Performance Appraisal Survey Analysis

Performance Appraisal:

There are many different types of performance appraisals available. Among the more common include:

Comparative Standards -- This type of performance appraisal compares employee's performance with others in a group

Group Ranking Order -- In this type a supervisor places each employee in a classification, such as top 1/2 of employees. Usually someone has to be assigned in a bottom fraction of the group.

Individual Ranking -- This is the most commonly used form where a supervisor will list employees from highest and lowest.

Paired Comparison -- This type of performance appraisal compares employees with each and every other employee within a group and rates employees in terms of 'superior' or 'weaker' compared with another. A ranking and score is then assigned employees.

Source: Allen, 1998. "Management Evaluation."

This particular evaluation combined a group ranking method with 360 degree feedback, where a comprehensive evaluation of employee performance is enabled using feedback from all of the people an employee would interact with, including supervisors, co-workers and subordinates (Hunter, 2003). Each of the employees surveyed (four total) were ranked from 1 to 4, 1 being the highest performer and 4 the lowest.

Three out of four respondents indicated that they believed the performance appraisal was administered in a timely fashion. Only two of four respondents however indicated that they appraisal results were as anticipated, and even more discouragingly one of four indicated they felt the performance appraisal was measured adequately against there job (strongly agreed).

Every respondent (four out of four) strongly agreed however that they were provided recommendations for improvement during their performance appraisal. These recommendations were given based on the critical feedback provided by co-workers and supervisors the employees worked with. None of the employees in this case had subordinates working under them.

The results of the performance appraisal survey response were not as expected. Because a 360 degree feedback method was utilized, there was an expectation that more employees would feel that the performance appraisals adequately reflected their abilities, skills and performance during the season. As the results show however, this is not the case.

A majority of respondents suggested that the feedback offered was far too subjective in nature, and because each of the individuals replying were 'group ranked' and their performance was measured by individuals within their group, they felt it was possible that other members of the group downplayed their achievements and focused on their weaknesses in order to make themselves appear more competent in their own evaluations.

This is a distinct possibility. To remedy the situation and provide more objective feedback for employees in the future, it is recommended that the company maintain a 360 degree approach because it provides the most information about individual employee's achievements. However, instead of asking co-workers within each employees group to evaluate an employee's performance, it is recommended that employees are evaluated by co-workers they work with indirectly in other areas of the company. Their influence will still be examined, but the results won't be influenced by an individual's desire to place themselves in a better light.