Debate Paper On the Use of Performance Appraisal in Evaluation of Employees
Traditionally, human resources department has been about ensuring the welfare of the employees is addressed as well as the interest of the organization is well met with regards to the meeting of the targets from the human resource perspective through training of employees, allocating of duties or even recruiting of people that have the needed skills. At the same time, it has been the role of the human resource department to evaluate the work done by the employees and appraise them through effective means that are sustainable and effective to the organization. Despite the fact that the issue of appraisal is vital, there have been a number of issues that have been raised against its use as the basis of evaluating the employees. The employees should always be evaluated using a systematic, reliable and sustainable mechanism that can be justified; hence the case for appraisal method of evaluating the employees is justified and certainly the most effective way going forward.
The controversial position is that employee appraisal is one of the most effective ways that has been used in improving the performance of the employees whereby it looks into their weaknesses as well their strengths and helps them to focus on the areas they have opportunities as a way of learning and improving the manner in which they do their things. This is indeed effective based on the fact that a number of people end up benefiting by improving their skills. It is all about what one can and should focus on even when it is outside their initial scope of work as long as they enjoy it and they stand a chance to learn from it (Soltani & Wilkinson, 2018). On the other, the traditional position holds that the employees should be evaluated on the basis of their qualifications as well as their experience and not just the results the post for a given period of financial year. This position is anchored on the fact that there is need to promote status quo in that those who have been in the industry longer are rewarded more than those who have joined the other day even when the newcomers perform better than the more experienced employees.
The controversial position holds that the employee development is key, and it can be best achieved through appraisal approach of employee evaluation. This is based on the fact that it highlights the strengths and the weaknesses hence giving a bearing an of what should be done and how it should be in order to ensure that the employees work on their weaknesses (Adler et al., 2016). Despite this argument, the traditional position has been of the opinion that many of the appraisals are done with the aim of promoting the employees or rewarding them hence it does not add much value with regards to developmental needs. The traditional argument is that training needs are done with or without appraisals; hence there is no need to limit the process to some form of an appraisal. The employees are therefore supposed to undergo development process based on training needs; hence the individual appraisal of the employees should not really be the main basis of the employee development.
The controversial position holds that the workforce appraisal has the ability to detect employee deficiency as well as come up with some of the most effective corrective measures. This is anchored on the understanding that through the appraisal, the areas of weaknesses that may have been identified will, therefore, be used as key points in coming up with a learning program that is capable of ensuring that the people learning and are able to understand how to address the issues they face (Tziner & Rabenu, 2018). At the same time, the contrasting opinion presented by those who hold the traditional position has held that the employee appraisal is mostly incomplete and biased based on the reality that when done by different people it is likely to lead to different results even though the person being appraised may be the same. This is a huge challenge based on the understanding that it is not conclusive; hence the corrective measures suggested may not be accurate.
The controversial position has been of the understanding that the employee appraisal is the correct way of promoting the employees since it based on performance and not just the paper qualifications or the number of years that people have been able to work in an organization. It has gone to state that it influences the decision on who is fired, transferred or even rewarded (Dokuka et al., 2019). At the same time, those of the contrasting opinion have always held the opinion that the employees are promoted based on the organizational policies and not merely on the basis of a single appraisal. This is based on the reality that there are organizations that promote employees if they work for the organization for a given number of years meaning with or without the appraisal, then they will still be promoted. This means it is not an effective way of being a basis for the promotion, but maybe it should just be a factor or a basis for promotion but not necessarily the only reason as to why employees are promoted.
The controversial position has held that the employees are motivated to work hard by the appraisals this based on their understanding that once they get favorable ratings from the process, then they stand a better chance of being able to work extremely hard so that they may maintain such ratings or on the other hand if they get a poor rating then they may be motivated to work hard so that they may equally benefit from the appraisal just as it may have been the case for some of their mates (Babagana et al., 2019). On the contrary, the traditional position has held that the idea of only concentrating on the numerical aspects in the name of appraisal and using it as the basis of evaluating the employees with no regards for other things such as the level of commitment that the employees put in is a huge challenge and a big letdown to the employees. Instead of motivating the employees, it is likely to demotivate them in that many will simply not give their best on things that are not evaluated but instead will focus on what is being evaluated with the aim of getting the best review hence they may not be motived to work harder but to concentrate on what made them stand a chance of getting a better performance.
