1. The document discusses various performance assessment tools and techniques, including essay appraisals, graphic rating scales, forced-choice ratings, critical incident reports, and assessment centers. 2. It also outlines a 10-step process for developing a new performance assessment system, including getting management buy-in, establishing criteria, appointing an implementation team, and revising the program over time. 3. The key is selecting tools that align with the organization's objectives and strategy, ensuring ongoing communication, and monitoring the system for continual improvement.

1. Universitas Bina Bangsa
Manajemen SDM
Lecturer: Dr. Angrian Permana

2. Detail of Performance Assessment
Manager evaluates
exactly how well
the individual has
performed in each
area.
Appraisal
instrument
Writes
narrative
descriptions
Assign
appropriate
ratings
What & How
What & How
What & How
Design of
PA System ?

3. 10 Step in developing a new PA System
Dapatkan manajemen puncak secara aktif terlibat.
Menetapkan kriteria untuk sistem yang ideal.
Menunjuk tim implementasi.
Desain bentuk yang pertama.
Membangun misi, visi, nilai, dan kompetensi inti ke
dalam formulir.
Memastikan komunikasi yang sedang berlangsung.
Melatih semua penilai.
Orient semua penilai.
Gunakan hasilnya.
Memonitor dan merevisi program.

4. Get top management actively involved
Top Management responsibilities
Menetapkan rencana
strategis
Mengidentifikasi nilai-
nilai & kompetensi inti.
Menunjuk tim
implementasi yang
sesuai.
Menunjukkan
pentingnya Mgt Kinerja.
Active Participants in process.
Use appraisal result in
management decisions

5. Establish the criteria for an ideal system
Appraisers who
must evaluate
performance
HR professional
who must
administer the
system
Appraisees
whose
performance is
being assessed
Senior management
Group that must lead
organization into the
future
Consider the needs of the four
stakeholders group
Identifying expectation
System Design
Pertanyaan dasar: Apa yang diperlukan bagi Anda untuk
mempertimbangkan sistem ini sebagai smashing sukses?

6. Appoint an implementation team.
Taskforces involve the appraisers & appraisees
Responsible for developing
appraisal forms, policies,
procedures, and assuring
successful deployment
Effective
implementations
teams divide into two
working task force
1. Policies, Practices, procedures (3P), responsible for
designing the appraisal form and recommending
policies and procedures, and develop measurement
system to make sure the system is operating properly
once it has been installed.
2. Understanding, Support, and Acceptance (USA), this
team works as a mini-advertising agency, arranging
communication plans and programs to ensure
understanding and support by everyone who will be
affected by the system.

7. Design the form first.
Criteria of the form
1. Simple
2. Understand-able
3. Refer to objective
4. Access-able
5. Attract everyone’s attention
6. Controllable
7. Socialized-able
8. Easy to change

8. Build mission, vision, values, and core competencies into the form
Why ?
Real objective of any performance
management system is to make sure that the
company’s strategic plan and vision and
values are communicated and achieved.
Core competencies expected of all
organization members should be includes,
describes and assessed.
If mission statement isn’t clearly visible in
the performance appraisal system, cynicism
will likely result.

9. Ensure ongoing communication
Circulate drafts of the form and invite users to make
recommendations.
1
2
Considers using focus groups to review ongoing
efforts.
3
Keep the development process visible through
announcements and house organ bulletin.
4 Use survey to request suggestion
Remember Cardinal Principle :
“People support what the help to create”

10. Train all appraisers.
Skill of Appraisers
1. Behavioral observation
and discrimination
2. Goal setting
3. Developing people
4. Confronting
unacceptable
performance
5. Persuading
6. Problem solving
7. Planning
Universal & Comprehensive
development by training and
awareness building
The need for
courage

11. Orient all appraisers
The program’s purposes and procedures must be explained in
advance to everyone who will be affected by it.
Specific training :
1. Procedures request a
feedback.
2. Multi-rater feedback.
3. Upward appraisal
4. Individual development
planning (IDP)

12. Use the results.
Use Results for :
1. Promotion
2. Salary
3. Development
4. Transfer
5. Training
6. Termination Decisions
Tangible
Intangible
What & How ?
What & How ?

13. Monitor and revise the program.
Monitor & Revise the Program :
1. Audit the quality of appraisal
2. Provide feedback to
management, appraisers and
appraisees
3. Actively seek and incorporate
suggestions for improvement

14. Tools and Technique
One reason for failures is that companies often select indiscriminately from the
wide battery of available performance technique without really thinking about
which particular technique is best suited to a particular appraisal objective.
The Most commonly used appraisal technique :
1. Essay appraisal
2. Graphic rating scale
3. Field review
4. Forced-choice rating
5. Critical incident appraisal
6. Management by Objectives approach
7. Works standard approach
8. Ranking methods
9. Assessment Centers
Strength Weakness
COMBINATION

15. ESSAY APPRAISAL
This technique ask the rater to write a paragraph or more covering an
individual’s strength and weaknesses, potential and so on.
The assumptions seem to be that a honest and informed statement
from someone who knows a man well, is fully as valid as more formal
and more complicated methods.
The biggest drawback to essay appraisal is their variability in length
and content.
More over, different essays touch on different aspect of a man’s
performance or personal qualifications, essay rating are difficult to
combine or compare.

