Much of Organisational Behaviour involves attempts to find fair and equitable ways to manage people and develop structures. Is such an approach always doomed to failure?
Much of Organisational Behaviour involves attempts to find fair and equitable ways to manage people and develop structures. Is such an approach always doomed to failure?
This report will attempt to have a look at fairness at the workplace. Also, the purpose of performance appraisal, performance review, and its meaning in the organisational context. Appraisals regularly record an assessment of an employee's performance, potential and development needs. The appraisal is an opportunity to take an overall view of work content, loads and volume, to look back on what has been achieved during the reporting period and agree objectives for the next. Some common methods of appraisal are examined and their implications for appraisee perceived fairness discussed. Labour process theory's conception of appraisal as an artefact of management control is included for the doubt it casts over the any appraisal ever being truly fair. More recent appraisal formats such as peer-appraisal and 360-degree appraisal provide a partial response to the charge of management structure. Ultimately put within wage effort bargain they however cannot transcend the control of management. Appraisal may be, in some cases, perceived as fair and equal. It can be argued that perceived fairness depends on employees' acceptance of management's right to manage them.
Fairness is a dependent concept much like goodness. One can distinguish something is good by knowing and comparing to something that is bad. For the employee, appraisal can be fair, if compared it with something less fair. Appraisal can be unfair if it is compared to something more fair. Consistency over time and population in appraisal practice is therefore necessary for the appraisal procedure to be perceived fair.
The purposes of performance appraisal include: determining merit pay, collecting information about employee competence, communicating organisational objectives, setting individual targets, determining promotion prospects, justifying dismissal of under-performers, and motivating employees among many others. Employee appraisal should be a continuous process and should not be limited to a formal review once a year. The objectives of the appraisal scheme should be determined before the system is designed in much detail. The objectives will to a large extent dictate the methods and performance criteria for appraisal so they should be discussed with employees, managers and trade unions to obtain their views, feedback and commitment. The main objectives of an appraisal system are usually to review performance, potential and identify training and career planning needs. In addition the appraisal system may be used to determine whether employees should receive an element of financial reward for their performance. Performance reviews give managers and employees opportunities to discuss how employees are progressing and see what sort of improvements can be made or help given to build on their strengths and enable them to perform more effectively. Review of potential and development needs could help predict the level and type of work that employees will be capable of doing in the future and how they can be best developed for the sake of their own career and to maximise their contribution to the organisation. Reward reviews determine the 'rewards' that employees will get for their past work. The reward review is usually a separate process from the appraisal system but the review is often assisted by information provided by the performance appraisal.
Lets look at the management by objectives basis of performance appraisal. In this system, the employee is judged in comparison with performance targets agreed during the previous appraisal. Essentially, counselling aspects become the basis on which to assess any future performance. The employee and manager, given the shortcomings over the past period, 'agree' on targets on which to subsequently evaluate the employee. A major reported advantage of this kind of appraisal is the role of employee voice in agreeing on developmental and performance objectives. Perceived fairness under such a method is expected by some writers to be high. Such a perspective is however somewhat naïve, the true role of employee voice in the appraisal process is likely to be limited as they will be aware of management expectations of continuous improvement.
Appraisals can help to improve employees' job performance by identifying strengths and weaknesses and determining how their strengths can be best utilised within the organisation and weaknesses overcome. They can help to reveal problems which may be restricting employees' progress and causing inefficient work practices. Some employers may talk to their employees regularly about their problems and performance at work and may not therefore see the need for a formal appraisal system. Regular dialogue between managers and their staff about work performance should, of course, be encouraged. However, in the absence of a formal appraisal scheme, much will ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Appraisals can help to improve employees' job performance by identifying strengths and weaknesses and determining how their strengths can be best utilised within the organisation and weaknesses overcome. They can help to reveal problems which may be restricting employees' progress and causing inefficient work practices. Some employers may talk to their employees regularly about their problems and performance at work and may not therefore see the need for a formal appraisal system. Regular dialogue between managers and their staff about work performance should, of course, be encouraged. However, in the absence of a formal appraisal scheme, much will depend on the attitude of individual managers. Some will give regular feedback on their employees' performance and potential while others will neglect this responsibility. An appraisal system can develop a greater degree of consistency by ensuring that managers and employees meet formally and regularly to discuss performance and potential. Experience shows this can encourage better performance from employees. Appraisals can also provide information for human resource planning to assist succession planning and to determine the suitability of employees for promotion, for particular types of employment and training. In addition, improved communications by giving employees an opportunity to talk about their ideas and expectations and to be told how they are progressing. This process can improve the quality of working life by increasing mutual understanding between managers and employees.
Examples of performance appraisal methods would include:
Rating method lists a number of factors to be assessed such as quality and output of work, which are then rated on a numerical scale according to level of performance. The rating scales method is easy to construct, use and understand. However, it is highly subjective, there is often a tendency to bunch the ratings around the average point and an overall impression can influence all the individual assessments.
