Performance Appraisal

dirangkum Dr.Sunar Abdul, MS

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL OVERVIEW „ WHAT IS A PA? „ WHAT IS IT USED FOR? „ LEGAL ISSUES „ INFORMATION SOURCES „ METHODS „ ERRORS AND ACCURACY „ FEEDBACK

Performance Appraisal The process by which an employee’s contribution to the organization during a specified period of time is assessed. (Proses di mana seorang karyawan di dalam organisasi selama jangka waktu yang telah ditetapkan dinilai )

Performance Feedback Memungkinkan karyawan mengetahui seberapa baik mereka telah diperlakukan dibandingkan dengan standar organisasi

“Process by which an organization measures and evaluates an individual employee’s behavior and accomplishments for a defined period of employment” (Proses oleh sebuah organisasi yang tindakan dan mengevaluasi setiap karyawan tentang perilaku dan untuk jangka waktu yang ditentukan pekerjaan) (Dr. Anderson)

PURPOSES

„ ENHANCE ORGANIZATIONAL DECISIONS, EG.

PAYRAISES, PROMOTIONS „ ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF INDIVIDUAL DECISIONS, EG. CAREER CHOICES, FUTURE DEVELOPMENT „ PROVIDE RATIONAL, LEGAL DEFENSIBLE BASIS FOR PERSONNEL DECISIONS „ AFFECT EMPLOYEES’ VIEWS AND ATTACHMENT TO THE ORGANIZATION

The system of basic HRM practices Job Security (Employer Branding)

Employee well-being

(HR planning)

Rewards / Pay

(Recruitment)

Selection

Job Design / Work organization

Performance

Appraisal

Evaluation Feedback Objective setting

Requirements

Development

Promotion Career planning & development Succession planning

Corporate Social responsibility? (Outplacement)

Training Job rotation Challenging Assignments “Talent development”

Definition of performance appraisal

„ It includes an analysis of a person’s current

performance, overall capabilities and future potential, and facilitates informed decisions concerning the setting of future performance goals, compensation, promotion and development, all for the purposes of improving motivation and performance.

Performance Appraisal ‘Higher-level’ strategies and objectives SMART GOALS • Specific • Measurable • Agreed • Realistic • Timed

Evaluation of period’s performance & feedback

Agreeing on performance objectives

Deciding on training and development plans

Key issues: Procedural and distributive justice, focus & effectiveness of incentives

Performance-based compensation Career Planning & Counceling

Expectancy theory & Performance Appraisal Expectancy Theory Expectancy “Goal can be reached”

Instrumentality ”Behavior leads to rewards”

Valence ”Reward is desired” Motivation Effort

Goal Setting

Performance Evaluation

Performance appraisal

Reward Tangible & Intangible

Frequent Specific Problems „ Poor working relationship with the boss „ Insufficient knowledge of appraisees „ Prejudice / halo effect, etc (compare selection

interview biases)

„ Unclear performance criteria / Wrong measures „ Everyone is ‘just above average’ „ Team vs. individual balance „ The process vs. people balance „ Missing the development part

A GOOD APPRAISAL SYSTEM Criteria „ Validity „ Reliability „ Freedom from bias: errors „ Practicality

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL OVERVIEW „ WHAT IS A PA? „ WHAT IS IT USED FOR? „ LEGAL ISSUES „ INFORMATION SOURCES „ METHODS „ ERRORS AND ACCURACY „ FEEDBACK

USES „ TRAINING „ WAGE AND SALARY „ PLACEMENT „ PROMOTION

PA and other HRM Functions Training & Development Recruitment

P A

Compensation

Selection Labor Relations

Example

Communication

Leadership

Personal Development

Adaptability

Development of Others

Relationships

Production

Task Management

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL OVERVIEW „ WHAT IS A PA? „ WHAT IS IT USED FOR? „ LEGAL ISSUES „ INFORMATION SOURCES „ METHODS „ ERRORS AND ACCURACY „ FEEDBACK

LEGAL ISSUES „ UNFAIR DISCRIMINATION „ WAYS TO AVOID

BASE ON JOB ANALYSIS BEHAVIOUR INSTRUCTIONS REVIEW RESULTS

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL OVERVIEW „ WHAT IS A PA? „ WHAT IS IT USED FOR? „ LEGAL ISSUES „ INFORMATION SOURCES „ METHODS „ ERRORS AND ACCURACY „ FEEDBACK

INFORMATION SOURCES „ OBJECTIVE PRODUCTION DATA „ PERSONNEL DATA

ABSENTEEISM TURNOVER „ JUDGEMENT DATA RATING SCALES COMPARISON METHODS

Performance Appraisal Employee Data

Conceptual Criterion Objective Personnel Data Data Judgmental Data

Performance Appraisal Employee Data „ Objective data „

Ex: # cars sold, time to completion, efficiency, etc

Conceptual Criteria: • Salesmanship

Problem: Criterion contamination Criterion Deficiency: • total revenue • profit • markup • repeat customers • time spent on customer.

