Building A Better Performance Review

Inroduction

I became interested in this topic awhile back while I was receiving one of my annual reviews. I could not stop thinking about how difficult it must be for a supervisor to develop on a continual basis several individual reviews for large department and still be unique and objective review after review. It became even more apparent to me how little I knew about the process, when I was promoted into a coaching position and was allowed to begin giving input on my team member¡¦s performance reviews.

Although I have no complaints about the current review process in my company, I often wonder if there is not a better or easier way to go about the process. So my question is: What, if any, are the alternatives? In this paper, I will review the aspects of the traditional performance appraisal, the 3600 degree performance review and Debundling, an alternative approach to the traditional performance appraisal proposed by Peter R. Scholtes in The Leader¡¦s Handbook, in an attempt to build the better performance appraisal.

The Traditional Performance Appraisal

Most often the performance appraisal for employees is conducted once a year and traditionally is a backward looking event. The process is based on a rating system and sums up what has been discussed and accomplished throughout the previous 12 months. The purpose is to give an employee opportunities in areas that need to be further developed. Performance appraisal for evaluation using the traditional approach serves the following purposes: (Grote, p. 4-5)

„Ï Promotion, separation and transfer decisions

„Ï Feedback to employees about their performance

„Ï Evaluations of relative contributions made by the individuals

„Ï Criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of selection and placement decisions

„Ï Reward decisions, including merit increases, promotions and other rewards

„Ï Determining training and development needs

However, there are a few flaws in the traditional approach to performance appraisal. Some of these are:

„Ï It is primarily concerned with past 12 months history rather than looking forward to future goals

„Ï The appraisal is usually tied to the employees salary revi...

... middle of paper ...

...possibly utilizing, a combination of the traditional and the 3600 peer review would give a better insight to my performance and help my supervisor develop further training for myself and our department. I do believe however, that the 3600 peer review process would not be effective for all positions within an organization and could be damaging to a person if not handled properly. Although Scholtes offers an insightful alternative to the review process, I do not believe this is a theory many organizations or employees will embrace. I do believe however, that his theories will offer alternatives and allow supervisors to gain a better understanding into the human psyche, which would allow them the opportunity to manage more effectively.

References

Grote, D. (2002). The performance appraisal question and answer book:

A survival guide for Managers. New York: AMACOM

Peiperl, M.A. (2005). Getting 360-degree feedback right. Harvard Business Review on Appraising Employee Performance. (pgs. 69-83). Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing

Scholtes, P.R. (1998). The Leaders Handbook: A guide to inspiring your people and managing the daily workflow. (pgs. 293-360). New York: McGraw-Hill