All management professionals need to know the degree of accomplishment of the tasks that make part of every employee’s job in a business organization. This is the employee’s performance and it is based on the results he/she provides through his/her efforts. Assessment of
employee performance is underlain by three main objectives:
- Providing the employees feedback on their performance
- Working out ways of more effective performance
- Obtaining data for making decisions on prospective tasks within jobs and compensation
Feedback on the performance is also a main factor in improving employee performance because it not only encourages an individual (if positive feedback is provided) but also motivates him/her to put the maximum possible effort in the assigned task.
However, assessment of performance is not as simple a matter as it appears. In a large number of cases, appraisals made by the managers regarding employee performance fail due to one or more flaws in the manager’s judgment. Some of these flaws are:
- Subjective Judgment
- Judgment based primarily on the employee’s personality traits rather than his/her actual performance
- The manager’s own lack of skills required to make a fair appraisal
To size up an employee’s degree of accomplishment, managers must understand the job requirements and be able to make objective observations of the results. So what kind of criteria does one need to use for measuring employee performance? These should be relevant to the job, easily understandable, and objectively measurable.
Techniques of Evaluating Employee Performance Three techniques most commonly used to examine the performance of an employee include: checklist, rating scale, and critical incident. Management by Objectives (MBO) is another method used to gauge the degree of success of an employee’s efforts.
The checklist method is actually based on recording the performance rather than evaluating it. This method works by a list of statements or questions to which the employee provides a yes/no response.
Several different rating scales have been developed for
measuring employee performance. The one most commonly used, what may be called the ‘traditional’ rating scale, includes different variables like initiative, quality of work, amount of work done successfully, and so on. Usually, the employee is rated on a 3 to 5 points scale. More sophisticated rating scales are used in institutes or organizations according to the nature of the assigned tasks.
In the critical incident technique, the manager identifies the recorded incidents of an employee’s behavior. An incident that shows a result of unusual success or failure of the employee on some job task is regarded as ‘critical’. Success with the task reckons a positive performance and failure shows the contrary. The main disadvantage of this assessment as a
background check technique, for example, is its time-consuming nature.
In the MBO system, ample objective feedback is provided on the performance of employees (usually the managers themselves) so as to make an evaluation based on the degree to which certain specified objectives were (or were not) achieved in a pre-determined period of time.
Avoiding Evaluation Errors All techniques of assessment on employee performance are likely to have some shortcomings and errors which the managers need to be aware of in order to make a fair judgment of the employee performance. The most common errors come with the rating method of assessment. Important ones of these include:
Strictness/Leniency: If the rater goes overly harsh or too lenient in sizing up the performance, erroneous assessment is the result.
Halo Effect: Well-known among psychologists, the halo effect results when rating on one dimension (regarded very important) considerably influences rating on other dimensions (assumed less significant).
Central Tendency Error: Sometimes, the rater tends to rate all employees equally, usually rating everyone as ‘average’. This facilitates the rating process for the rater but may produce discontent among employees.
Recency Effect: It is common among raters to be biased in rating a recent behavior which may shadow the previous performance. Employees are often very conscious to this and this leads to better performance each time the rating is conducted.
Labels: employment screening
In this modern day and age it is essential to understand the importance of having the most update information on employees. The option of
employment screening gives the management and human resources department an ability to set guidelines for their companies prospective employees. Within these guidelines, human resources is capable of "weeding out" potential financial, and possibly even physical, threats to the company and its current personnel.
Considering all aspects of a potential employee's ability to contribute to the growth and stability of the company should be the first priority. Followed closely by their qualifications is weather a particular individual is qualified based purely upon their education, or upon their experience in the work force. Ideally any prospective employee will have a combination of both. Finally, a prospective employee should be put through an employment screening. Employment screening varies from industry to industry, as it should.
For example, a potential Accounts Manager applies for an
accounting job at local bank. She is a professional, with over five years experience in the banking/accounting industry. She has excellent references and according to her last employer, "was an asset to the company." Upon an employment screening of her criminal record, human resources discovers that she had a failure to appear in traffic court and was arrested for this. Human Resources has set their policy in such a fashion that a prospective employee must have no arrests what so ever in order to qualify for the position. In this situation, an employment screening can cause a company to lose a fantastic asset because of a trivial misdemeanor.
On the other hand, if upon the viewing of her criminal record human resources discovered she was convicted of “possession of a forged instrument” or stolen checks and financial documents, this is certainly a reason not to consider her for the position.
Another attribute of employment screening is voluntary drug screening. In most cases a prospective employee voluntarily submits themselves to a drug screening. This can occur either on a one time basis or as often as the company deems necessary. This screen is vital in some industries, especially industries that involve the operation heavy machinery or industries that primarily work with the care and maintenance of children or the elderly. This particular aspect of employee screening has the ability to save the company large sums money by preventing unnecessary accidents and, more importantly, it has the potential to save lives.
Finally, one of the last avenues used to screen potential employees when
recruiting is to check their financial credentials. This within itself can be a double edge sword. By checking whether or not the potential employee has filed for bankruptcy, or is behind on there credit card payments, some companies hold the belief that this will eliminate irresponsible people from their workforce. However, in most cases checking someone’s financial credentials is a relatively costly and time consuming venture. Also, it may not give a company an accurate picture of the potential employee. There are a myriad of different reasons why individuals file for bankruptcy, or fall behind on credit card payments. Reasons range from divorce, to serious healthcare issues, or even a death in the family.
Employment screening gives companies valuable information on potential employees. It accomplishes this by checking potential employees' references and their criminal record. With this information in hand a company can gauge if a potential employee is reliable, trustworthy and safe. Then upon viewing a potential employee's financial credentials a company can evaluate if the potential employee is good with time and money management.
All in all,
employment screening is an essential part of bringing qualified personnel into any company's workforce when filling
jobs.
Labels: employment screening