Actual Criteria: • # cars sold/month

Criterion Contamination: • Geographic region worker is assigned

Performance Appraisal Employee Data „ Personnel data „ Absenteeism - # of days missed from work „ „ „

„

How well does absences discriminate good from bad employee? Are unexcused absences more harmful than excused? Voluntary (requested time off) vs Involuntary (medical)

Turnover – how long employee stays on job „ „

Voluntary (quit) vs Involuntary (discharged) Why appraise length of time workers stay? ƒ May be a reflection of management, procedures, pay, etc

„

Accidents – cost to the company in terms of damage and time off work „

Typically used for truckers, machinists, production workers, etc.

Problem: Criterion Deficiency „

Appear to be only measures of ‘poor’ performance

Performance Appraisal Employee Data „ Judgmental data – subjective ratings „ Majority of performance appraisal systems „ Can be used in any type of job „ May be correlated with other measures (objective or personnel) Problem: Rater must be skilled at identifying relevant behaviors

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL OVERVIEW „ WHAT IS A PA? „ WHAT IS IT USED FOR? „ LEGAL ISSUES „ INFORMATION SOURCES „ METHODS „ ERRORS AND ACCURACY „ FEEDBACK

METHODS „ RATING SCALES

GRAPHIC RATING SCALE „ EMPLOYEE COMPARISON

RANK ORDER PAIRED COMPARISON FORCED DISTRIBUTION „ BEHAVIOURAL CHECKLISTS

BEHAVIOURAL CHECKLISTS „ CRITICAL INCIDENTS „ WEIGHTED CHECKLIST „ BARS „ BOS „ MIXED STANDARD SCALE

Alternative Sources of Appraisal SUPERIOR SUPERIOR CUSTOMERS CUSTOMERS

PEERS PEERS

TEAM SELF SELF SUBORDINATES SUBORDINATES

Types of Performance to Measure Measurement Methods „ Objective Production „ Dollar Sales „ Performance Tests „

„ Subjective „ Comparative Procedures „ Ranking „ Forced Distribution

3 Types of Methods „ Trait based „ Behavior based „ Results based

Trait Methods Graphic Rating Scale Mixed Standard Scale Forced-Choice Essay

Common Common Trait Trait Methods Methods of of Appraisal Appraisal

Behavioral Methods Critical Incidents

Behavioral Checklist Behavior Observation Scales

Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS) Common Common Behavioral Behavioral Appraisal Appraisal Methods Methods

Results-based Methods „ Used when „ It is not important how results are achieved „ There are many different ways to succeed

„ Practicality „ Contamination „ Deficiency „ Teamwork

PA Methods Vary upon Task Types Knowledge of the transformation process

High

Low

High

Behavioral / Result Ex: assembly workers

Result Ex: sales

Low

Behavioral Ex: reporters

Extensive selection/ training Ex: researchers

Reliability and Validity of PA Measurement

Contemporary PA Concepts Management by objectives (MBO)

360-degree feedback

Self-managed teams

Step Step5a: 5a: Inappropriate Inappropriate goals/metrics goals/metrics deleted deleted

PA under a MBO Program Step Step1:1: Org. Org.goals goals &&metrics metrics Step Step2:2: Dpt. Dpt.Goals Goals &&metrics metrics

Step Step7:7: Review Revieworg. org. performance performance

Step Step3:3: Spvr Spvrlists lists goals goals&&metrics metrics Step Step3:3: Sbt. Sbt.proposes proposes goals goals&&metrics metrics

Step Step6:6: Final Final review review

Step Step5b: 5b: New Newinputs inputsare are then thenprovided provided Step Step4:4: Mutual Mutual agreement agreement

Step Step5:5: Interim Interim review review

Self-Managed Teams Characteristics „ Focusing group result „ Larger Span of control „ More part-time/contract workers „ More cross-functional workers

