PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL - INTEGRITY OF THOUGHTS

ROLE OF REVIEWING AUTHORITY (RA)

When some one is invited for a dinner, even the child in the family is appraising the uncle. Appraisal is everybody’s pleasure. But Performance Appraisal in an organization is a different exercise since it has to be objective and focused.

A reviewee has lesser role to play in the effectiveness of the system, as his only job is to know the scores for various activities and act prudently to get the maximum. But for the system of Performance Appraisal to succeed, the other three players have to play their role actively and honestly. It is the job of HR department to have a meaningful appraisal system and equally meaningful implementation and control. RA (Reviewing Authority) whose role is heavy and decisive has to play his part in full and objectively.

Ø “When he works with you for the whole year can’t you spare half an hour to write about him?”

This question asked by a Chairman to a Works Manager for a sloppy/slipshod appraisal report is to be remembered by all RAs as they review the performance. Also the saying “Don’t take decision when you are angry (also don’t write reports)”.  Hence a RA ideally should note down salient/striking features of the performance periodically though recollecting them with a dispassionate mind while reporting also should not be difficult.

Ø “When I went to Indore, Bharat did not receive me at the station.”   “Oh! What a dinner I had with Punit and what a lovely little daughter he has” - are matters to be de linked from the thoughts when performance is appraised.

Ø Misplaced sympathy is also a source of bias. One cricket fanatic boss gives virtually bonus marks to a supervisor who keeps him up to date with scores during matches. Even if one spends one hour for writing such a report this approach is improper.

Ø Bias, both for and against an individual is unavoidable but almost avoidable. One has to do utmost to almost succeed.

Ø A person with a good PRO countenance may lack the firmness an administrative manager requires. A quick, efficient performer may not be a good team man. Hence actual performance has to be appraised without getting carried away by what is called halo effect (good in one aspect means good in others as well).

Ø “Arre bhai this year he is appearing for promotion. Let us not spoil his career” is an ideal way of spoiling others career. Calling a bill collector as Collector is insult to District Collector.   The same way branding mediocre as good and good as excellent are damaging to the really good and excellent employees.

Ø Let us not call it a donkey. Calling it horse brings in answerability. Let us call it a mule.  This is yet another safety valve approach people follow. Donkeys will be happy to be called mules. Mules are anyway mules but the widely useful horse will be upset, for having been bracketed with mules.

Ø Performers cannot be called average for our inability to appraise.

Ø Performance appraisal has to be related to the nature of job role. For instance to appraise commitment the degree of commitment expected is different for a middle management employee and the one in the top executive cadre.

Ø Poor – satisfactory – average – good- Very good or excellent are the five ratings normally awarded. For each task especially Key Performance Areas (KPAs), one should clearly frame in mind what contribution fetches what ratings. Such clarity has to be passed on to the reviewee as well.

Ø “I have not been rated outstanding then why should I rate my subordinate” is yet another thinking that is detrimental to the fair implementation of an appraisal scheme.

Ø The human tendency to remember the latest work experience also has to be overcome by the RA, to cover the appraisal for the entire assessment year. Therefore as the assessment year progresses, periodically identifying factors that hinder performance would help reduce these tendencies as far as possible.

Ø There should also be objectivity by consistency between scores and remarks. There are RAs who gave a ‘C’ rating with a remark “very prompt in work”.

Overcoming external factors like regional /parochial considerations is another requirement to achieve objectivity. ‘Let us not let down our boys’ is the policy, and the zone of consideration overtakes meritorious factors.

To overcome pressures from vested interests, as also to have an objective view, the review has to be data based. While a healthy system would itself have such data as input in the reports, nothing prevents the RA from adding them in his report on his own. Once data supports the ratings and remarks in the appraisal the FRA too will have to follow suit in case he wants to differ.

·      During the review period no worker of his section had a grievance or was booked for negligence.

·      The absenteeism came down and production increased by 2%.

·      The rejection percentage was less by 2%.

Are some of the examples of data supporting review.

·      ‘He disposed off waste material lying for over 5 years thus enabling spacious work area for the finished goods.

·      He participated in the alcoholics anonymous groups and helped three of his staff reform and stop taking alcohol.’

 Are also examples of data based Performance Appraisal.

At times the appraisal scheme calls for recommendations for giving higher responsibilities/positions. Though potential appraisal may not be prevalent in a scientific manner, the RA has to appreciate the qualities needed for the higher job role viz. technical knowledge, managerial qualities, behavioural finesse and emotional strength etc. For instance an officer humble by nature may feel that being assertive is an offence on the other individual. Levels of courage and risk taking ability are other aspects. The RA has to carefully weigh all these aspects before stating “Recommended”.

In the end analysis a data based Performance Appraisal for which the HR managers have to take the initiative for system creation; monitoring and control will go a long way in having a motivated work force.  The RAs with conscientious data based Performance Appraisal can contribute in no small measure for objectivity in assessments which would go a long way in keeping performers motivated.   The HR functionaries with due dissemination of information on the need for data based appraisal can add in equal measure the dose of objectivity. 

Such appraisal is non-financial and professional integrity needing all encouragement and support.

                                   *******************