Organizations require human resources to survive and one of the main responsibilities of a manager or organizational head is to ensure that all employees in an entity exhibit a high spirit and motivation. This ensures that the mission and vision of the employer organization are met. Moreover, the quality of work delivered by each worker contributes directly to the general performance of an organization. Such thus reinstates the need for HR managers to make informed decisions of which performance management paradigm to use. Ideally, there exist at least two forms of performance management systems. One such paradigm is the formal performance review approach, which uses standard set laws and procedures to generate performance records of different employees.
The performance feedback model forms the other choice that an HR manager can make. As opposed to the appraisal option, the feedback model makes the performance management paradigm informal, free, inclusive, and encouraging (Kramar, 2014). Nonetheless, the nature and environment of an organization highly determine the model of performance management to adopt. As such, an entity with strict culture can only use the appraisal system, while those embracing the open culture and environment can benefit highly from the feedback system. Moreover, an organization with trust and commitment issues, especially among managers and supervisors, risks a lot by going the feedback way (Mello, 2018). That is because the absence of serious HR leaders would jeopardize the whole organization under such a condition.
The Use of the Performance Management System
Selections have costs and every decision that an organization or a leader makes bears consequences that can either be positive or negative. As noted earlier, there exist different styles of performance management models. Such include the performance feedback and performance appraisal paradigms. Choosing any of these systems exposes an organization to both pros and cons. One of the pros related to opting for the performance appraisal paradigm is that such allows an organization to act formally. Additionally, the choice also saves entities the pain of having to resolve bias-related issues resulting from opinionated supervisors and managers who undertake workers’ reviews, another benefit.
Thirdly, going the appraisal way makes it possible for entities to save time, while operating legally. A major disadvantage concerning opting for the appraisal system regards to the demotivation challenge. The challenge mainly comes from rating employees without directly collaboratively involving them. Choosing the feedback option has benefits like boosting employees’ motivation, nurturing collaborative organizational culture, increasing workers’ commitment, and reducing pressure between the management team and the subordinate staff (Das, 2020). However, issues like supervisor biases and delays serve as cons associated to the feedback option.
Who evaluates it?
Several parties can undertake performance checks based on the chosen system that an organization uses. Supervisors and managers are often the mandated parties to appraise employees under the appraisal system. The involvement of these two parties has advantages like clarity and time preservation. A major problem with the involvement of these two parties is the lack of openness and the potential to have the other workers feel assumed. A supervisor, peers, managers, and self can undertake the evaluation process under the feedback paradigm. Benefits of such people include promoting openness, cultivation of collaborative environment, and nurturing teamwork. Problems with the move include time wastage and the potential to acquire biased feedback.
What is evaluated?
Evaluating behavior has benefits like motivating morality and commitment, while such may also lead to branding. Evaluating traits further exhibits benefits like commitment promotion and promoting cultural fittingness, while such may also lead to branding, fear, and lack of reduced commitment (Kramar, 2014). Similarly, evaluating results may lead to increased productivity, while causing adverse effects like misunderstandings and demotivation, especially if employees feel that their efforts are not appreciated adequately.
How performance is evaluated?
- Promotes productivity.
- Effective in strict environments.
- Piles undue pressure on employees.
- Potential to convert workers into unfeeling zombies (Mello, 2018).
The methods of evaluation
- Promotes formalness.
- Saves time.
- Prevents bias issues.
- Can cause demotivation.
- Kills collaboration.
- Leaves workers in darkness, never open.
- Promotes collaboration.
- Promotes teamwork.
- Highly open.
- Time consuming.
- More susceptible to biased feedback
Das, G. A. (2020). Strategic human resource management: Formulating and implementing HR strategies for a competitive advantage. Taylor & Francis Group.
Kramar, R. (2014). Beyond strategic human resource management: is sustainable human resource management the next approach? The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(8), 1069–1089. Web.
Mello, J. A. (2018). Strategic Human Resource Management. South-Western.