248 PART 3 Assessing Performance and Developing EmployeesF.docx

248 PART 3 Assessing Performance and Developing Employees
Figure 8.7
lmproving Performance Low
L09 Discuss legal and
ethical issues that
affect periormance
managemenl.
Motivation
SOUICE: Based on M. Lbndon, Job Feedback tMahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1997), pp. 96*97. Lse:
by permission.
on the grout)ds of leaving well enough alone. Rather, such
employees are likelr :
appreciate opportunities for further der.elopment. Rer'vards and
direct feedback h<h:
toinaintain ihese .mployees' high motivation levels.
Legal and Ethicat lssues in Performance
Management
fu-r developing and using performance management systems,
human resource prtri'i:e"
sionals ne.d to ensure that these systems meet legal
requirements, such as the ar', rj-

ance of discrimination. In addition, performance management
systems should m*l
ethical sundards, such as, protection of employees' privacy.
Legal Requirements for Performance fttanagement
Because performance measures play a central role in decisions
about pay, proo)otit :--.
and discipline, employmenr-related larvsuits often challenge an
organization's per'
forroanc" murlug"*rlt system. Lawsuits related to pedormance
lnanagement usu;-l:ls'
involve charges of discrimination or unjust dismissal'
Discrimination claims often allege that the performance
management system j:*
criminated against employees on the basis of their race or sex.
Many performi-lirts
Ability
CHAPTER 8 Managing Employees'Performance 249
i.r:-:-ii€S are subjective, and measurerrrent errors, such as those
described earlier in the
-
: rrir. can easily occur. The Supreme Court has held that the
selection guidelir"res in
:- -;-:;erai governrnenr'sllnifotmGuidelines
onEmployeeSelecdonProcedttres also apply
-i::rrnance measllfement.l6 In general, these guidelines

(discussed in Chapters 3
,: : r rerlllire that organizations avoid using criteria such as race
and age as a basis for
::':'.:. ,,,'n1€11[ decisions. This requires overcotning widespread
rating erlofs. A substan-
--: .-. ,"1' of evider-rce has shor,vn rhat white and black raters
tend to gir,e higher: ratings
--.:i:L.ers of tl'reir own racial group, eren after rater training.lT
In addition, eviileuce
: ;:,::!S that this teirdency is strongest rvhen one group is only a
small Percentage ,lf
.. - .:al ri'ork group, When the vast majority of the groutrr is
male, females receile
, ..r:: i:rtings; .lnthat-t tl-t" minority is male, males receil'e
lou'er ratings.ls
:,.';:1-r regard to lawsr-rits filed on the grounds of rurjust
dismissal, the usual claim is
':' ,: -lre person /as dismissed for reasons besides the ones that
the etlplttr-er states.
r .::.,s. an enployee rvho',vorks for a defense contractor
discloses rhai rl'ie colnlran)r
;f:--..rled rhe gorrernment. lf the cornpany fires the emplo)-ee,
the emplo1'ee might
.,'..' -, ,har rl're firing was a way to pur-rish the ernpioyee for
blon'ing tl-re n'l-ristle. in this
::: f situation, courts generaily focus on the emploiel'5
perf.trmance managelnellt
',:.:. looking to see rvhetl-ier the firing could have been L.ase.l
c)n Frror l'erti)rlllallce.
- .i.i:.-nJ itself, the employer rvould need a perforuatlce
lrlaltitgeffIent svsten that
.- .-ies er,idence to support its ernployrnent decisious.

