Judging the usefulness of staff appraisals

It is true the appraisal system has yet to mature. Some companies are confused with the objectives of the scheme - they wonder if the system aims for development or reward? Many managers consider appraisals as one of the most uncomfortable tasks.

A senior manager who has just completed the executive appraisal forms said the exercise was a misrepresentation. He could be right. Elaborate procedures and forms have been developed to help managers review their employees. For example, MBO, (management by objectives) is the best example of that approach.

And, yet, even with this entire goal-setting and scientific appraisal, very few companies are happy with their review system. Commitment to goals does not happen always. There are problems of identification with specific goals by staff.

Some feel the goals are beyond reach. For others, these are not compatible with their own ideas of what the organisation should do. And for some senior executives, goals are outrightly not acceptable. That is the reality!

Surely, one can show how performance appraisals can misrepresent reality? Mistakes are bound to happen. Any failure is not due to the system's fault. It is a matter of how are we handling the process!

If a change process is not handled professionally, it will soon collapse. Can't we have accurate performance appraisal results? Not always. Do not forget that there is a link between motivation strategies and organisation culture.

For instance, one company wanted to save labour costs when awarding pay raises. The HRD was asked to set up a standard profile by which management expected managers to distribute the appraisals in their group.

The plan was like this - a very small percentage will receive the highest possible rating; a slightly larger number will receive the next highest rating, most of the people will be about in the middle and the remaining will be spread at the lower level.

The management was very specific and directed that no more than 10 per cent can receive top rating. The said the organisation explicitly preferred a distribution of appraisal scores, which was pre-determined and subjective.

It was tailor-made and suited the management's wishes. Companies driven by budget and procedure constraints would prefer such a method. Public sector companies adopt a routine method of evaluating staff which is based on traits and attributes.

The results end up with satisfactory scores in large numbers (say 70 per cent) so that every one should get an equal increment based on appraisals. These companies are constrained by guidelines. Unless they work towards adding profit-driven increments to salaries, the staff will not be encouraged to perform better.

Faulty job description: Prac-tically, job analysis and role description should precede performance appraisals. Key performance areas and key tasks listed in job descriptions serve as an input to develop a performance instrument.

Poor job analyses can occur because organisations employ untrained staff to work in the personnel department. This commonly results in errors. Performance appraisal often uses the job summary, which is not updated.

Some job descriptions do not have competency requirement. If the appraisal were based on faulty job description, naturally, the results of the scores would be faulty.

Continuous appraisal: A very common problem in many companies is the inability of the line managers to observe and record the critical incidents of the employee's behaviour throughout the employment period.

Some cases, managers do not have enough support documents showing the contribution of the employees. No employee can be either thoroughly good or totally bad at work in a full year.

Self appraisal: Opportunity must be given to every employee, junior and senior, to review their performance so that he or she could do an instant self-appraisal.

If you make the appraisal report confidential that only keeps the employee in doubt. One has to accept the fact that performance appraisal is a subjective process. So it may be subject to deception in all elements of the process.

Pon Mohaideen Pitchai is a Dubai-based human resources consultant.