suggest that with dissatisfaction and feelings of unfairness in process and inequity in evaluations, any performance appraisal system will be doomed to failure (p. 54). Murphy and Cleveland (1995) stated that reaction criteria are almost always relevant, and an unfavorable reaction may doom the carefully constructed appraisal system.2.1.10Benefits of PASPossibly the most important benefit of appraisal is that, in the speed up and pressure of todays working life, it allows the supervisor and subordinate to have time out for a one-on-one discussion of indispensable work problems that might not other than be addressed.Likewise, the existence itself of an appraisal system indicates to employees that the organization is genuinely concerned with their individual performances and advancement. This only can have a positive impact on the employees sense of worth, commitment and belonging.Appraisal offers the rare chance to focus on employment activities and objectives, to spot and correct existing problems and to enhance favorable future performance. therefrom the performance of the whole organization is improved.Performance appraisal usually provides employees with acknowledgment for their work efforts, if any and as a result it brings them satisfaction. Actually, there are facts load-bearing(a) that human beings will even prefer negative recognition in rather than no recognition at all.During performance appraisals, feedbacks are obtained. These provide racy information on whether training and development needs should be considered. The presence or lack of working skills, for example, can become very obvious. The supervisor and subordinate can thus agree upon any demand for training. As far as the organization is concerned, the overall appraisal results can provide a regular and efficient training needs audit for the organization as a whole.The information obtained from appraisals can also give indication on an organizations recruitment and plectron practices. This can be done by screening the performance of recently hired workers. The general quality of the workforce can also be monitored by assessing any improvement or decline performances. Changes if needed in the recruitment strategies can then be considered.2.1.11Criticisms related to P.A.SThere are several problems in the actual performance appraisal primarily due to rater bias. Some supervisors are too lenient and thus have a tendency to rate all employees positively rather than really measuring their performance. Another problem is the central tendency where supervisors position the majority of the employees in the center of the performance scale, even though they deserve a better or worse grade.The halo effect is another error usually made during appraisals. This arises when a supervisors general feeling about an employee influences the overall judgment.Performance appraisal systems are at times criticized for weaknesses in the system design itself. Sometimes they assess the wrong behaviours or consequences, or focus on employees personality instead of on their work performances. Very often standards for appraising employees are not related to the work itself. As a consequence employees may not likely be interested in such a system where performance standards are unsuccessful in highlighting important aspects of the jobs.Some organizations founds that PAS is a constant cause of tension, since evaluative and developmental concerns come often into disagreement. It is said that the appraisal can serve only one of them at a time. Also they find it dehumanize and demoralize to pass on judgments which then become source of apprehension and stress to employees.Many researchers such as Derven (1990) expressed doubts about the effectiveness and dependability of the appraisal process. Some found the process t o be imperfect in nature.Moreover, Gabris Mitchell found a disturbing bias in the appraisal process called the Matthew Effect. It is said to take place in cases where employees keep on receiving the same evaluation each year. This denotes that there is the belief that if an employee has work well, he or she will continue on that pace. The Matthew Effect advocates that even if employees struggle to do well, their past appraisal reports will discriminate their future progress. accuracy is important in appraisals. However for raters to appraise employees accurately, they should give unbiased results. Unfortunately accurate ratings are quite impossible as researchers affirm that personal liking, look, former impressions, gender and race will certainly manipulate appraisals, that is, there will always be some kind of biasness.2.1.12Conclusion about PASThere are diverse schools of beliefs as to the validity and reliability of performance appraisals. While Derven (1990) doubts about its d ependability, Lawrie (1990) finds it to be the most important aspect of organizations.A recent survey concluded that more than fifty per cent of the workforce wishes that their supervisors list the performance objectives much more specifically and clearly. The same survey revealed that 42 per cent of the employees were rather disappointed their organisations performance appraisal system.Many supervisors make the wrong use of appraisal. They use it as a punitive tool rather than helping their subordinates to improve their performance and kill work problems.According to Shelley Riebel, as in the Detroit News (April 11, 1998) often managers are unsuccessful to explain what they really expect from their employees and fail to well describe the criteria used for assessing their performance.The data obtained during the appraisal process should be wisely used and considered. Still, for performance appraisal to be successful, it is important to carry it out on a regular and consistent basis . This will allow supervisors to follow and review employees work. Raters often make the mistake of emphasizing too much on mistakes committed by the employees. Rather, if ever some problem is spotted by the supervisor, the issue should be discussed with the employee concerned and both should try work on a solution.2.2 pauperization Performance Appraisal System2.2.1 Introduction to MotivationMotivation can be defined as the driving force that moves us to pursue a certain goal, or trigger a particular action. It can be considered as the desire inwardly a person causing him or her to act. People generally act for a motive and that is to achieve a specific objective.Two main types of motivation have been noted, namely intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation comes from the inner self while extrinsic motivation arises when external factors require one to perform something.According to Passer and Smith (2004) the concept motivation refers to a course of action that influences the determination, direction and dynamism of goal-directed behaviour. Similarly, Kreitner and Kinicki (2007) assert that motivation represents psychological practices that stimulate voluntary actions. In the work context, as confirmed by Coetsee (2003), motivation entails the facility of individuals and groups to put much effort so as to achieve organizational goals. From the above, it can be construed that there exists no single and general definition for motivation. Yet, Boje and Rosile (2004) regard motivation as an authoritarian ideology, a way to manipulate performance and where visions of self-actualisation need gratification. This view might be too negative to consider, but the rise in capitalism has been driven by high concentration motivation programmes which sometimes turn employees into production machines.2.2.2 Motivation and P.A.S in Organisation TodayMotivation can be the key to a successful organization. It is often claimed that the best businesses have the best motivat ed workers. Well motivated employees are said to be more productive and perform quality work. It remains however one of the most challenged tasks for managers to motivate their staffs as everyone is unique. A supervisor should strive to tie in the companys goals together with the employees individual goals through performance management. Moreover, the whole performance appraisal process and its result can affect an employees motivation. As highlighted by Cummings and Swabs (1973), employees performance is the outcome of the employees motivation to perform. In an organisational context, the performance is appraised by assessing the employees aptitudes and potentials to achieve the set goals.2.2.3 Theories of Motivation related to P.A.S2.2.3.1 Edwin Lockes Goal Setting TheoryA main segment for efficiently coaching employees is by using goal setting. Edwin Locke (1968) introduced the Goal Setting Theory whereby employees get motivated to work for the organisation when they are given s pecific and pronounced goals to achieve. This theory emphasizes that hard goals produce a higher level of performance than easy goals. Secondly, particular hard goals produce higher level of output and lastly, behavioural intentions lead to choice behaviour.Many, who study the relationship between performance and motivation in organizations, will agree that goal-setting and explanation creates confidence in the workers. By clearly explaining the meaning of the goals, employees will have a clear view on what the organization wants to achieve. Coetsee (2003) affirms that the most performing workers are goal-directed. Set goals allow employees to accomplish organisational vision, aims and strategic objectives. The assumption made here is that when people recognise and understand what is expected from them and how they are to be met, they will be motivated to achieve them within the time-limit.With regard to coaching, goal-setting theory has been used more than any other as a framework to motivate employees to improve their performance.The early work of Maier (1958) and Meyer et al. (1965) emphasized goal setting in the appraisal process. In a study, Latham et al. (1978) found that consistent with the theorys predictions, employee participation in setting the goals resulted in higher performance than assigning them, not because of greater goal commitment, but rather due to high goals being set. According to Dossett et al. (1979), a similar result was observed with Weyerhaeusers word processing employees.Goals and objectives set by the employers and employees should be discussed regularly. Erez (1977) asserted that for difficult goals to result in high performance, sufficient feedback is very important.2.2.3.2 Behaviour forethought Model (BMM)Cummings and Swabs presented the Behaviour aid Model (BMM) to illustrate how people are motivated to perform efficiently in an organisation. This model emphasises on the significance of outcomes in the motivational process.F ig.1 Behavior Maintenance ModelThis framework shows that goal aspirations results in goal attainment and motivation. When goal attainment is achieved by the employee, it leads to job satisfaction which in turn leads the employee to become motivated.2.2.3.3 superior Vrooms Expectancy theoryExpectancy theory is an idea that was introduced by Victor Vroom. The theory as explained by KreitnerKinicki (2007) is based on the assumption that people are motivated to act in ways that will be followed by valued and desired outcomes. The theory says that an employee might be motivated when there is a belief that a better performance will result in a good performance appraisal which will help in the realisation of personal goals. The theory focuses on motivation as the combination of valence, instrumentality and expectancy. valency is the value of the alleged result. Instrumentality is the point of view of an individual whether he or she will really obtain what they want. It shows that success ful act will eventually lead to the desired result. Expectancy refers to the different level of expectations as well as confidence regarding ones capability. Employees believe that these create a motivational force and this force can be represented by the formula Motivation = Valence x ExpectancyThe theory focuses on three things Efforts and performance relationship Performance and reward relationship Rewards and personal goal relationship2.2.4 Conclusion Performance Appraisal as Motivator?From the above reviews, it can be seen that no such research has been done to show if performance appraisal really acts as a motivator to employees. Bratton and Gold (2003) and Bowles and Coates (1993) claimed motivation to be one of the purposes of appraisals. It remains unconditional to know whether performance appraisal has a role to play in employees motivation. The research will therefore try to answer the following research questionsDoes the Performance Appraisal System affect employees moti vation?Does the system affect more a specific category of employees?How do employees perceive the PAS at the MRA?How do employees perceive feedback?Does the level of importance given to the system directly affect the employees motivation?Does the trust put on the appraiser influences the employees motivation?