- lrgrect against both kinds of iau,suits, it is irlptrn;.rlt tL) har-e
a legally
.,:.::-,:lble performance n.ranagernent system.39 Sucl'r a sstem
n'rruld L'e base.l on valitl
.- ,:'.th'ses, as described in Chapter 4, t'ith the reqtrirements
fLrr jtri: sr,rccess clearly
- - ::rlnicated to employees. Perforrnance rneasrlretnent
shr'ttLl.l elaluate behaviors or
': ' "S' ratl'rer tl'ran traits' The organizaliot't should r-rsc-
tlulritr'lt- ratels (inclrrding self-
. , :-,-:als) ar-rd train raters in how to use the s),stern.
The,rrgani:atirrr-r sl-rclr-rld provide
. '.r'ien, of ali pelforrnance ratings b}, uptr q1-lsve1 mart-
t,rgers and set up a 5ttr"tlr
, - :t.i.it)}'e€s to appeal u'hen they believe thel-ri'ere er-rrluat.-
.1 ur-rfirirly. Along rvith
', ,.::'r;k, rl-re system should inclucle a process for ct-,2'rchino
t'rr training enployees to
: -' .hc'm irnprove, rather thatt simplv dismissirrg !'()rrr
lcdirrmtrs.
fi*ctronic Monitoring and Employee Privacy
.t.,-itter technology 11ow supports lnan' !.erlorrlancr
tnilrtLlgclnellt systems. Orga-
: - ,r1s clften stole records of emp-t161'gss' l.erionnance
ratil1gs, tlisciplinary actions,
, . .,',-rk-rule violations in electronic .laiirl.ases. {ant
cotlpanies r-tse computers to
. .'--:rrr l',roductivity and other perfonlrrnce me;:lillres
elecrronicaily. Meijer, a retail
,-=rierlter offering groceries and 40 otl-rer tleparrment:, is trne

of several retailers
::.-.. >rrftrare designed to irnpror,e the etficlencl rrl cashie'rs.
The store's colllputer
- .. iron, long it takes to complete each customer trans:lction,
taking into accoulrt
.' . ...::'LJs of rnerchandise being pr-rtchaseci as rreLl as rrhetl-
rer cLrstornets are paytng
; ,'- :-1sll, credit, gifts carc{s, or store cretlit. Eacl-r s'eek tl-re
cnshiers receive scores. If a
. . . ri ialls belon' the baseline score too man- tirres, l-re or sl-
re rnay be carefully tnon-
::-: bv a marlager, morred to a lclu'er-pa1,ing lol:, or evell be
let go. lvleijer reports
' , . :ire s)rstem has helped n-ranagers identifi' ,ur.i coach siou'
cashiers, but cashiers
' : ..rmplai|red that it fo|ces them to hLrrr- custolners aloug,
tather than pay atten-
:'. ii rhem ar-rcl help thern through the checkr)Llt line.4r:
fi/hettrer custonters q'in
: ::rls on rvhether they prefel a speerly casl-rier c''r .r friendll'
one.
',--lrorrgh electlorric rnonitolirrg carr irnplott l'r,'.ltrrtivitl', it
also generzltes llri-
. rrlncerns. Critics point out thar an eurpior-t'r shotri,-l i-rot
rnonitor einployees
250 PART 3 Assessing Performance and Developing Employees
rvhen ir has no reason to beiieve anything is wrong. They

complain that monitoring
systems threaten to make the workplace an electronic su'eatshop
in which employees
are treated as robots, robbing them of dignity. Some note that
employees'performance
should be measured by accomplishments, not just time spent at
a desk or rvorkbench'
Electronic systems should not be a substitute for careful
management. When moni'
toring is necessary managers shouid communicate the reasons
for using lt. Monitor'
ir'rg ,iay be used *or. potlriuely to gather information {or coacl-
ring employees and-
heipilg rhem develop ih"it skills. Finally, organizations must
protect the privacy of
p.*ur-ur'r.. measurements, as they must do with other empl6yee
recorcls'
LC
DID WE GET BURNED BY SHORT-TERM
GOALS?
ln 2008, the business world and government leaders
were in shock. Lehman Brothers, an investment bank
with a 15O-year history folded, investment giant
Merrill Lynch seemed poised to follow, and only a
massive bailout by the U.S' government saved 'AlG, a
huge insurance comPany. lt appeared that the entire

