Performance Evaluation

The turning point of written appraisals came in the later part of the 1960s when federal guidelines dictated a more objective and systematic method to assessing employees. These guidelines are to ensure a fair process of appraisal however; it has made it much more difficult on a manager to conduct a professional and fair evaluation of their employee. These guidelines are from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and state that 1) Employees not be discriminated against based on race, color, sex, age, creed, or national origin. 2) Employees must be paid equally for conducting similar jobs. 3) Equal opportunity is given to those with handicaps. Further, the EEOC states that appraisal reviews must not be based on a manager's bias and accurately refer to job-related performance. Still, there are many errors committed by managers while completing a written review for employees. Listed below are some common examples of these mistakes and suggestions on correcting these actions to better the employee and manager.

Problem: Managers must retrieve, usually from memory, events of an employee during the designated review period. Successes, failures, time-management, work ethics, and other factors must be recalled and graded on the employee. Many times managers have no written documentation on these events and are pulling from memory the outcomes. This usually results in an incomplete review and many key items can be overlooked.

Solution: Managers must make the decision on how they want to effectively record the performance of the employee on a regular basis to later review during appraisals. The manager can do this in a number of different ways, but the result must be a complete and accurate file that will make sense over time.

Problem: Evaluation criteria changes with little or no thought to past performance measurables and therefore the manager reviews based on these new standards yet the employee is still performing under the previous system.

Solution: If the decision is made to change processes and procedures and no communication is made to the employee, then the employee cannot be held accountable if they are not meeting expectations and have no knowledge of the changes. All actions taken in the prior system still need to be evaluated and included in the review process. At which point the change in direction needs effective communication to the employee and then going forward this measurable is in effect.

Problem: Careless or vengeful managers have a bias against the employee.

Solution: In order to prevent or explain the seriousness of bias and respect in the office, companies must have a systematic form of communication concerning mutual respect in the workplace. In this, explanations of manager's roles and responsibilities in maintaining these standards and their consequences if not practiced must be stressed. Therefore, performing an unfair and inaccurate review of an employee based upon a bias shall not be tolerated and can lead to termination.

Problem: All actions of employees are not weighed

...