Additional keys to effectiveness are training managers to do appraisals, holding them accountable for how well they do appraisals, and using measures of how results are achieved (Lawler III, Benson, McDermott, 2012). Though this statement proves mostly correct, there is some inconsistency with the authors claim. Within every organization, there needs to be a driving force that is committed to not only the organization but also its administrative process. Human Resources is that driving force and amidst all other functions they facilitate, one of the more important obligations is to the employees themselves by way of their performance appraisal system. The information collected from performance measurement is typically used for compensation, performance improvement or management (e.g., personnel decision making), and documentation.
The purpose of this paper is to evaluate how employee motivation can be developed when employees are tightly controlled by management. In an organisation employees are the key resources of the firm’s success, thus organisations need to motivate employees in order to expect better performance and efficiency. Employee’s who are motivated in the organisation work harder, perform efficiently, produce higher quality of quantities and engage in more activities in the organisation. Motivation is a concept when organisations encourage and influence it’s employees to perform better which results to rewards either intrinsic or extrinsic. Motivation not only focuses on behaviour and the performance of the employee, but also on the attitudes that influence them due to the choice of actions (Hutchinson 2013).
Introduction: Evidence suggests that peoples’ actions are often governed by self-interest. “The self-interest motive is singularly powerful, according to many of the most influential theories of human behavior and laypersons alike (Miller, 1999, p. 1)”. Consequently an effective and responsible manager uses rewards and punishment as a means to improve efficiency of employees and productivity of the company. Whether self-interest alone is responsible for human motivation is a debatable issue and a manager must take this factor into account. Factors other than rewards and punishment also affect motivation.
In ways unknown to them, what they expect from the relationship reflects the sum total of their conscious and unconscious learning to date.’ (Spindler, 1994, p328) The creation of a strong working psychological contract is dependant on the commitment and effectiveness of the employee within in the organisation. The extent to which their own expectations of what the organization will provide for them and what they owe the organisation in return must match the organisation’s expectations of what it will give and get in return (Schein, 1965).
The individual trait may translate into employee performance, each of them have subsets which affect people in professional career. Every trait may be related to specific profession. Judge, Higgins, Thoresen, Murray, Barrick (1999) suggest that Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Conscientiousness are appeared to be most relevant to career success and other two traits are not really related to career success and job performance so if we want to use personality as a predictor to job performance and find out how personality traits affect people in professional careers we have to discuss theories. Personality Buchanan and Huczynski (2010) define personality as the psychological qualities that influence an individual’s characteristic behaviour patterns, in a stable and distinctive manner. Many managers are convinced that personality is related to performance in work and career success.
In addition, Zatzick, Zhao and Tingling (2014) also stated that managers that will decide which employee will be dismissed must also discuss with managers responsible for recruiting because “to avoid mistakes such as “last in, first out,” hiring managers are in the best position to know whether the most recent hires have the cutting-edge skills companies need most and therefore are the ones most difficult to replace.” “Employees are more satisfied with a system in which the supervisors, in addition to evaluating their results, involve them in seeking improvements to the work process” (Lam and Schaubroeck, 1999). CONCLUSION To sum up, measuring employee performance is not always advantageous. As stated above, performance measurement
Lastly, for some employers, it is often better to be able to test for specific traits in a particular job that might predict success or that might make an applicant a wrong fit for the particular job. For example, in service industries, employees deal directly with the public, so it is important to have a sense of the employee's prospective of service orientation, since the company is judged by the quality of the service provided. Another example is seen in a position that requires sales and constant communication with people, finding someone who leans toward extroversion might be more helpful for the organization's goals. Overall, the use of personality tests is significant to workplaces for either selecting new employees or developing existing employees.
In order to sustain difficulty, the organization must transform practices in order to be successful as well, having effective leadership to guide employees through those difficult and unwanted changes. The idea that emotional competencies can positively impact workplace outcomes has led an emotional intelligence (EI) to explode as a hot topic among management practitioners (Farh, Chien, & Tesluk, 2012, p.11). Emotional Intelligence with leader process provides the framework for individual to characterize their abilities, behavior, and performance contributing to their organization. Emotional perception encourages efficiency and effectiveness in the work environment theorized by employees. Emotional Intelligence framework is the opportunity to examine the mechanism and boundary that have the form of the relationship between employee and organization.
Personality is a vital tool, which indicates success or the failure of an individual for that job. " Those relatively stable enduring aspects of the individual which distinguish him from other people and at the same time form the basis of our predictions concerning his future behaviour"(Wright et al, 1970). Managers get to know their employees even better as personality depicts their habits, interests, sentiments, ideals, opinions and believes. In addition to this managers can also judge the level of awareness that employee has towards his job. Sometimes there are conflicts between ego, superego, and id.
Lewis, Thornhill et al (as cited in Spooner & Haidar, 2006) defined ER as a social, political, legal, economic and psychological relationship where employees are willing to work accordingly to their employer’s interest and dedicate their time to the workplace in return for a financial and non-financial reward. Young (1963) stated that management has the right to decide all the policies, rules and the method of operating the workplace but if unions are operating, the authority has to be shared partially between the unions and management. According to BWC, the three analytical frameworks have different view on ER. A pluralist thinks the possibility of conflict is critical in ER but it can be managed by proper rules and regulations. ER is essentially supportive in the view of a unitarist, it only get interrupted by occasions and unlawful conflict.