The controversial position has been holding that there is need to ensure that the process is based on facts, standards and processes so as to ensure that it is accurate. At the same time, it has been estimated that through the existing framework it is easy to ensure that the appraisal is done and the results of the appraisal is submitted. The fact that it is objective simply means that one will not be worked against with regards to favoritism. This means that it can be done by someone who hates an individual but the results will still be positive since it is based on the fact and not what someone thinks about the other (Alharbi, 2018). On the other hand, the traditional position holds that it is clear that there has been a lot of stereotyping in the industry which has affected the outcome of the process. In that there are many people who have been perceived in a given manner which has affected the way they are reviewed or perceived. It is also clear that a huge number of people have been subjected to a lot unfair biasness which has been inclined to the stereotype that their bosses may be having against them and this has been a huge challenge for them. In the long run, one cannot rely on this as the main basis of doing things when it comes managing organization processes.
Even though those of the controversial opinion hold that is systematic and long process that can be done without having any interferences to the rest of the activities that the employees are engaged in, it is clear that that those of the traditional opinion hold a different opinion (Dokuka et al., 2019). This is based on the fact that according to them, the appraisal is simply a time wasting process since most of its findings are hardly implemented yet much of the office valuable time that would have been used or spent on other engagements is wasted on the appraisal. Even though there are claims of it being systematic hence it can be done alongside other activities, the reality from the traditional position or perspective is that the employees can be appraised without being subjected to all these activities that are hardly effective in the long run.
Those of the controversial opinion have claimed that it simply leads to better mental preparedness among the employees whereby they all ready for any appraisal anytime. This also means that they perform better on normal days since they do not know when the appraisal will be done since it is not a case of preplanned event but it is a routine activity that is done periodically (Babagana et al., 2019). Those of the contrasting opinion, the traditional position holds that it has simply brought about stress at workplace in that people are very stressed up for no reason. This has been anchored on the understanding that the employees instead of simply going for training on how to improve their skills will always be stressed up about the appraisal as well as the set standards and what is likely to happen in the event they fail to meet the set standards. There is need to ensure that the workplace is stress free as much as possible.
Conclusion
In light of the above discussion, it is clear that it appraisal of employees as a form of evaluating that is indeed objective, standardized and effective even though those who are used to the old order may not really be happy about it. There is need to come up with measures that will ensure the current appraisal methods are not stand alone methods but they work hand in hand with the other methods in the quest of complementing what have been devised by the human resource department in the improvement of the experience of the employees as well as improving the level of accountability in the organization. It is therefore in line with the existing literature to state that the employees should always be evaluated using a systematic, reliable and sustainable mechanism that can be justified hence the case for appraisal method of evaluating the employees is justified and certainly the most effective way going forward.
References:
Adler, S., Campion, M., Colquitt, A., Grubb, A., Murphy, K., Ollander-Krane, R., & Pulakos, E. D. (2016). Getting rid of performance ratings: Genius or folly? A debate. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9(2), 219-252.
Alharbi, S. (2018). Criteria for Performance Appraisal in Saudi Arabia, and Employees Interpretation of These Criteria. International Journal of Business and Management, 13(9).
Babagana, S. A., Mat, N., & Ibrahim, H. (2019). Effectiveness of Performance Appraisal (EPA): Does Distributive Fairness and Employee Participation Matter?: A Conceptual Framework. Sains Humanika, 11(2-2).
Dokuka, S., Zaikin, I., Furman, K., Tsvetovat, M., & Furman, A. (2019). Wisdom of collaborators: a peer-review approach to performance appraisal. arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.12861.
Soltani, E., & Wilkinson, A. (2018). TQM and performance appraisal: complementary or incompatible?. European Management Review.
Tziner, A., & Rabenu, E. (2018). Effectiveness of performance evaluation formats. In Improving Performance Appraisal at Work. Edward Elgar Publishing.