110 likes | 260 Views
Performance Appraisal systems. Team B3: Paula Urrego-Riveros David Ibagon Lydia Duro-Emanuel Sabrina Tsai Chi-Wen Shih Nazish Leghari. Agenda. Definition and Purpose of PA Pros and cons (Behavior, motivation, teamwork) Find what PA lacks that leadership theory has
E N D
PerformanceAppraisal systems Team B3: Paula Urrego-Riveros David Ibagon Lydia Duro-Emanuel Sabrina Tsai Chi-Wen Shih Nazish Leghari
Agenda • Definition and Purpose of PA • Pros and cons (Behavior, motivation, teamwork) • Find what PA lacks that leadership theory has • Suggest how PA could be aligned to leadership theory • Conclusion
Definition and Purpose Definition: • Evaluation of performance • Achieve individuals goals • Organizational goals • Period of time Purpose: • Increase organizational performance • Appraisal individual contribution • Detect lack of skills of employees • Set future plans or objectives (Training) Torrington, et al. (2005)
Positive Aspect about Performance Appraisal Ferris, et al. (1995)
Negative Aspect about Performance Appraisal Ferris, et al. (1995); Redman and Wilkinson (2001); Torrington et. al (2005)
What is PA lacking that Leadership theory has • Dependence & Demands on Supervisor (Decision making by Leadership) • Bias • Lack of communication • Emotional Issues • Hierarchal divide
What should be modified in order to align PA to Leadership theory • Engaging • Action Based • Being fair • The balancing act • 360 Degree Appraisal Notes WMG, (2011)
Performance Appraisal (360 Feedback) Supervisor / Boss Other Boss Internal Customers Peers/Co-workers External Customers Skip-Level Reports Subordinates/Direct reports Suppliers McCarthy and Garavan, 2001
Team suggestions • Organization and employee objectives • Training • Frequency of appraisal • Maintaining records • Measurement system • Conducting the appraisal • Pay for Performance • Legal Issues Boice and Kleiner, (1997)
Conclusion • Creates a Learning experience. • PA is a powerful tool that could be used to identify potential leaders in an organization.
References • Boice and Kleiner., (1997). Designing Effective Performance Apprasial System. Volume 46,6 pp. 5 • McCarthy A. & Garavan T. (2001) “360 feedback process : performance, improvement and employee career development” Journal of European Industrial Training V. 25 N. 1 pp5-32 • Ferris, G. R., Rosen, S. D. and Barnum, D. T. (1995) Handbook of human resource management. Oxford: Blackwell. • Lepsinger, R and Lucia, A (1997). 360 degree feedback and performance appraisal. The art of science of 360 Feedback. pp. 6 • Notes WMG, (2011). [http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/wmg/ftmsc/modules/modulelist/le/sessions/performance_management/how_to_improve_pa/]. [last updated 24 November 2006].[Accessed 15 February 2011] • Prowse, P. and Prowse, J. (2010) The Dilemma of Performance Appraisal. In: Taticchi, P. eds. • Redman, T. and Wilkinson, A. (2001) Contemporary human resource management : text and cases. Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall. • Torrington, D., Hall, L. and Taylor, S. (2005) Human resource management. 6th. Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall. • Towers, B. (1992) The Handbook of human resource management. Oxford: Blackwell.