Uses of Performance Appraisal

1. Uses of Performance Appraisal • Compensation (raises, merit pay, bonuses) • Personnel Decisions (e.g., promotion, transfer, dismissal) • Identification of Training Needs • Research Purposes (e.g., assessing the worth/validity of • selection tests

2. Basic Performance Appraisal Process Conduct a Job Analysis (e.g., specify tasks and KSAs) Develop Performance Standards (e.g., define what is superior, acceptable, and poor job performance) Develop or Choose a Performance Appraisal System

3. Performance Appraisal Process • Observation • Selective Attention • Timing • Structure • Frequency • Storage • Encoding of Information (e.g., categorization) • Short vs. Long-term • Memory • Evaluation • Retrieve Information • Combine information • Decision-making (judgment)

4. Sources of Information • 1) Supervisors (most common) • Role Conflict (e.g., judge and trainer/teacher) • Motivation • Time availability • Friendship • 2)Co-Workers (Peers) • Friendship bias • Leniency • High level of accuracy • Best used as a source of feedback

5. Sources of Information (cont) • 3)Self • Lots of knowledge • Leniency effect • Good preparation for performance appraisal meeting (conducive for dialog) • 4)Subordinates • Biases (e.g., # of subordinates, type of job, expected evaluation from supervisor) • 5)Client • Good source of feedback • Negativity bias

6. Subjective Appraisal Methods (can be used with any type of job) • Relative Methods • Ranking • 1st _____ • 2nd_____ • 3rd _____ • 2) Pair Comparison • Employee-1 _____ versus Employee-2 _____ • Employee-1 _____ versus Employee-3 _____ etc. • Both are difficult to use with a large number of subordinates

7. Subjective Appraisal Methods Absolute Methods • 1)Narrative essay • Unstructured (e.g., content, length) • Affected by the writing ability of supervisors and time availability • Graphic Rating Scale (most common) • _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ • Very Average Excellent • Poor

8. Common Rating Scale Errors • Leniency (positive bias) • X • _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ • Very Average Excellent • Poor • Severity (negative bias) • X • _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ • Very Average Excellent • Poor • Central Tendency (midpoint) • X • _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ • Very Average Excellent • Poor All lead to a restriction in the range of performance scores

9. Halo Error Responsibility Commitment Initiative Sensitivity Judgment Communication Observation of specific behavior (s) (e.g., volunteers to work overtime) High ratings on other performance dimensions

10. Subordinate Characteristics (e.g., age, gender, race, attractiveness) Labels for Subordinate (positive or negative) Supervisor Characteristics (e.g., gender, race, age) Attitudes, Stereotypes Expectations for Subordinate Liking of subordinate Observation of Subordinate Job Performance Selective Attention Encoding of Information Recall Information Evaluate Performance

11. Subjective Appraisal Methods Behavioral Methods (use of critical incidents; examples of good and poor job behavior collected by job experts over time) • Behavior Observation Scales (BOS) • Rate the frequency in which critical incidents are performed by employees • Sum the ratings for a total “performance” score • 1) Assists others in job duties. • _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ • Never Usually Always • Cleans equipment after each use. • _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ • Never Usually Always

12. Objective Appraisal Data • 1) Production Data (e.g., sales volume, units produced) • When observation occurs (timing), and how data is collected • Fairness and relevancy issue • Potential limited variability • Limitations regarding supervisory personnel • 2) Personnel Data • Absenteeism (excused versus unexcused) • Tardiness • Accidents (fault issue)

13. Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS) Process • Generate critical incidents (examples of good and poor job performance) • 2) Place Critical Incidents Into performance dimensions (e.g., Responsibility, Initiative, Safety) • Retranslation Step (do step # 2 again with a separate group of job experts. Discard incidents where disagreement exists as to which dimension in which they belong) • Calculate the mean and standard deviation of each critical incident (discard those with a large standard deviation) • 5) Place critical incidents on a vertical scale

14. BARS (Pros and Cons) • Process involves various employees (increases the likelihood of usage) • Job specificity (different BARS need to be developed for each position) • Not any better at reducing common rating scale errors (e.g., leniency, halo) • Time consuming

15. Performance Appraisal Training • Frequent observation of performance and feedback (both positive and negative) • 2) Recordkeeping (ongoing if possible) • 3) Encourage self-assessment of employees • 4) Focus on behaviors (not traits) • Use specific behavioral criteria and standards • 6) Set goals for employees (specific and challenging ones) • 7) Focus on how to observe job behaviors and provide incentives to do so

16. Legally Defensible Appraisal Systems • Ensure that procedures for personnel decisions do not differ as a function • of the race, sex, national origin, religion, or age of those affected by such • decisions. • Use objective and uncontaminated data whenever they are available. • Provide a formal system of review or appeal to resolve disagreements • regarding appraisals. • Use more than one independent evaluator of performance. • 5) Use a formal, standardized system for personnel decisions. • Ensure that evaluators have ample opportunity to observe and rate performance if ratings must be made. • Avoid ratings on traits such as dependability, drive, aptitude, or attitude. • Provide documented performance counseling prior to performance,-based termination decisions.