financial system could collapse, effectively bringing
commerce to a halt.
As we slowly recover from the economic slump that
followed these events, many are asking what caused
the crisis, hoping to prevent such events from recur-
ring. The piciure is complicated, but observers place
soi.,e of the blame at the feet o{ management, includ-
ing human resource rnanagement
One source of trouble seems to have been per-
formance management in the mortgage lending
industry. Lending companies set goals based on what
would help them grow in the near term: make more
and more ioans to homebuyers. To back up that strat-
egy, they measured the performance of loan officers
1r,Jho apptou" loans) and mortgage brokers
(who bring
together borrowers and ienders) by counting the num-
bei of loans they made and adding up the total dollars
in those deals. The more loans these employees made,
the more money they earned. There were no rewards
for turning down risky borrowers or penalties for mak-
ing bad lians, because the lenders typically sold the
loan contracts to other financial companies' When the

"bubble" of fast-rising housing prices burst and the
slowing economy caused many borrowers to lose jobs,
the loan deals went bad on a massive scale, fueling the
financial crisis.
SOURCE: Based on Wayne F. Cascio and Peter Cappelli,
"Lessons from the Financial Services Crisis," HR Magazine,
January 2009, Business & Company Resource Center, http://
galenet.galegrouP.com.
Q,uestions
1. lf performance management Practices at mort-
gage companies helped the companies earn
impressive profits for a time, would you rate that
as a business success? An ethical success? Why or
why not?
2, lf those same practices made mortgage compa-
nies more vulnerable after the real estate bubble
burst and the financial crisis occurred, would you
rate that as a business {ailure? An ethical failure?
Why or why not?
3. ln general, how could performance management
at mortgage brokers be adjusted so that the com-
panies treat their employees, cusJo]nefs, investors,

and communities more ethically? Explain whether
you think your recommendations would help or
hurt the comPanies.
LOl ldentifu the activities involved in performance
management.
Performance management is the process through
which managers ensure that employees' activi-
ties and outputs contribute to the organization's
goals. The organization begins by specifying which
"rpa.tt
of perfotmance ate relevant to the organi-
,"tio.r. N"*t, che organization measures the rel-
evant aspects of performance through performance
appraisal. Finaliy, in performance feedback sessions'
I
j
I
i
MINING FOR GOLD: RATING EMPLOYEES WITH

When performance aPpraisals
rely heavily on managers' ratings
of their employees, concerns
arise about whether managers'
opinions are too subjective to
be valid and reliable. Some
companies have looked for more
objective kinds of data. A few have
begun applying a method called
data mining-using comPuters
to sift through massive amounts
of data generated by networked
computers, looking for patterns.
A relatively new idea is to
look for patterns in "social net-
worksj' that is, the Patterns of
people that individuals interact
with on a regular basis. Software
collects data about emPloYees'
online interactions, such as
e-mail traffic, address books, and
buddy lists, and measures the
amount and frequency of con-
tacts among employees. lt creates
maps showing the extent to which
each employee (represented bY
a circle) interacts {lines on the
map) with each other employee.
The software also looks at out-
comes, such as the sales volume
or billable hours produced by
each employee, in order to hunt
for relationships between social

activity and business outcomes.
For example, a studY of con-
sultants at IBM found that those
who communicate extensivelY
with their manager Produce
more revenue {through billable
hours) than other consultants.
ln contrast, if consultants have
weak ties with many managers
(perhaps trying to satisfy manY
superiors), they tend to earn
less than average. Microsoft
uses a similar type of analysis
to identify which employees
are "superconnectors," busilY
sharing ideas with others, and
which are "bottlenecks;" where
information flow stops. The
presumption is that the super-
connectors are most valuable to
the organization.
DATA MINING
eounting worker interactions
certainly is more objective than
asking a manager to rate some-
one's communications skills. The
question, of course, is whether
this type of data mining is an
effective performance measure.
For example, is the number
of e-mails a person sends and
receives a valid measure of the
extent of that person's communi-