Challenges „ Measuring individual result Æ Unfair & Hard „ Quality and commitment std. Æ Diverse „ Measure crossfunctional performance Æ Tough

Establishing Performance Criteria (Standards) „ Traits „ Behaviors „ Competencies „ Goal Achievement „ Improvement Potential

THREE FOCAL POINTS OF APPRAISAL 1. PERSONAL TRAITS AND CHARACTERISTICS + inexpensive to develop and use + not specialized by position; one form for all workers - high potential for bias and rating errors - not very useful for feedback or development - not easily justifiable for reward/promotion decisions 2. JOB BEHAVIOR AND ACTIVITY + can focus on specific duties listed in the job description + intuitively acceptable to employees and superiors + useful for providing feedback + seem fair for reward and promotion decisions - are time consuming to develop and use - can be costly to develop - have some potential for rating error and bias

THREE FOCAL POINTS OF APPRAISAL CONTD

3. WORK RESULTS AND OUTCOMES + less subjectivity bias + acceptable to employees and superiors + links individual performance to organizational objectives + seem fair for reward and promotion decisions - are time consuming to develop and use - may encourage a short-term perspective - may use deficient or inappropriate criteria

Traits „ Certain employee traits such as attitude,

appearance, and initiative are the basis for some evaluations „ May be either unrelated to job performance or difficult to define „ Certain traits may relate to job performance and, if this connection is established, using them may be appropriate

APPRAISAL METHODS NARRATIVES ESSAYS CRITICAL INCIDENTS

RANKING COMPARISONS ALTERNATION PAIRED COMPARISONS

CHECKLISTS SIMPLE WEIGHTED

RATING SCALES GRAPHIC RATING SCALES BEHAVIORALLY ANCHORED RATING SCALES (BARS) BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATION SCALES (BOS)

OBJECTIVE MEASURES NATURAL COUNTS (Quantity produced, etc) GOALSETTING STANDARDS (MBO, etc)

Performance Appraisal Methods „ Graphic Rating Scales – rate worker on

number of different dimensions by checking a box, circling a #, Likert scale, etc. Examples:

X

Job Knowledge: 5

4

3

2

1

X

Quality of Work: Superior

Above Average

Average Below Unacceptable Average

Performance Appraisal Methods „ Graphic Rating Scales (continued)

Common Problems: „ Halo Errors – Overall impression of worker biases individual ratings „ Leniency Errors – Particularly hard grader (negative) or easy grader (positive) „ Central Tendency Errors – Tendency to select the mid point of scale particularly when unsure

Performance Appraisal Methods „

Rank-Order – rank all employees from best to worst on performance (ordinal scale)

Ex: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Sally Charlie Lucy Linus PigPen

Problems: „ Employee rankings are relative to each other rather than a standard. „ Difficult with large number of workers

Performance Appraisal Methods „ Paired Comparison – compare each employee to every

other employee Example:

∗ Sally-Charlie Sally-Lucy ∗ Sally-Linus ∗ ∗ Sally-PigPen

∗ ∗ Lucy-Linus Lucy-PigPen ∗ Charlie-Linus ∗ Charlie-PigPen ∗ ∗ Linus-PigPen Charlie-Lucy

Lucy – 3 Linus – 3 Sally – 2

PigPen – 2 Charlie - 0

• Problem: # comparisons = n(n-1) / 2

Performance Appraisal Methods „ Forced Distribution – Use normal curve to place workers into categories of

performance „ Useful when large number of workers „ Forces distribution to be normal, so that most workers are average 20 18

Frequency

16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lowest 10%

Next 20%

Middle 40%

Next 20%

Highest 10%

Problem: No reason to believe distribution to be normal Poor performers are weeded out

Performance Appraisal Methods using Specified Behaviors „ Critical Incidents – Those behaviors that are

particularly important for doing the job

Supervisor keeps a running list of employees’ critical incidents as they relate to various job-related behaviors such as job knowledge, decision making, leadership, etc. „ Used mainly as a diagnostic tool Examples: „ “Failed to complete report” „ “Decision to use fluorescent bulbs instead of incandescent saved company $600 on year’s electric bill” „

Performance Appraisal Methods using Specified Behaviors „ Weighted Checklists – Takes critical incidents and

weights each one according to importance „ SMEs list of critical incidents from good to bad for

completing the job. „ Supervisor then uses scale to identify behaviors worker engaged in, then computes score

