An Examination of Performance Appraisal Systems in Light of Employee Motivation
Aaron J. Gordon
Aaron J. Gordon, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Department of Business & Economics Algoma University, 1520 Queen Street East Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario.
Manuscript received on January 01, 2016. | Revised Manuscript received on January 08, 2016. | Manuscript published on January 15, 2016. | PP: 13-16 | Volume-2 Issue-2, January 2016. | Retrieval Number: B0103012216
Open Access | Ethics and Policies | Cite
© The Authors. Published By: Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering and Sciences Publication (BEIESP). This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Abstract: Performance appraisal processes vary in organizational contexts and are not always intertwined with the pursuit toward employee effectiveness. This report analyzes the common mistakes made by organizations when performance appraisals are utilized. In addition, the quantitative approach, found in The Birkman Method® and qualitative discoveries of Strengths Finder and 360 Degree Feedbacks are considered in relation to feedback methodologies. This discussion leads to scholarly perspectives on negative perceptions of performance appraisals among managers and employees today. Next we discuss four systematic models of performance appraisals; those being, a five stage process, conversation analysis, computer software monitoring system, and employee participation. By doing so, we conclude that performance appraisals must be linked to motivational theories. In particular, this report examines McClelland’s Theory of Needs, Goal Setting, and Expectancy Theory. These theories then demonstrate that a four-fold process of performance appraisal must be followed; that being, utilizing personality testing, 360 degree feedback, employee participation, and a positive climate where supervisors model from the top down.
Keywords: The Birkman Method®, 360 degree feedback, performance appraisals, motivation theories.