水芹菜的功效与作用文献出处：Boachie-Mensah F, Seidu P A. Employees’ perception of performance appraisal system: A ca study[J]. International Journal of Business and Management, 2012, 7(2): p73. 原文
Employees' Perception of Performance Appraisal System: A Ca Study
Boachie-Mensah, Francis O; Seidu, Peter Awini
1. Introduction
In today's competitive business world, it is understood that organizations can only compete with their rivals by innovating, and organizations can be innovative by managing their human resources well. The human resource system can become more effective by having a valid and accurate appraisal system ud for rating performances of employees (Armstrong, 2003; Bohlander &Snell, 2004). Unfortunately, the number of organizations using an effective performance appraisal system (PAS) is limited (Hennesy &Bernadin, 2003).
Perceptions of employees about the targets, outcomes and us of performance appraisal (PA) results would be beneficial depending on a number of factors. For example, employees are more likely to be receptive and supportive of a given PA programme if they perceive the process as a uful source of fe
edback which helps to improve their performance (Mullins, 2007). Employees are likely to embrace and contribute meaningfully to a given PA scheme if they perceive it as an opportunity for promotion, and as an avenue for personal development opportunities, a chance to be visible and demonstrate skills and abilities, and an opportunity to network with others in the organisation. On the other hand, if employees perceive PA as an unreasonable attempt by management to exerci clor supervision and control over tasks they
(employees) perform, various reactions may result. PA will be effective if the appraisal process is clearly explained to, and agreed by the people involved (Anthony et al., 1999). Without adequate explanation or consultation, PA could turn counterproductive. In addition, staff motivation, attitude and behaviour development, communicating and aligning individual and organisational aims, and fostering positive relationships between management and staff are esntial for successful appraisal (Armstrong, 2003).
In order to obtain accurate PA information, raters must provide objective and unbiad ratings of employees. Due to difficulty in developing an accurate performance checklist, managers' subjective opinions are frequently called for. Many organizations u some combination of subjective and objective asssment for actual PA. Yet, there are numerous problems in actual asssment of empl
oyee performance (Corbett &Kenny, 2001). The existence of such problems suggests that PAS may be fraught with bias or errors, resulting in compromid evaluations of employees' accomplishments and capabilities. And the PAS of the institution of study might not be an exception. For a PAS to be perceived as fair, it must be free of bias. It is known that appraisal errors can harm perceptions of pay system fairness by confusing the relationship between true performance differences (Miceli et al., 1991). The importance of effective PA in organizations cannot be over emphasized as appraisals help develop individuals, improve organizational performance and feed into business planning. An understanding of the phenomenon, therefore, in every ctor of human endeavor is imperative. This recognition has raid interest in studying people's perceptions of the quality of PA in organizations (educational institutions inclusive). There, however, ems to be a paucity of credible data on the quality of PA in Ghana's educational ctor. The Ghanaian situation is relatively unexamined in genre
academic literature. This makes it difficult to fashion an appropriate management intervention to address any existing problem, becau the exact dimensions of the challenge and its caus are not known. It is against this backdrop that this study was undertaken. It sought to asss the level of perceived PA bias in the educational ctor in Ghana by analysing employees' perceptions of PA i
n one of the ten polytechnics in the country. The study sought to examine PA from the perspective of employees' perceptions of errors with the view to gathering and analysing information that could assist in development of innovative approaches to achieve both individual and corporate goals. Findings of the study would help fill the gap in extant literature. The findings would also provide uful insights and guidelines for enhancing the quality of PA in organizations.
三星手机备份
儿童钙片哪种好2. Literature Review老师您辛苦了
2.1 The process and purpo of performance appraisal
少年公孙策Studies show that there are many approaches for evaluating employee behaviour and performance with respect to job tasks and/or organisational culture. As a result, various applications of PA have left many managers in a state of confusion and frustration with the employee evaluation process (Gurbuz &Dikmenli, 2007). This situation ems to negatively impact the popularity of appraisal systems in many organizations. Most people support the concept and purpo of PA, in spite of their concerns about the process and application of appraisal outcomes by managers (Grote, 1996). The biggest complaint from managers is that they are not given sufficient guidelines to asss people; and the biggest complaint from employees is that the process is not equitable and fair. PA concentrat
es much in asssing past behaviours of employees, a situation some managers exploit to victimi unfavoured employees (Bersin, 2008). Timing of appraisal; Selection of apprairs and Providing feedback
(Scullen et al., 2003). Early PA process were fairly simple, and involved ranking and comparing individuals with other people (Milkovich &Boudreau 1997). However, the early person-bad appraisal systems were fraught with problems. As a result, a transition to job-related performance asssments continues to occur. Thus, PA is being modified from being person-focud to behaviour-oriented, with emphasis on tho tasks or behaviours associated with the performance of a particular job (Wellbourne etb al., 1998).
楼层怎么选Regarding the purpo of PA, Cleveland et al. (1989) describe four types of us of performance appraisal: between person, within person, system maintenance and documentation. Between person us are what have been referred to as administrative purpos, consisting of recognition of individuals' performance to make decisions regarding salary administration, promotions, retention, termination, layoffs and so forth. Within person us are tho identified in Management by Objectives (MBO), such as feedback on performance strengths and weakness to identify training needs and determine assignments and transfers. PA also helps in organisational goals, which are ref
erred to as system maintenance us. Finally, documentation purpos are to meet the legal requirements by documenting HR decisions and conducting validation rearch on the PA tools. Some organizations are attempting to meet all of the goals simultaneously while they continue to u tools that were designed for one type of purpo (Wie &Buckley, 1998). Jawahar and Williams's (1997) findings suggest that ratings collected for administrative purpos are more lenient than ratings for rearch or developmental purpos. Although rating scale formats, training and other technical qualities of PA influence the quality of ratings, the quality of PA is also strongly affected by the administrative context in which they are ud (Murphy &Cleveland, 1995). Effective managers recogni PAS as a tool for managing, rather
than a tool for measuring subordinates. Such managers u PA to motivate, direct and develop subordinates, and to maximi access to important resources in the organisation to improve productivity.
2.2 Rater issues
Rearchers have shown considerable interest in variables related to the individual doing the appraisal (Lefkowitz, 2000; Levy &Williams, 2004; Robbins &DeNisi, 1998). One of the most studied rater variables is rater affect (Levy &Williams, 2004).
芳香排骨
A general definition of affect involves liking or positive regard for one's subordinate (Lefkowitz, 2000). Forgas and George's (2001) study suggests that affective states impact on judgements and behaviours and, in particular, affect or mood plays a large role when tasks require a degree of cognitive processing. In PA, raters in good mood tend to recall more positive information from memory and apprai performance positively (Sinclair, 1988). Affective regard is related to frequently higher appraisal ratings, less inclination to punish subordinates, better supervisor-subordinate relationships, greater halo, and less accuracy (.Lefkowitz, 2000). Antonioni and Park (2001) found that affect was more strongly related to rating leniency in upward and peer ratings than it was in traditional top-down ratings. This effect was stronger when raters had obrvational time with their subordinates.
基础标准
A cond broad area related to raters is the motivation of the rater. Traditionally, rearchers emed to assume that raters were motivated to rate accurately, and that the problems with the appraisal process involved cognitive processing errors and complexities (Levy &Williams, 2004). This position has, however, been questioned, leading to attempts to identify and understand other elements of raters' motivation and how such motivation affects the appraisal process. The issues involved include individual differences and the rating purpo on rating leniency. Most practitioners