Comparison with objectives is a system where the employee and his or her manager agree objectives at the beginning of the appraisal period. The subsequent appraisal is based on how far these objectives have been met. This method is more objective than previous.
Critical incidents are where the appraiser is required to record incidents of employees' positive and negative behaviour during a given period. Feedback on every occurrence, this method is very time consuming and sometimes frustrating.
Narrative report is a technique which requires the appraiser to describe the individual's work performance and behaviour in his or her own words. However, its effectiveness depends largely on the literary ability of the appraiser.
Consideration of new approaches to carrying out appraisals may be a natural consequence of other changes in the organisation such as teamworking, increased flexibility and greater emphasis on the importance of communication skills and relationships developed with people in the workplace. 'Upward appraisal' gives employees the opportunity to comment on the performance of their manager and may provide a more balanced view of the individual's performance. '360 degree', sometimes known as 'multi-source assessment', potentially offers a wider view of the individual's performance by taking into account comments from several sources such as peers, subordinates, other managers and possibly customers. Successful introduction of this form of appraisal is likely to depend on the culture of the company and whether it is introduced with care, a clear idea of how it will operate and what it is meant to achieve/objectives. It will need the backing of individuals involved and any workforce representatives if it is to work successfully. It is most commonly used with managers and may best be used as a way of helping individuals identify their areas of further development.
Reward reviews provide for salary increments, bonuses and similar incentives to be awarded on the basis of an employee's performance. There is usually a link with the appraisal system but the reward review should take place at a different time from the appraisal interview. Employers should carefully examine their existing pay, benefits and appraisal systems before they decide to introduce reward reviews. Consultation should take place with managers, employees and trade unions, and agreement reached before such schemes are introduced. Performance appraisal systems alone can motivate, improve performance and create greater job satisfaction without the inducement of additional reward. However, there is increasing interest in reward reviews and the links with performance assessment. For example, appraisal related pay is a payment system where the employee receives an increase in pay based on regular and systematic assessment of his or her performance. Reward reviews can be a cost effective method of motivating employees by providing cash incentives to effective performers. They can also provide incentives to those employees whose work is not easily measurable. However, the assessments on which rewards are based are usually subjective. Reward reviews can also be divisive because employees who do not receive payments may complain of favouritism and may eventually become discouraged.
When the objective based appraisal procedures are considered unfair, then the other basis for the employee to be judged or counselled can be based on personality and behaviour. Psychologists have shown that humans naturally conceive others in the form of personality traits or characteristics. Certain traits are certainly appropriate to certain roles in organisations. For example in research, traits such as inquisitiveness, tenacity, and precision would be valuable; in human resource management, traits such as sociability, sensitivity, and realism would be valuable. For these reasons appraisals have had a tendency to attempt to assess traits in individuals. The advantage of basing appraisals on traits are; in judgement, rewarding those whose characteristics are most conducive to effectiveness in their role; and in counsel, identifying traits that the employee has and more advanced roles where those traits are appropriate. Traits are however difficult to define, the subjective view of the appraiser may determine the meaning of each trait. Traits even once defined are very difficult to identify in individuals as they may manifest in very different ways. This is compounded by the problems of definition, leading to severe risks of procedural and distributive injustice (Flint, 1999). Potentially, the employee perceives the appraisal as entirely arbitrary in judgement and pointless in counsel as traits are not easily defined or identified due to the subjectivity issues discussed above. Perceived fairness in the trait based method appraisal is more conspicuously absent than in even the objective based appraisal.
Appraisal based on behaviours has been seen as a more objective and fair method. Behaviour encompasses both the manifestation of traits and achievement of objectives in context. Behavioural systems also incorporate comparison between an ideal behaviour and the employee's actual behaviour. This should result in greater objectivity on the part of the appraiser, as each employee will be evaluated against the same criteria, unlike in trait or objective/target approaches. Counselling also, should be seen as more productive as desired behaviours can be clearly articulated allowing methods of producing these behaviours to be devised.
In contrast to the assumptions of the above discussion that labour and management both gain through the appraisal process, labour process theorists have seen the appraisal as a method for eliciting employee compliance with management objectives, (Newton & Findlay 1999). This is purportedly achieved as the appraisal process encourages employees to perceive themselves in terms of management's perspective, rewarding adherence to and punishing deviance from apparently rational criteria. In reference to behavioural norms on which to base judgement and counsel, Newton and Findlay's (1999) analysis of Townley's (1993) (distorted) Foucaldian power effects is instructive. They note how a university distributed the publication list of an academic who had had a 'particularly successful year' and how this became the behavioural norm. The use of an outlier is argued to exemplify the labour process perspective. The labour process perspective successfully undermines the neutral perception of appraisal.
