Reflection On Performance Appraisal

Performance appraisal is the evaluation of employees' performance (work quantity, quality and social benefits, etc.), work ability and work attitude (including moral character) in the work process of employees, and the result is used to judge whether employees are commensurate with their job requirements.

The purpose is to identify employees' work achievements and improve their working style, so as to improve their work efficiency and business efficiency.

I think this view is very penetrating, so that my vague thinking suddenly became clear.

If the purpose of assessment is only a reward and punishment, it can play a certain role, but it has only done a half and a half.

What is the ultimate goal of our assessment work? Who is to reward and punish?

No, reward and punishment are only means of assessment, and the ultimate goal of assessment is to improve work efficiency and business efficiency.

Then can we improve our efficiency and efficiency if we reward the excellent and punish the less outstanding ones?

It should be said that little effect has been achieved.

Why?

The purpose of performance appraisal is not to be afraid of eating big meals. So we encourage everyone to take the initiative to work through examination and wage linkage?

It is not surprising that such a question arises.

The answer is, of course, negative. Assessment is absolutely not, or not just for motivation, motivation is only a means of improvement and improvement.

Xu Yulin, a teacher in the school of labor and personnel at Renmin University of China, has discussed the fallacy of taking examination as an incentive and reward and punishment method. It is enough for me to be convinced by the actual situation of our company. It makes me wonder, as if he knew about our company.

He pointed out that the purpose of domestic enterprises assessment is the following two points:

(1) through the examination to confirm the performance of the executive personnel to achieve the level of decision, reward and punishment, bonus distribution, salary increase, pfer, promotion and other human resources management decisions;

(2) encourage employees to work hard through examination and rational use of assessment results (rewards and punishments and treatment adjustments).

Professor Xu Yulin said with no question that this understanding is not only inconsistent with theory, but also has 8 negative effects:

1) the motivation for employees to improve their performance comes from the drive of interests and the fear of punishment.

Yes, yes, that's right. The purpose of our assessment is for this. Few employees in some units or departments can get full wages in most months of the year. Employees are generally afraid and disliked by the deduction of money. Now some units or departments have become numb and resentful.

But how to punish is useless. What else can we do?

2) over reliance on the examination system weakens the responsibilities of managers at all levels to improve performance.

This is quite true. Our cadres have passed the examination, and the rest are cadres in carrying out the examination.

As for whether employees can get better through rewards and punishments, it seems that managers can not do so.

We should do all we have to do. We should punish all the fines, and the tree pacesetter has also been planted. What else can we do, so it seems that there is no manager's responsibility.

3) simply rely on regular and performance appraisal and neglect the control and supervision of the work process.

Yes, only by the end of the examination can we know the urgency and anger, the observation and analysis of the signs in the process, and really pay little attention to the prediction of the results. In fact, this is more important for the managers, and the results are all out, can punishment bring back to life?

4) as managers play the role of police, assessment is the problem of staff selection, resulting in the confrontation and conflict between managers at the same time.

I also know about the relationship between the cadres and the masses in our company. I am afraid I do not want comrades and partnerships. Few people can hear their employees' outspoken opinions and suggestions to the leaders. They are totally distrust of their minds and abilities.

5) this kind of management which only pays attention to the result and does not emphasize the process is not conducive to training the shallow staff who lack working ability and experience.

If our cadres are able to find problems in the course of their work, lead them to analyze and study together, study together, study together, sum up experience, and help them to correct their shortcomings and improve their abilities, we must better account for them than before.

6) when employees find that they fail to meet their work standards, they abandon themselves or abandon their efforts or attribute to external, others and other factors.

It is easy to lose heart when employees are helpless, unable to learn to improve, and do not express their opinions.

7) when the working standard can not be measured accurately, the employee will avoid responsibility.

Examination can not be comprehensive and can not measure all jobs.

If you only use the assessment to measure your work, you can really lead employees to avoid or shirk their responsibilities. Even if you are paralyzed, you really think that work is not done well.

8) generate resistance to outstanding performance, so that outstanding people become the target of attack.

It is true that in addition to deducting money, it is cold, and can not get care and help. It is easy to generate jealousy and revenge.

As long as one of the examiners or the examiners of the company performs performance appraisal under such understanding, it is doomed to fail.

What is even more frightening is that the enterprises after failure can be even worse than before. The time needed to eliminate these negative effects is hard to estimate.

{page_break}

Needless to say more, the core of performance appraisal is to improve and enhance two key words, improving the way each employee works and improving the overall efficiency and efficiency of the enterprise.

From this important premise, the two questions I once had in my mind suddenly became clear.

First, our team work has been united, cooperative and positive. Is it necessary to conduct performance appraisal?

Frankly speaking, I do exist in my mind. I will do well in my work. Why do I check and why I fail to do well?

Deep introspection is caused by the unaccustomed system constraint and Misreading of performance appraisal.

Let's first talk about what is unaccustomed to institutional constraints, which should be the ethical complex of the Chinese people.

Lin Yutang, a great master of the Republic of China, once defined the ethical foundation of Chinese society as a result of thousands of years of low mobility and acquaintance society composed of regional and consanguinity.

In the circle of acquaintances, communism can be pursued.

People can be relatively different from each other, and their goals are easy to be unified. Even if there is no contract and system constraints, there can be a tacit understanding. That is to say, in acquaintance society, the demand for a series of systems including human resources is not strong.

