98%(40)39 out of 40 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 8 - 9 out of 14 pages.
lacks test-retest reliability, determining whether an employee’s performance has truly changed over time will be impossible.Acceptability– whether or not a measure is valid and reliable, it must meet the practical standard of being acceptable to the people who use it. For example, the people who use a performance measuremust believe that it is not too time consuming. Likewise, if employees believe the measure is unfair they will not use the feedback as a basis for improving their performance.Specific feedback– A performance measure should specifically tell employees what is expected of them and how they can meet those expectations. Being specific helps performance management meet the goals of supporting strategy and developing employees. Being specific may also mean the performance measure can be defined in quantitative terms. If a measure does not specify what an employee must do to help the organization achieve its goals, it does not support the strategy. If the measure fails to point out performance gaps, employees will not know how to improve-How is performance measured? (pg. 178)Table 7.1 compares methods in terms of criteria for evaluating performance measurement (pg. 178)Comparative approach to measurementThe performance appraisal method may require the rater to compare on individual’s performance with that of others. This method involves some form of ranking in which some employees are the highest performers, some are average, and others are not meeting expectations.Simple ranking– requires managers to rank employees in their group from the highest performer to the lowest performer. The major downside of ranking involves validity. To state a performance measure as broadly as “highest” or “lowest” doesn’t define what exactly is effective or ineffective about the person’s contribution to the organization. Ranking therefore raises questions about fairnessForced-distribution method– is another way to compare employees’ performance. This type of performance measurement assigns a certain percentage of employees to each category in a set of categories. (ex. 45% to good, 45% average, 10% poor). This method works best if the members of a group are very varied in terms of their performance. This method is good for the first few years until a manager selects a team of all high performers and then is pressured to put some of these members in the lower performer categories (this results in inaccuracies and hurting morale)Paired-comparison method– this approach involves comparing each employee with each other employee to establish rankings. Clearly, this method is time-consuming if a group has more than a handful of employees.Ex. A manager compares one of his team member A with another and gives one point to the higher performer. The manager then compares the team member A with another different team member and gives a point to the higher performer. The