I will explain the appraisal methods of performance and any changes I think is warranted. There are three common appraisal methods and they are as follows, "rating scales, essay methods, and results oriented or MBO" (Appraisal Methods, 2006). Certain protocol involved with these appraisals can be seen as "encouraging discussion" (Appraisal Methods, 2006), being able to be candid as an employee allows for empowerment during the appraisal session. "Constructive intention" (Appraisal Methods, 2006), will give the employee a well-rounded view of destructive work behavior and promising work behavior. Basically it is an understanding that will not make the employee feel threatened or singled out during an appraisal. "Setting performance goals" (Appraisal Methods, 2006), can increase employee incentive and motivation while giving the employee those goals to look to the future in his or her current employment. "Appraiser Credibility" (Appraisal Methods, 2006), can make the employee feel comfortable especially if the appraiser and the employee have a history of working together and they share common work practices.
Advantages and Disadvantages
"Rating scales" (Appraisal Methods, 2006), can be used for everyone. They are standard in theory and have basic questions that can be used for an abundance of employees. Disadvantages can be seen as "trait relevance" (Appraisal Methods, 2006), does the scale pertain to all employees? I would think there would be differing scales for differing sets of employees within the corporate hierarchy. "Systemic Disadvantage" (Appraisal Methods, 2006), this is supposed to be accurate in measuring employee performance with both desirable indicators and undesirable indicators. This is hard to prove with the rating scale method due to other extenuating circumstances or traits. "Perceptual errors" (Appraisal Methods, 2006), this applies to perception errors such as "the halo effect" or we see others the way we see them based on our own ethics. An employer may not see the employee as having any defects and the evaluation could be biased. "Perceived meaning" (Appraisal Methods, 2006), this occurs when the employer differs on the employee performance, for example, John may work for Jane and do an excellent job but when Mary asks him to do a task, John does as he is asked but Mary thinks he did a poor job. "Rating errors" (Appraisal Methods, 2006), sometimes a supervisor can be deliberate in their thinking, meaning they may feel that all employees are middle of the road employees and give them an appraisal that may or may not be desired. Sometimes the appraiser feels inadequate to do the actual measuring and does not have the time.
"Essay method" (Appraisal Methods, 2006), is great because you actually have a "written statement" (Appraisal Methods, 2006) about your appraisal and it is specific in nature. The advantages of this method are that it is more concentrated on your actual job performance. It is not general and it tells you your strengths and weaknesses and how to improve performance. The disadvantage of this method is that they are "time consuming" (Appraisal Methods, 2006) and difficult to process.
"Results method or MBO" (Appraisal Methods, 2006), "they seek to measure employee performance by examining the extent to which predetermined work objectives have been met" (Appraisal Methods, 2006). The advantages are the MBO method actually is measured on outcomes. The disadvantages are "they can lead to unrealistic expectations about what can and cannot be reasonably accomplished" (Appraisal Methods, 2006).
I would outlaw the scale method because it could be biased and unreliable. I like both the MBO method and the essay method. At least you are getting feedback from both and it is interpersonal in nature.
Appraisal Methods, (2006) Archer North Performance Appraisal System. Retrieved August 31, 2006 from http://www.performance-appraisal.com/methods.htm