cations? Will people in the organi-
zation accept it as a performance
measure? And wouid informing
employees that they are exPected
to send frequent electronic mes-
sages help them Produce more or
better-quality work?
Sources: Stephen Baker, "Putting a
Price on Social Connections," Business-
Week, April B, 2009, www.
businessweek.com; and Stephen
Baker, "Data Mining Moves to Human
Resources," BusinessWeek, March 1 2,
2009, www.businessweek.com.
rwo sers of information. The circle on the left represents all the
information in a
performance appraisal; the circle on the right represenm all
relevant.measr-rres of job
performance. The overlap of the circles contains the valid
information. Information
lhar is gathered but irrelevant is "contamination." Comparing
salespeople based on
hou'many calls they make to cLlstomers could be a
contaminated tneasure. Making
a lot of calls does not necessarily improve sales or customer
satisfaction, unless
every salesperson makes only rvell-planned calls. Information
that is not gathered
but is relevant represenrs a deficiency of the performance
rneasure. For example,
suplrose a company measures whether employees have good

attendance records but
r-rot ,uheth.. rhey rvork efficiently. This limited performance
appraisal is unlikely
to provide a fr-rll picture of employees' contribution to the
company. Perlonlance
measures shouid minimize both contamination and deficiency.
. Reliability-With regard to a performance measure, reiiability
describes the
consisrency of the results that the performance lneasute will
deliver. Ifiterrster
reliability is consistency of resuits when more than one person
measLlres performance'
Simply asking a supervisor to fate an employee's performance
on a scale of 1 to 5
o,o,li.,l lik"ly have ltrv inrerrater reliability; the rating will
differ deper-rding on who
rF
278
{
3ns
ran
ne-
-he
ner
an

rre,
cer
rnd
the
rni-
rni-
tce
ing
ted
es-
or
CHAPTER I Managing Employees' Ferformance 229
is scoring the ernployees. Test-retest reliability refers to
consistency of results over
time. if a perfor*url.. measure lacks rest-retest reliability,
determir-ring rvhether an
"mploy"el
performance has truly changed over time will be impossible.
Acieptabitity-Whether or not a measure is valid and reliable, it
must meet the
p.u.ii."l standarcl of being accepmble to the people who use it.
For example, the
people who use a performance measure must'believe rhat it is
not too tirne con-
suming. Likewise, if employe"r believe the tneasure is unfair,
they will not use the
feedback as a basis for improving their performance.
SpeciJic feedback-Aperformance measute should specifically
tell emptoyees what
is expected of thern and how they can meet those expectations.

Being specific
helps performance management meet the goals of supporting
strategy and devel'
oping employees. If a measufe does not specify what an
employee must do to help
the organization achieve irs goals, it does not support the
strategy. If the measure
fails to point out employees' performance problems, they will
not know how to
improve.
AAethods fsr Measuring Ferformance
Organizations have developed a wide variety of rnethods for
measuring performance.
Some methods rank each employee to colnpare employees'
performance. Other
methods break down the evaluarion into ratings of individual
attributes, behaviors,
or results. Many organizarions use a fireasurement system that
includes a variety
of the preceding measllres, as in the case of applying total
quality management to
perforrnance management. Table 8.1 compares these methods in
terms of our criteria
for effective performance management. .
Making Comparisons
The performance appraisal method may require the rater to
compare one individu-
al's performance with that of others. This method involves some
fonn of ranking, in
which some employees are best, some are average, and others
are worst. The usual
techniques for making comparisons are simple ranking, forced