17. Legally Defensible Appraisal Systems (cont) 9) Communicate specific performance standards to employees. 10) Provide raters with written instructions on how to complete performance evaluations. 11) Evaluate employees on specific work dimensions, rather than on a single overall or global measure. 12) Require documentation in terms of specific behaviors (e.g., critical incidents) for extreme ratings. 13) Base the content of the appraisal form on a job analysis. 14) Provide employees with an opportunity to review their appraisals. 15) Educate personnel decision-makers regarding laws on discrimination.

18. Factors Affecting Employees Acceptance of Performance Evaluations • Asking for (and using) performance information/input from employees • Ensure a 2-way interaction during the performance appraisal meeting • Provide a way for employees to counter or challenge the appraisal • Sufficient detail and knowledge of employee performance by • supervisors • Consistent use of performance standards across employees • Basing performance evaluation on actual job behaviors • Using performance ratings for personnel decisions (e.g., pay, promotion) (importance of using employee self-evaluations) Importance of rater training

19. Female attractiveness and corporate success GENDER FEMALE MALE REGULAR FAST REGULAR FAST UNATTRACTIVE ATTRACTRIVE RATED ON VARIOUS FACTORS (E.G., ABILITY, INTEGRITY, LIKEABILITY) KEY IS PERCEPTION OF LEVELS OF FEMININITY. IF HIGHLY FEMININE, NOT SEEN AS VERY CAPABLE.

20. Female traits and leadership RATE TRAITS OF TYPICAL MALES RATE TRAITS OF TYPICAL FEMALES RATE TRAITS OF TYPICAL OF LEADERS MALE TRAITS SEEN AS SIMILAR TO LEADERSHIP TRAITS

21. Race Discrimination • WHITES INTERVIEWED BLACK APPLICANTS • MORE DISTANCE • LESS EYE CONTACT • LESS OPEN • BLACKS VIEWED LESS WELL • WHITES INTERVIEWERS TREATED WHITE APPLICANTS THE SAME WAY AS BLACKS • WHITE APPLICANTS VIEWED LESS WELL

22. AGE AND INTERVIEW QUESTIONS QUALIFICATIONS LOW AVERAGE HIGH YOUNG OLD EASIER QUESTIONS ASKED TO OLDER APPLICANTS DESPITE QUALIFICATIONS

23. EFFECT OF LABELS RANDOMLY ASSIGNED LABELS LOW ARMY RECRUITS AVERAGE THIS GROUP HAD BETTER PERFORMANCE SCORES ON VARIOUS MEASURES ALSO VIEWED THEIR LEADERS AS MORE EFFECTIVE HIGH SELP-FULFILLING PROPHECY AT WORK (LEADERS SPENT MORE TIME WITH THE “HIGH” EXPECTATION GROUP)

24. PERCEIVED SIMILARITY IN AND OUT-GROUP BIAS • SELECTION TO THE IN-GROUP • ABILITY • RESPONSIBILITY • 3) TRUST IN-GROUP OUT-GROUP • LESS DESIREABLE JOBS • LESS TIME SPENT WITH SUPERVISOR • TREATED FORMALLY • LOWER PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS • LESS REWARDS • LIKING, SPEND TIME WITH LEADER • CHALLENGING, VISIBLE JOBS • BETTER MEMORY FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR • TREATED WARMLY • PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS • ALLOCATION OF REWARDS

25. Occupations with Highest and Lowest Mean Earnings, 1990 Ranking Occupation % Female Mean Earnings High 1 Physicians 11 $57,166 2 Dentists 5 46,369 3 Lawyers 10 39,132 4 Podiatrists 5 38,402 5 Medical science teachers 17 37,958 6 Law Teachers 13 36,411 7 Securities and financial services sales 17 35,448 8 Airline pilots and navigators 1 34,488 9 Optometrists 6 34,211 10 Medical Scientists 35 33,909 Low 1 Child care workers, private household 98 $4,473 2 Private household cleaners/servants 92 5,530 3 Housekeepers and butlers 95 5,612 4 Child care workers, other 89 6,617 5 Cooks, private household 83 7,082 6 Waiters and waitresses 83 7,095 7 Misc. food preparation occupations 56 7,548 8 Waiters and waitresses’ assistants 46 7,632 9 Teachers’ aides 88 7,628 10 Textile sewing machine operators 93 7,726

26. If everyone were compensated for education and experience to the same degree as White men, the following differences in pay would occur: Projected Pay Adjustments Based on Education and Experience Observed PayProjected PayDifference% Difference Women: Black Latina Asian Native Amer. White Men: Black Latino Asian Native Amer. White $ 10,429 $ 14,367 +$3,983 +37.8 9,725 13,189 +3,464 +35.6 12,432 16,111 +3,679 +29.6 10,052 13,663 +3,611 +35.9 11,213 14,662 +3,449 +30.8 $ 14,372 $ 16,263 +$1,891 +13.2 14,935 16,473 +1,538 +10.3 20,148 21,288 +1,140 +5.7 16,019 17,420 +1,401 +8.7 20,335 21,449 +1,114 +5.5