Weighted Checklist Position: Secretary Critical Incident

Scale Value

- Knows the difference between correcting the +6.5 grammar in the boss’s letter and correcting writing style - Knows various postal rates and mails material in +4.2 a cost-efficient manner - Knows what typing is to be done on plain vs. company letterhead +3.1 - Keeps a running count on the use of office supplies +2.5 - Opens all mail whether or not it is marked “confidential” -1.9 - Confuses priorities on typing that needs immediate attention -3.8 and projects that have no established deadlines - Files away correspondence so that it can rarely be found for -5.2 later reference - Leaves many mistakes in typing from failing to proofread the -7.1 typed copy

Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales BARS BARS – Rating scale which uses specific behaviors as anchor points Five step development process: 1. Create list of critical incidents 2. Group incidents into meaningful dimensions 3. Sort incidents (assess goodness of fit in groups) and discard inconsistent ones 4. Rate remaining incidents on representativeness of the dimension (those with low inter-rater agreement are discarded) 5. Incidents are placed on scale according to their rating „

Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales BARS Example Position: Patrol officer Job Knowledge: Awareness of procedures, laws, and court rulings and changes in them Could be expected to follow correct procedures for evidence preservation at scene of crime Could be expected to know s/he could break down locked door while in hot pursuit and thus arrest fleeing suspect Could be expected to misinform public on legal matters through lack of knowledge

9 Very High 8 7 6

Could be expected to be fully aware of recent court rulings and conduct him/herself accordingly

Could be expected to 5 Moderate occasionally have to ask other officers about points 4 of law 3 Could be expected to search suspect’s car two hours after 2 suspect was booked Very Low 1

Behavioral-Observation Scales BOS • BOS – Supervisor rates employee on frequency of how often each critical incident occurs Position: Student 1. 2. 3. 4.

Comes to class on time Asks intellectual questions Does not interrupt class Takes detailed notes

Never Seldom Sometimes Generally Always 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

Performance Appraisals Other Factors 1. Rater Training – try to minimize errors such as

leniency, halo, central tendency, etc. •

Perhaps videotaped performance with known rating (est by SMEs) and have rater match ratings to expert opinion

2. Rater Motivation – provide motivation for giving

accurate ratings •

Are supervisor’s rewards tied to performance of subordinate ratees?

Performance Appraisal Rater Motivation

Other Types of Appraisals 1. Self Assessment – appraise oneself on how well you think

you are doing. • • •

Likely positive leniency People generally acknowledge their weaknesses when not tied to monetary considerations Can help diagnose training needs

2. Peer Assessment – evaluate co-workers a. b. c.

Peer Nomination – nominate specified # of top coworkers Peer Ratings – rate co-workers on various dimensions Peer Rankings – rank co-workers from top to bottom

Performance Appraisal Follow-Up „ Post-appraisal interview with subordinate to

discuss evaluation „ Identify both strengths and weaknesses „ Set goals for improvement (motivate) „ Factors affecting motivation of appraisal

Does employee agree with assessment? „ Does employee approve and accept the goals? „

MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES BENEFITS A basis for effective organizational planning and control Improves communication and feedback with the supervisor Encourages participation and joint decision-making Facilitates role clarification by revealing assessment criteria PROBLEMS Are the really important (key) areas of the job included? Is the process participative or are goals “set” for the worker? Can the worker truly control the outcomes s/he achieves? Overemphasizes quantitative, short-term, individual objectives

360° Feedback

Implementation „ 360-feedback.com 9 Step Process „ „ „ „ „ „ „ „ „

Determine organizational readiness Develop an appropriate survey and process given organizational needs and objectives Generate enthusiasm among key decision makers and participants Ensure that participants and managers have the skills to support the process Provide an orientation briefing Administer the survey Coach participants in one-on-one meetings Provide organizational summary data Re-conduct the survey (in four to six months)

Participants „ Superiors „ Peers „ Direct Reports „ Customers „ Self

Participants The following slides outline the pros and cautions associated with each participant in 360 Degree Appraisal process. There may be occasions when one source or another may not be chosen to participate. For each individual being appraised, specific groups should be chosen to ensure that the feedback is appropriate and that a plan for improvement can be generated for the employee. A pro is something that is a positive outcome from that specific group. A caution is not something that is necessarily negative but must be monitored so that it does not create a negative situation for all involved.