Consider the appraisal application in the environment of a smaller company. They can certainly benefit from having appropriate appraisal systems. The task of appraising employees is usually easier because managers are more likely to know each employee well. In most organisations employees are appraised by their immediate managers on the grounds that those who delegate work and monitor performance are best placed to appraise performance. Others argue that appraisals carried out at a more senior level allow employees an opportunity to talk with higher management who, in turn, can find out the views and attitudes of more junior staff at first hand. A better approach may be for employees' immediate superiors to write and carry out appraisals and the more senior managers to have an opportunity to comment on the report. This enables senior managers to keep a regular check on the progress of staff and to monitor the appraisal system to ensure that reporting standards are consistent. It is sensible to allow employees to see at least some parts of their appraisal reports. Where reports are only partially open it is usually the section on potential/promotion prospects which is not disclosed. If reporting is 'open', employees should have the opportunity to sign the completed form and to express their views on the appraisal they have received; in particular whether they feel it is a fair assessment of their work over the reporting period.
It is important however that the appraisal system is designed to meet the particular needs of the smaller company and is not over elaborate. An appraisal system does not need to generate a lot of paper to be effective; in fact the most effective systems are often the simplest.
No organisation, whether large or small, should contemplate the introduction of a formal appraisal system unless it is fully committed to its success and its objectives are clearly defined. A scheme will involve the investment of time and money. Managers will need to be trained to carry out appraisal properly; employees will need to be fully and carefully informed about how it will affect them.
A badly designed appraisal system operated by untrained and poorly motivated managers, and hastily introduced, will damage relationships and provide no benefits.
There is also strong support for equal and fair conduct from the government. There has been a number of changes which favour equal and fair management in the workplace.
The Draft Code of Practice on the use of personal data in employer/employee relationships, published by the Data Protection Commissioner in October 2000, suggests that good practice requires that any review or appraisal system should be operated fairly, lawfully, correctly and open to challenge by the individual. The Commissioner suggests that employees are shown all information recorded in the appraisal system about them, with the opportunity to comment as part of the record.
The Data Protection Act 1998 was introduced to cover the processing and possible use of personal information. The Data Protection Commissioner has introduced a draft Code of Practice in the use of personal data in employer/employee relationships (October 2000), which sets out that employers should follow in the collection and use of employee data. The provisions cover computer records and some manual records kept in structured form, and are likely to cover most employment records. Employees (prospective, past, current) may request from an employer what information is kept about him/her. The employer may make a charge of up to £10 for responding to each request. Employers are entitled to protect third parties, and to withhold any information that might prejudice their business, but the general principles of the Act are that employees should have access to personal information and expect that the confidentiality of this information is respected by the employer.
The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 introduced a similar right for disabled people who are treated less favourably because of a reason related to their disability, without a justifiable reason. At the moment, these rules apply to employers with 15 or more employees but the Government has announced its intention to no longer retain the exemption for businesses with fewer than 15 employees, effective probably by October 2004.
In any discrimination cases, appraisal forms and procedures may be used by employees to validate their complaints. It is very important for employers to monitor their appraisal systems on a regular basis, and to check promotional policies, inorder to ensure that criteria used to assess performance is non discriminatory in terms of sex, race and disability.
Employees dismissed on grounds of inadequate performance and who later complain of unfair dismissal sometimes indicate in their applications that they have received little or sometimes none at all, indication of alleged poor performance, whilst in employment. Appraisal schemes should not be used as a disciplinary functions to deal with poor performers but it is important to establish a procedure for informing employees in writing of unsatisfactory markings. The consequences of failure to meet the required standards should be explained to the employee and confirmed in writing. The appraisal form however is not the place to record details of verbal or written disciplinary warnings. These should be recorded separately as part of the disciplinary procedure. There should be space on the appraisal form to record unsatisfactory performance together with notes of action to be taken, both by the individual and by management, to remedy these deficiencies.
This report has tried to show that certain factors in appraisal fairness is dependent on appraisee subjectivity. It has shown how certain methods of appraisal seem to appear to the employee as fair. Further, an attempt has been made to outline the argument against appraisals being a power neutral instrument of rational management. New modern developments in appraisal techniques have started showing enhanced perceived fairness whilst at the same time reinforcing the validity of management's control. It is possible that the lack of fairness would contribute to the weaknesses in the methods being used, therefore introduction of bias and prejudice are likely. This as a result, makes some people feel treated unfairly.
Bibliography
Armstrong, Michael and Baron, Angela. (1998). Performance management: the new realities. London, Institute of Personnel and Development.
Bach, S., & Siison, K. eds (2000). Personnel management: a comprehensive guide to theory and practice. Oxford, Blackwell Business.
Fletcher, Clive. (1997). Appraisal: routes to improved performance. London, Institute of Personnel and Development.
Flint, D. (1999). The role of organizational justice in multi-source performance appraisal: theory-based applications and directions for research. Human resource management review, Vol 9.
Grote, D. (2000). Performance appraisal reappraised. Harvard business review, Vol 78.
Industrial Society. (1998). Performance management. Managing Best Practice.
Newton, T., & Findlay, P. (1999). Playing god? The performance of appraisal. Human resource management journal, Vol 6.
Sisson, K., & Storey, J. (2000). The realities of human resource management: managing the employment relationship. Buckingham, OUP.
Anon. The source. Electronic Journal of Sociology.