distribution, and paired
comparison.
Simple ranking requires managers to tank ernployees in their
group from the
highest performer to the poorest performer. In a variation of this
approach, altemaaon
ranking, the rnanager works frorn a list of employees. First, the
manager decides whlch
employee is best and crosses that person's name off the list.
From the remaining
names, the manager selects the worst employee and crosses off
that name. The process
continues with the manager selecting the second best, second
worst, third best, and
so on, until all the employees have been ranked. The rnajor
downside of ranking
involves validiry. To state a performance measufe as broadly as
"best" Or "worst"
doesn'r define rvhat exactly is good or bad about the person's
contribution to the
organization. Ranking therefore raises questions about fairness.
Another way to compare employees'performance is with the
forced-distribution
method. This type of performance measurelnent assigns a
certain percentage of
employees to each category in a set of categories. For example,
the organization night
esrablish the following percentages and categories:
r Exceptional-5 percent
r Exceeds standards-25 percent
t$4 Compare the

m{ior methods
fof measuring
pqrformance.
SipRle Rankino
Method of
performance
measurement that
reluires managers to
rapk employees in their
grfup from the highest
performer to the
poorest performer.
Fopced-Distribution
MFthod
Mpthod of
pelrformance
measurement that
aspigns a certain
pfrcentage of
erirployees to each
ca]tegory in a set of
ca[egofles.
-..-t--..--.."
ta
ob
on
oi.I
ng
ess

:ed
'le,
)ut
:ly
rce
he
ter
:e.
t5
ho
.tl
,
,--&
In this chapter we examine a variety of approaches to
performance lnanage-
lneut. 'We begin by describing the activities involved in
managing performance,
then discuss ih. p.rrpor" of carrying out this process. Next, we
discuss specific
approaches to performance managefrent, including the strengths
and weaknesses of
.r-.h
"pprouch.
Wt aiso iook ar various sources of perfonnance informafion' The

next section explores the kinds of errors thaf commonh' occur
during the assess'
mer-rt of performance, as well as rvays to reduce those errors.
Then we describe
*'ays of giving performance feedback effectively and
inten'ening when performance
must irnprove. Finally, lve summarize 1ega1 and ethicai issues
affecting perfornance
management.
CHAPTER B Managing Employees'Per{ormance 725
Perlormance
Management
The process through
which managers
ensure that emPIoYees'
a ctivities and oiitputs
contribute to the
organization's goals.
r r3ur L s! '
Stages of the Perfornrance Managenrent Process
i:i;!r:::r.lirtr;:':.:rl ;1ii:
a prob-
vhether
le orga-

to rate
conse-
isals. lb
iety ser
zaricn s
'evenue.
rg goals
s team-
: online
;o man-
fs must
uss the
:mploy-
: raises
icussing
manag-
3ement.
re that
)rocess

/ occur,
oviding
;h ways
?he ffngeess *f Ferfmrf-ffieffi€€ &4Anagem*nt r#l rdentirvthe
-llrhough ma'y en'rployees have corne to clread the annual
"perfortna.ce appraisal" ffH[:tt;]::t'
:::eeting, at which a boss picks apart the ernployee's bel-raviors
and apparent attitLrdes ,Jnunr*rn,.
:: 11 the Lrast year, performance management cal-) potentially
deliver many benefits.
l::.ctlye pe.forrna.r.. management can tell top performers that
they are valued,
:::i,-ailrage communication betu,een managers and their
employees, establish uniform
-: :::j":rJs for evaluating employees, and help the organization
ider-rtify its strongest
,:.: ..r'eakest performers. Consultant Dick Grote asserts that
performance a1.r;lraisals,
::,,;.rlt'done, meer an "ethical obligation of leadership" by
providing information
-. r: .r11 meinbers of an organizatioll want to knorv so they carr
succeed: "What is it
. ;:.!-.-.! of me? Horv arn I doing at meeling
yotll'expectationsJ"'
. ileet these objectives, performance managenent includes
several activities.
:.. )iJ$'n in Figure 8.1, these are defining perforrnance,
measuring perfortnance,
:r-,1 :.c.lii-rg L-rack performance information. First, the
organization specifies u'hich