The influence of this complex is still hidden in our blood until today.

However, the development of Qinghai gelatin to a modern enterprise must comply with the rules of the game in the commercial society, that is, the spirit of contract.

In the course of the continuous development of Qinghai gelatin, the company will inevitably absorb people from all corners of the country, to a certain extent, the original acquaintance and small society must break.

Only the system is the foundation for the future scientific management of the company. From this point of view, performance appraisal is an inevitable demand for the development of gelatin in Qinghai.

If we understand the above point, we can achieve the goal of refusing to refuse performance appraisal, but deep down, we may still think that this is to obey the overall situation.

If we are doing the performance appraisal with the attitude of obeying the overall situation, is it good for everyone to do that? Do we need to make such a complicated and rigorous assessment index for some departments and individuals who are already busy for the company and have already been active in their work?

This is the misreading of performance appraisal, that is to say, performance appraisal is mainly linked to some indicators and wages, so that everyone works well, so we have all taken the initiative to work well, of course, there is no need for performance appraisal.

Let's go back to the complete definition of performance appraisal. The first sentence is that performance appraisal is the evaluation of the performance (quantity, quality and social benefits, etc.), work ability and work attitude (including moral character) of the employees in the work process. We can see from this sentence that performance appraisal is not only about the results of the examination, but also the process of assessment -- the ability and attitude to complete the work process, in other words, in what way to complete the work.

In fact, anyone who reads any human resource professional book can find that they spend a lot of time on the principles and design principles of process control.

Only by examining the process can we achieve the ultimate goal of improving the way of work through performance appraisal.

The most direct role of improving the way of work is definitely the improvement of individual professional ability of employees.

I think no matter whether an old comrade with rich experience or a fresh person who has just started to work, he will not think that he has no potential and can not be changed. Nor dare he say that any method of his work is the most appropriate one in any similar enterprise or any time background.

That means that every one of us can admit that we can improve and improve ourselves, and we need to improve and improve it.

We have come to the conclusion that an excellent team will never refuse performance appraisal, because every member of the team really needs performance appraisal and needs to improve itself through performance appraisal.

We can further deduce: a good management if the subordinates relaxed assessment, that is to let subordinates lose the opportunity to improve their work, so that the survival of the subordinate competitiveness is becoming weaker and weaker, it is like pushing the subordinates to the cliff that is eliminated sooner or later.

At the same time, it is also pushing the enterprises that they serve to be eliminated sooner or later.

{page_break}

Of course, in order to truly improve the way of performance appraisal, it is not possible to have this understanding. Qualified examiners and scientific and effective assessment standards are two essential conditions.

Qualified examiners refer to the basic understanding of the human resources system as long as the management at all levels should participate in the examination of others.

The following question is about the standard of assessment. This is another question that once puzzled me.

Two, our work is very difficult to refine and quantify, how to conduct examination?

The scientific nature of performance appraisal standards has gone beyond my professional scope, so I can only put forward some of my very superficial considerations for your reference.

The scientific evaluation index I understand should at least include the obvious characteristics of the indicator's orientation to the examiners.

First of all, I think that since the purpose of performance appraisal is to achieve the goal of improvement and promotion through the confirmation of the results and process, then the performance appraisal indicators are not only the decomposition of the operational indicators, but also must set clear guiding indicators for the positions, current levels and development goals of different levels of employees.

These guiding indicators are the abilities and attitudes needed to accomplish the job.

Secondly, it is difficult to quantify.

In fact, this is a false proposition, because the development of social science has repeatedly demonstrated a truth: nothing is impossible to quantify, but whether we have the ability to quantify.

The quantification I understand is not equal to digitalization, or it does not mean that every level of examination index must be absolutely digitalized.

For example, whether theoretical application and logical deduction are rigorous, whether data collection is sufficient and whether professional or writing paradigms can be designed as a A-E level or a qualitative index of YES&NO, is it a way to solve this problem as long as the number of indicators pferred to 100 points is at the highest level?

Thirdly, the so-called guidance is not only the guidance of individual indicator design, but also the guidance of the accumulation of the same indicators in terms of the ability of the employees at high, middle and basic levels.

On the Internet, we have seen the weight distribution of the performance appraisal of a certain central enterprise. The management responsibilities for all levels of management personnel are as follows: the top management 50%-70% of the company is the macro strategy and the promotion of the whole company. 30%-50% is the macro planning of human resources, and the 20% is the VIP customer of the company. The 50% of the middle-level management personnel is the management and personnel training, guidance and evaluation of the daily work of the Department, 30% is the macro planning of human resources, 20% of the actual operation; the content of the grass-roots management is: 70% execution, 20% management, 10% macro thinking.

Referring to this case, according to the above ideas, the main work contents of our managers should be placed on management and personnel training and promotion. We should focus on the construction of personnel in the Department.

The discussion on performance appraisal was generated during the last few days for the Ministry of investment to set up assessment indicators. It was not professional, but I myself gained some thoughts on some scattered information.

The design of scientific indicators must be based on the repeated communication between the examiners at all levels and the examiners under the guidance of the Ministry of human resources.

It is not difficult to understand that while everyone of us is improving, the human resource system, including performance appraisal, is in the process of improvement and upgrading.