Superiors „ Pros „

„

„

First-line supervisors often in best position to carry out full cycle performance management Superiors have authority to redesign an employees work based on individual and team performance Most Federal employees think that best ratings come from first-line supervisors

„ Cautions „

„

„

Relying solely on superiors reduces validity of performance feedback Superiors may not be in same location as employee, preventing them from having hands-on knowledge of the employee’s performance Training may be lacking on appropriate methods of evaluation

Peers1 „ Pros „ Peer pressure and peer approval more effective motivators than supervisors „ Peer ratings have proven to be excellent predictors of future performance „ Peer ratings remarkably valid and reliable in rating behaviors and manner of performance „ Peer ratings tend to average out bias from other groups in the rating process „ Increased use of self-directed team encourages use of peer evaluation „ Peer ratings help move supervisors into a coaching role as opposed to a pure judging role

Peers „ Cautions „ „ „ „ „ „

Should not be used to determine pay, bonuses, or promotions (creates animosity and prevents truthful responses from peers) Do not divulge the names of those providing feedback; in general anonymity is preferred to prevent animosity and generate truthful responses Choose the peers wisely; don’t choose at random-the peers must be very familiar with the work requirements and performance Can be very time consuming for peers to participate Can cause tension among employees and breakdown of teams Ensure employee involvement in creation; otherwise no buy-in will be achieved from employees or their representatives

Direct Reports „ Pros „

„

„

„

„

Gives supervisors a more comprehensive picture of employee needs & issues Makes employees feel that they have a greater voice in organizational decision making Extremely effective in evaluating supervisor’s interpersonal skills Combine direct report ratings to achieve an average rating; adds validity and reliability Supervisors are more responsive to direct report feedback, creating more effective managers

„ Cautions „

„

„

„

Need for anonymity is essential; if not anonymous, reprisal from supervisors is likely Supervisors may feel that authority is undermined when they must take into consideration that their employees are rating them Allow only direct reports with at least a one year relationship with the supervisor and no disciplinary action to comment If undergoing downsizing or reorganization, carefully weigh the need for direct reports in the process; may add fuel to the fire

Customers „ Pros „ „

„

Serves as “anchor” for all other performance factors Combined with peer evaluation, these data round out feedback and focus attention beyond only serving the supervisor’s needs Ensures that the employees concentrate their attention on the customer as the customer will have some say with regards to their feedback

„ Cautions „

„

„

Only ask customers to evaluate outputs, not processes; they can’t always see the entire process Customer feedback process is time consuming; focus this time on “big picture” items Don’t ask the customer to evaluate a single employee, unless the customer has a direct relationship with the employee

Self „ Pros „

„

„ „

Improves communication between supervisor and employee Particularly useful if entire cycle focuses on selfassessment; forces individual to keep track of successes and failures Develops ability to see one’s self for what they really are Allows supervisor to have better handle on performance when it can not always be observed

„ Cautions „

„ „

Research indicates “low correlation between selfratings and all other sources of ratings, particularly supervisor ratings” Self ratings are consistently higher than other ratings If supervisors do not use appropriate feedback skills, the fact that a self-rating is higher than the supervisor’s may cause alienation and defensiveness

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL OVERVIEW „ WHAT IS A PA? „ WHAT IS IT USED FOR? „ LEGAL ISSUES „ INFORMATION SOURCES „ METHODS „ ERRORS AND ACCURACY „ FEEDBACK

Why PA May Fail Unclear Language

Mgr not taking PA seriously

Lack appraisal skills Mgr not prepared

Mgr not honest or sincere

Insuff. Rewards

No ongoing feedback Ineffective discussion

Mgr Lacks Infor.

Training Appraisers

Error of Central Tendency

Common Common Appraisal Appraisal Errors Errors to to Address Address in in Training Training