,:-r:irS of perfotmance are relevant to the organization. These
decislons are based
i-, rhe job anasis, described in Chapter 4. Next, the
organization n-reasutes the
relevant aspects of performance by conducting performance
appraisals. Finally'
through performance feedback sessions, managels give
employees inforn-ration about
their performance so they can acijust their behavior to meet the
organization's goals.
When there are perfortnance probletns, the feedback
session should include efforts to identify and resolve
the underlying probleins. In addition, perfortnance
feedback can come through the organization's tewards,
as described in Chapter 12. Using this performance
managernent process helps managers and empioyees
focus on the organization's goals.
Conputer softrvare and h-rternet-based performance
lnanagelnent systeins ale available to help lnanagers at
various stages of the perfortnance lnanagetnent process.
Software can help nanagers cttstomize performance
measurelnent forms. The manager uses the software to
estabiish a set of perforn-iance standards for each job.
The manager rates each ernplol'ee according to the
precleterrnined star-rclarcls, and the software provides a
repori thaa compares the enpltryeet perforilance to
the stantlards and identifies the empioyee's strengths
ancl weaknesses. Otirer sofin'are offers help $'lth diag-
nosing performance p,roblems. This rype of solnvare
:: ::, t :::tf ::r! :i::::riiiij9r!:i.,i!g: :;:r,. :,..:i:l:l::,:!:j ::i:::l: i:

t: :i. ii
lt.r i
Managers maY dread giving criti-
cism, but accarding to a survey
by Leadership lO, a research and
training company, emPloyees
want to hear more about how
:" i..; : : :,..: :'...t ":.,. .
welt they're doing-even if itb
unpleasant.
SOURCES: Rebecca R. Hastings.
" Recession Stifl ing Managers' Commu-
nication?" HR Magazine, February 2010,
Busrness & Company Resource Center,
http : / / gale net. gal egroup. com ; a nd
Leadership lO. 'iManagers Are lgnoring
Their Fmployees," news release, Decem-
ber 2, 2009, www.leadershipiq.com.
a
d
fi
ft
ri
o
s(

p(
rl
CI
ol
m
dr
I get too little positive feedback
I get too little constructive criticism
When mv boss criticizes, he/she doesn't
giv-e enough information for me to
in"n *, ** r.:$,""T:5Jil:
is too vague to encourage rePeat
pertormance
0102a3040s0607080
Percentage of Employees Who Agree
103 Discuss
the purposes
of performance
management systems.
C
In
ca
Fc
pe

al
pe
a
.t
I
s{?#sYBtsf1'iwffi+i +t d fl rffi !F'f
9,
@
*.
,€'
lr€i*ryffi €!gery€E:{[email protected]€f.,ltt{E'*33f{rw--eqq..s
asks questions-for example, Does the employee work under time
pressure? The
answers suggest reasons for performance problems and ways the
manager can help the
employee improve.
Purposes of Performance Management
Organizations establish performance management systems to
meet three broad
purposes: srrategic, administrative, and developmental.
Strategrc purpose means
.ff".ri.'. perfor*a.r.. management helps the organization achieve
its business
objectives. It does this by helping to link employees'behavior
q'ith the organization's
goalr. Perfognance managemenr starts with defining what the

organization expects
i.o*
"u.h
employee. It measures each employee's performance to identifir
where
those expectations are and are not being met. This enabies the
organization to
take coriective action, such as training, incentives, or
discipline. Performance
management can achieve its strategic purpose only when
measuremerrts are truly
linkeJ to the organizarion's goals and when the goals and
feedback about performange
are communicaied to employ.er. Just Bom, the company that
makes Peeps and Mike
and Ike candy, meets the strategic purpose of performance
management- Its system
has empioye.s'"rrd managers meet to agree on several personal
objectives-through
whlch each employee will help meet the objectives of his or her
department. Together,
rhey idenrifl, .i,rr.r,., rraining the employee needs and meet
regularly to discuss the
employee's progress in meeting the objectives.i
'fn* oa*;"irtt etiue putpose of a p.rfor*an e management syslem
refers to the ways
in which organizations use the system to provide information
for day'to-day decisions

