Describe Appraisal by Results

[shamsudeen]

Explain Appraisal by Results method of performance appraisal.

[nbm]

In recent years, the appraisal has been extended to management groups also which has encouraged added attention to evaluation of performance. Managers now feel that performance is in itself the most reliable indicator of potential and quality. This feeling has led to the development of appraisal by results that are against the setting and accomplishing of verifiable objective. The essential feature of the appraisal is the manager's observation of the subordinate's performance measured against specific pre-determined goals with the subordinate's actions, attitudes, and general job behaviour examined in this context. Conclusions are based on observation and evidence of performance rather than the superior's opinions of the subordinates.

Though there are variations, six basic elements are common to most result-oriented appraisal plans:

The superior and each of his subordinates jointly plan the subordinate's tasks and responsibilities.
The subordinate prepares a plan for specified period, say, six months, or a year. Through mutual consultation, the final target to be achieved is fixed.
Through mutual consultation, they also fix up and clarify superior's supporting and evaluative role.
At the end of the specified period, the superior makes a performance evaluation of subordinate on the basis of mutually agreed criteria.
Superior discusses the results and his evaluation with the subordinate, corrective actions, if necessary, are suggested, and mutually agreed upon targets are fixed for future.
The method emphasises traits and other characteristic, focusing on performance results.

The process of appraisal poses several questions and problems. The two most common problems relating to appraisal are— (a) fixation of goals and (b) measuring accomplishment of goals. The fixation of goals is carried on through mutual consultation between superior and his subordinate and it depends upon their judgment and experience. In assessing goal accomplishment, the evaluator must take into account such considerations as whether goals were reasonably attainable, whether the factors beyond the control of subordinate have helped or hindered him in accomplishing his goals, and finally what the reasons for accomplishment or non-accomplishment were. As such, the success of this system depends upon: (i) good job descriptions specifying areas in which goals are too developed; (ii) trust in the subordinate to establish responsible goals; (iii) specification of specific rather than general goals; and (iv) problem solving, rather than critical, discussion of ensuring performance.

Evaluation-of Appraisal by Results Method

This method of appraisal springs from forces that have generated a popular philosophy of management known as 'management by objective' or 'management by result'. Thus, this method is less a technique and more a way of life for managers. If the prevailing style of management is harmonious with the objectives approach, appraisal by results appears to be an improvement over trait approach methods of appraisal. One study indicates that the very nature of trait approach tends to immediately stimulate the rater to adopt a role stereotype of a supervisor—critical evaluative, and often defensive. The result-oriented approach alters this stereotype and rates reporting greater satisfaction, more agreement, greater comfort, and less tension and hostility.

Appraisal by result has the same strength as management by objectives or results. This has a great advantage of being operational because appraisals are not apart from the job a manager does, but a review of what actually he does as a manager. Moreover, the person appraised is more likely to see positive steps to improvement than he would if he were faced with the need to remould his inner psychological make-up to satisfy his superior. Self-generated change works better than imposed change winch generates resistance, hostility, and defensiveness on the part of subordinates.

The result-oriented approach, however, is not without its limitations. This approach has all the weaknesses of management by objectives. In particular, (his appraisal method has following weaknesses:

1. One of the major weaknesses of the method is to emphasise results alone, and it is entirely possible for a man to meet or miss goals through no fault of his own. External factors often play important part in performance. Most evaluators claim that they always take uncontrollable or unexpected factors into account in assessing goals performance. But it is extremely difficult.

2. It requires the job being performed to be such that goal establishment is possible by others than the managers. It is doubtful if such a procedure is practicable for the job whose output is qualitative. The more restricted and regimented the job the less usable is this particular approach.

3. The result approach necessarily involves considerable time, thought and contact between superior and subordinate. If the span of management is large, this system may be inappropriate and trait approach appraisal may be selected. 

4. This approach puts entire emphasis on training and development, since management by objectives gives better and more accurate visibility to managerial needs, and development programmes can be better pinpointed. Yet, management has to make various decisions on a comparative basis—who gets the pay increase or who is to be promoted. This approach provides some data for justifying the correctness of decision, but their comparability among competing subordinates is limited.

5. This programme appraises operating performance only. There are also other factors to appraise, notably an individual's managerial ability. Thus, an individual, failing to achieve particular target in one direction at present, may be an asset to the organisation in future. Therefore, an adequate appraisal system must appraise performance as a manager as well as performance in setting and meeting goals.