Heritage

Why staff performance appraisals don’t work

appraisal

Organisations should prepare elaborate appraisal schedules that include training of appraisers and the employees. PHOTO | FOTOSEARCH

Organisations whose financial year is ending on June 30 are preparing to appraise the annual work performance of their employees.

Some heads of department and supervisors will use the appraisals to fairly rate employees below them according to their actual performance. Others may use this opportunity to settle scores with a few who rubbed them on the wrong way.

Although staff performance appraisals are well-intentioned, they do not achieve their goals for the following reasons.

AGREED OBJECTIVES are NOT SMART

Although the CEO is responsible for the overall organisation performance target, when cascaded downwards it forms the basis for both departmental and individual work objectives. When agreed individual work objectives are not Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant and Timely (SMART) and properly linked to the departmental ones, evaluation of employee performance becomes an uphill task. It is easier to measure work that is quantifiable than one that is surrounded with qualitative factors. Employees should be urged to develop work objective with measurable targets that will inform their ratings in the appraisal.

NON-EXISTENT PERIODIC REVIEWS

Organisations operate performance management systems that either lack provisions for periodic reviews or appraisers become too busy to undertake the expected reviews. Employees are surprised when confronted at year-end with work issues of the past three or six months which they were not alerted about.

For the final work evaluations to be improvement-oriented, heads of department should hold informal work performance reviews on a quarterly basis.

UNTRAINED APPRAISERS

When annual appraisals degenerate into nice-to-do end of year rituals to appease management, many organisations fail to either train appraisers or debrief them before the exercise begins.

The untrained appraisers are left on their own to subjectively dish out ratings that may not reflect the actual performance of employees. Caught in the uncertainty quagmire, others secretly seek the views of the concerned employees before arriving at the final grade.

To redeem the purpose of performance appraisals, organisations should prepare elaborate appraisal schedules that include training of appraisers and the employees.

COMMON MEASUREMENT TOOL

A random examination of annual staff appraisal forms revealed that some organisations use a common form for employees of all cadres. Such a measurement tool consists of sections that may not be applicable to staff at lower levels.

For example, it would be foolhardy to assess a clerical officer who has no supervisory responsibilities on a factor such as leadership capability.

For effective performance evaluation, organisations should use different staff appraisal forms that consist of relevant factors for each level of employees.

APPRAISAL RATINGS NOT DISCUSSED

Some organisations conclude the appraisal the point of determining employees’ grades without holding one-on-one discussion meetings on the results. The employee is left in the dark on the specific areas of improvement needed to enhance their future work performance.

Heads of departments and supervisors should hold meeting with the employees they assessed to provide them feedback. Progressive organisations are known to have employees append their signature to staff appraisal form to confirm acceptance of the ratings earned.

DOUBTFUL APPEAL SYSTEM

In cases of disagreement between the employee’s rating and what they expected, there should be an appeal system to resolve the matter.

However, one of the challenges of the appeal committee is perceptual fairness due to its membership. Some corporate organisations have resorted to using the HR Committee of the Board to handle appeal cases.

RATINGS NOT REWARD-LINKED

The outcomes of staff appraisals do not hold much water if they are not directly linked to reward. Some organizations operate a fixed salary incremental rate regardless of the employees’ level of work performance.

Expecting improvement in work performance and productivity of employees in the subsequent year would be like wanting milk from a stone. Organisations should create strong linkages between employee performance and rewards systems to enhance staff productivity.

The writer is a HRD consultant.