abo,rt ,ulary] benefits, and recognition programs' Per{ormance
management can also
support d..irior-, making relatedto employee retention'
termination for poor behavioq
ing
,1!i,r!!litt:::r'::
The
r the
,road
reans
iness
-ion's
pects
'here
In to
.ance
truly
.ance
Mike
'stem
^troh
:ther,

is the
ways
sions
r also
rvior,
auADTtrQ Q tr---^i^^ tr*^r^.,^^., D^J^.--^-- 1']7er rht r Lrr v
rvrs' rqvnY L| rPrvrssJ
and hiring or layoffs. Because performance management
supports these adninistrative
decisions, the information in a performance appraisai can have a
great impact on the
future of individual employees. Managers recognize this, which
is the reason they may
feel uncomfortable conducting performance appraisals when the
appraisal informa-
-r-- r- ---^-:--^ --l -L-,-f^--
t:l--l . l--l -^ ^ l^--^tt l: --^r--:-tion is negaiive ar-rci, tneieiore,
til(eiy to leaci to a la')ioii, disappolntii-rg pay increase, or
other negative outcome.
Finally, performance management has a developmental ptnpose,
meaning that it
serres as a basis for developing employees' knorvledge and
skills. Even empioyees
who are ueeting expectations can become more vaiuable when
they hear and discuss
performance feedback. Effective performance feedback makes
employees aware of
their strengths and of the areas in which thev can improve.
Discussing areas in which
employees fall shon can help the employees and their manager
uncover the source

of problems and identify steps for improvement. Although
discussing weaknesses
may feel uncomfortable, it is necessary when performance
managenent has a
developmental purpose.
Criteria for Effeetive Performanee Management
In Chapter 6, we saw that there are many ways to predict
performance of a job
candidate. Similarly, there are many ways to measure the
performance of an employee.
For performance rnanagement to achieve its goals, its methods
for measr,rring
performance must be good. Selecting these measures is a
critical part of planning
a performance management system. Several criteria determine
the effectiveness of
performance measures:
103 Define five
criteria for medsuring
the effectiveness
of a performance
management system.
Fit with suategy-A performance management system should aim
at achieving
employee behavior and attitudes that support the organization's
strategy, goals, and
culture. lf a company emphasizcs customcr scrvicc, then its
performancc managc-
ment system should de{ine the kinds o{behavior that contribute
to good customer
service. Performance appraisals should measure whether
employees are engaging in
those behaviors. Feeclbaek should help enplo*7ees improve in

those areas. When
an organization's strategy changes, human resource personnel
should help manag-
ers assess how the performance rnanagement system should
change to serve the
new strategy.
Validity-As we discussed in Chapter 6 , ualidity is the exrent ro
which a measurelnent
tool actually measures what it is intended to measure. In the
case of performance
appraisal, validity refers to whether the appraisal measures all
the relevant aspects
of performance and omits irrelevant aspects of performance.
Figure 8.2 shows
figure 8.2
Contamination and
Deficiency ol a Job
Performance MeasureJob
performance
meaSure
Aanlrrrl - ar tt'lrts -t'
job
performance
V'aliciity DeficiencyLOntamtnatron

248 PART 3 Assessing Performance and Developing EmployeesF.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 248 PART 3 Assessing Performance and Developing EmployeesF.docx

Similar to 248 PART 3 Assessing Performance and Developing EmployeesF.docx (19)

More from eugeniadean34240

More from eugeniadean34240 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

248 PART 3 Assessing Performance and Developing EmployeesF.docx