Leniency or Strictness Error

Recency Error

Contrast Error Similar-to-Me Error

ERRORS AND ACCURACY „ ERRORS

LENIENCY HALO CENTRAL TENDENCY „ ERRORS ≠ ACCURACY

ERRORS IN JUDGMENT „ HALO ERRORS „ EVALUATIONS BASED ON RATER’S

GENERAL FEELINGS „ DOES NOT DISTINGUISH AMONG MANY

DIMENSIONS OF PERFORMANCE

LENIENCY ERRORS „ NEGATIVE –GIVES HARSHER EVALUATION THAN DESERVED „ POSITIVE—GIVES HIGHER RATINGS THAN

DESERVED

ERRORS „ CENTRAL TENDENCY- RATER UNWILLING TO

GIVE EXTREME RATINGS, USE ONLY THE MIDDLE PART OF THE SCALE

ACCURACY „ ELEVATION „ DIFFERENTIAL ELEVATION „ STEREOTYPIC ACCURACY „ DIFFERENTIAL ACCURACY

ELEVATION HOW ACC - GROUP RATING

DIFFERENTIAL ELEVATION

STEREOTYPE ACCURACY „ ACC - DIMENSION RATING

GOOD ACC FOR OC POOR ACC FOR SOCIAL SKILLS

DIFFERENTIAL ACCURACY „ ACC DISCRIM AMONG RATEES

WITHIN DIMENSIONS

Problems in Performance Appraisal „ Appraiser discomfort „ Lack of objectivity „ Halo/horn error „ Leniency/strictness „ Central tendency „ Recent behavior bias „ Personal bias „ Manipulating the evaluation „ Employee anxiety

Appraiser Discomfort „ Performance appraisal

process cuts into manager’s time „ Experience can be unpleasant when employee has not performed well

Lack of Objectivity „ In rating scales method, commonly used

factors such as attitude, appearance, and personality are difficult to measure „ Factors may have little to do with employee’s job performance „ Employee appraisal based primarily on personal characteristics may place evaluator and company in untenable positions

Halo/Horn Error „ Halo error - Occurs when manager

generalizes one positive performance feature or incident to all aspects of employee performance resulting in higher rating „ Horn error - Evaluation error occurs when manager generalizes one negative performance feature or incident to all aspects of employee performance resulting in lower rating

Leniency/Strictness „ Leniency - Giving undeserved

high ratings „ Strictness - Being unduly critical of employee’s work performance „ Worst situation is when firm has both lenient and strict managers and does nothing to level inequities

Central Tendency „ Error occurs when employees are incorrectly

rated near average or middle of scale „ May be encouraged by some rating scale systems requiring evaluator to justify in writing extremely high or extremely low ratings

Recent Behavior Bias „ Employee’s behavior often improves and

productivity tends to rise several days or weeks before scheduled evaluation „ Only natural for rater to remember recent behavior more clearly than actions from more distant past „ Maintaining records of performance

Personal Bias (Stereotyping) „ Managers allow individual differences such as

gender, race or age to affect ratings they give „ Effects of cultural bias, or stereotyping, can influence appraisals „ Other factors – Example: mild-mannered employees may be appraised more harshly simply because they do not seriously object to results

Manipulating the Evaluation „ Sometimes, managers control virtually every

aspect of appraisal process and are in position to manipulate system „ Example: Want to give pay raise to certain employee. Supervisor may give employee a undeserved high performance evaluation

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL OVERVIEW „ WHAT IS A PA? „ WHAT IS IT USED FOR? „ LEGAL ISSUES „ INFORMATION SOURCES „ METHODS „ ERRORS AND ACCURACY „ FEEDBACK

FEEDBACK „ SPECIFIC „ BEHAVIOURAL „ RATEE SENSITIVITY „ IMMEDIATE „ AVOID INFORMATION OVERLOAD

Here’s What You’re In For! „ Coaching „ Rewarding „ Disciplinary Action „ Performance Appraisal „ Documenting performance

Coaching and Rewarding „ Hey, I’m not athletic – how can I coach? „ Give

clear direction and training

• Tell them – give written instructions? • Show them • Let them do the task – you observe • Provide feedback • Check in

Coaching and Rewarding „ Follow Up Regularly

Can be informal and frequent „ Set regular meetings to discuss work „ Make small corrections subtly and frequently „ Communicate changes promptly „ Changes in expectations „ Changes in process „

„ Pros of Coaching

Coaching and Rewarding „ Good Job! „ Yep, sometimes rewarding is that simple. „ Make it personal. „ Send an email and copy your boss too. „ Celebrate! Go out to lunch, ice cream, coffee – and you don’t have to talk about work! „ Ask for them to do something similar again. „ Mention specific successes on an appraisal. „ Other ideas?

Setting the Meeting „ Schedule the meeting

several days in advance. „ Identify a low-stress day. „ Allow a minimum of one hour. „ Select a private, neutral location. „ Plan what will be said.

Discussing Performance „ Ask the employee for his/her thoughts about

his/her performance. „ Share examples of performance. „ Discuss the affects of performance. „ Be specific. „ Be consistent between verbal and written feedback.

CONCLUSION „ Purposes of performance appraisal „ Characteristics of an effective appraisal „ Different sources of appraisal information „ Various methods used for evaluation