16. GRAPHIC RATING SCALE
May not yield the depth of an essay appraisal but more consistent and
reliable.
Assesses a person on the quality and quantity of his work and on a
variety of other factors that vary with the job but usually include
personal traits like reliability and cooperation and specific
performance items like oral and written communication.
Using some scale :
(Outstanding, above average, average or unsatisfactory)
The most widely used this method.

17. FIELD REVIEW
If there is reason to suspect rater bias, when some raters appear to be using
higher standards than others, or when comparability of ratings is essential,
essay or graphic ratings are often combined with systematic review process.
Example :
A members of personnel staff meets with small groups of raters from each
supervisory unit and goes over each employee’s rating with them to :
a. identify areas of inter-rater disagreement
b. Help the group arrive at a consensus.
c. determine that each rater conceives the standards similarly
This group judgment technique tend to be more fair and more valid than
individual ratings and permits the central staff to develop an awareness of
the varying degrees of leniency or severity exhibited by raters in different
departments. Negative side : the process is very time consuming.

18. FORCED – CHOICE RATING
This technique was develop to reduce bias and establish objective standards of
comparison between individuals but it does not involved the intervention of a third
party.
This technique asks raters to choose from among groups of statement those which “best”
fit the individual being rated and those which “least” fit him.
The statement are then weighted or scored. The peoples with high scores are the better
employees. The rater does know what the scoring weights for each statement are . He
simply describes his people and someone in the personnel department applies the
scoring weights to determine who get the best rating.
Characteristics :
1. The rationale behind this technique is difficult to fault ( it is the same rationale
used in developing selection test batteries.
2. Tends to irritate raters, who feel the are not being trusted.
3. Additional drawback is the difficulty and cost of developing form. (needs a
special competencies)
4. Forced – choice forms tend to be of little value – and probably have a negative
effect - when used in performance appraisal interview.

19. CRITICAL INCIDENT APPRAISAL
1. Looks like a natural to some people for performance review interviews
because it gives a supervisor actual, factual incident to discuss with an
employee.
2. Supervisor are asked to keep a record, a “little black book” on each
employee and to record actual incidents of positive or negative behavior.
Characteristics :
1. It request that supervisor or raters jot down incidents on a daily or at the
very least, a weekly basis. This can become a chore.
2. This technique need not, but may, cause supervisor to delay feedback to
employees. And it is hardly desirable to wait six month or a year to confront
an employee with a misdeed or mistake.

20. MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES APPROACH
Employee in some organizations are being asked to set their own performance
goals.
When MBO is applied at lower organizational levels, employees do not
always want to be involved in their own goal setting.
Some organization, therefore, are introducing a work standard approach to
goal setting in which the goals are openly set by management.
Characteristics :
1. Some critics see MBO drifting into a kind of manipulative form of
management in which pseudo-participation substitutes for the real thing.
2. Employee are consulted, but management ends up imposing its standard and
its objectives.

21. WORK STANDARD APPROACH
Many organization set measured daily work standards.
This technique establishes work and staffing targets aimed at improving
productivity. When realistically used, it can make possible an objective and
accurate appraisal of the work of employee and supervisor.
To be effective, the standard must be visible and fair. In many case , that work
standards have been integrated with an organization’s performance appraisal
program.
Characteristics :
1. The work standard program provides each employee with a more or less
complete set of duties, it would seem only natural that supervisors will
eventually relate performance appraisal and interview comments to these
duties.
2. The use of work-standards should make performance interviews less
threatening than use of personal, more subjective standards alone.
3. If people evaluated on different standards, how can the ratings be brought
together for comparison purposes when decisions have to be made on
promotions or on salary increases?

22. RANKING METHODS
Comparing people who work for different
supervisors, individual statements, ratings, or
appraisal forms are not particularly useful.
Comparison involve overall subjective
judgment to which a host of additional
facts and impressions must somehow be
added.
Comparing people in different units for
the purpose of, say, choosing a staff or
determining the relative size of salary,
requires subjective judgment , not statistics.
better
Two most effective method
Alternation Ranking :
The names of employees are
listed on the left-hand side of
a sheet of paper. And the right
hand side of the sheet is
criteria of ranking.
Paired-comparison Ranking
(apple to apple):
The names of employees are
listed on the left-hand side of
a sheet of paper. And the
right-hand side of the others
employee names.

23. RANKING METHODS
Alternation Ranking :
The names of employees are listed on
the left-hand side of a sheet of paper.
And the right hand side of the sheet
is criteria of ranking.
Paired-comparison Ranking (apple to
apple):
The names of employees are listed on
the left-hand side of a sheet of paper.
And the right-hand side of the others
employee names.
D
C
B
A
A
C
D
B
NAM
E
RANKING
BASED ON
CRITERIA
D
C
B
A
4
3
2
1
NAM
E
RANKING
BASED ON
CRITERIA
D
C
B
A

24. ASSESMENT CENTERS
Assessing Past Performance
Assessing Future Performance or
potential
Individuals from different departments are brought together to
spend two or three days working on individual and group
assignment similar to the ones they will be handling if the are
promoted. The pooled judgment of observers – sometimes
derived by paired comparison or alternation ranking – leads to
an order of – merit ranking for each participants . Less structure,
subjective judgment are also made.