Sie sind auf Seite 1von 28



Systematic & objective way of evaluating both work related

behavior & potential of Employees

Formal process in organization where by each employee is

evaluated to find out how he/she is performing the job


2nowledge of work
Quality of work
Target attainment
Degree of skill
Ê    m

ompensation Decision (Pay raise)
Promotion decision
Training & development Programme
Feed Back
Personal development (identifying the individual
Effective Hr Programme (selection, training,
transfer, Devpt etc)
—  m
Individual evaluation Method
Multiple person evaluation method
Other Method
i     — 


onfidential Report
Essay evaluation

ritical Incident

heck list
Graphic rating scale
hoice Method
Multiple Person Evaluation Method
Forced Distribution
Other Method
Group appraisal
Field review method
Individual evaluation method


Govt org
Descriptive report-end of every year (Employees
Immediate superior)
Highlights the strength & weakness of the subordinate.
Not a database
Subordinates appraisal are merely recorded in this
No feed is provide to the employees

Rater are asked to write in details about each & every subordinates whose
performance is been assessed
Raters express the strong as well as week point of employees behavior


i) Job knowledge & potentials of the employees
ii) Employees understanding of the companies programmes,policies,objectives
iii) Employees relation with other co-workers & superiors
Iv) Employees general planning,org & controlling ability
v) The attitude & perception of the employees in general

The evaluator are asked to record the behavior of different subordinates.
Prepare the effective & ineffective behavior of employees on the job

A Ran away 4m the place 0
B Informed the superior 2

Gave E the necessary Ist aid 5

D Took E the nearest hospital 4
Based on the behavior the each employee has given the score
Measure the qualities of an employees i.e-Judgement,alertness,intiative,loyality
Individuals are evaluated through checklist
Set of objectives or descriptive statement is done about the employees & his
Under weighted checklist each question may be weighted equally

Is the employee really interested in the task assigned Yes/No
Does he respected by his colleagues Yes/No
Does he follow instruction properly Yes/No
Does he makes mistakes frequently Yes/No

Based on certain qualities the employees performance is been evaluated


2nowledge of work
Quality of work
Quantum of work done
Extent of co-operation
j "j       #
(atest method ±innovated in PA

ombination of rating scale & critical incident techniques of
employees performance evaluation
Assessment Technique where in critical incidents are identified & and
a range of performance possibilities are described for each dimension
Evaluators assess the subordinates based on certain statement
Statement may indicates the positive & negative qualities of an employee
Very knowledgeable Shirks Duties
Meticulous in planning Undependable
Very gud in executive Quarrelsome

ommitted to work Non-

Sincere poor in planning
Dependable lack of comm.
Poss good comm lack initiative
(oyal (ethargic
Tome consious Irregular

o-operative Irritable in nature

Goal Setting
Superior & subordinates jointly identify the objective which is desired
to be achieved by the subordinate in tune with the overall results
Peter drunker
Promotes a better communication r/ship b/w the superior &
MBO Objective-What must be accomplished rather than hw it is to be


onventional method of appraisal
(isting out the employees from best to worst
Employees in a group are ranked by the superior according to their individual
Followed in certain school for preparing the progress report of student
 X Y Z
 3 2 1
Attitude,aptitude,honesty,commitment etc-assessing the employees performance
Subordinates in a group is compared with
other member
Rater are asked to evaluate the employees
predetermined distribution scale
Job performance & Promotability
Ê — 

Employees are rated by a group of raters
Immediate supervisor of the employee,
other supervisors who have close contact
with the employees work,mgr or head of the
dept & consultant
R   %
Measure the effectiveness of personal mgt activities the use of people in an org

Method which helps in evaluating the potentials of candidates
1st applied in German army in 1930
The business & industrial houses-started using this method
Method several individuals are assessed by various experts using various
Techniques includes-role playing, case studies, conference etc.
Job performance as well as personal qualities-consider
Assessed by immediate superior
Helps in finding the performance of an employee-how well
the employee is performing the job
Periodical Appraisal-systematic manner
Both Mgr & subordinates are subjected to appraisal
Process of P A

Importance process of PA
They should judge the employees performance as successful & unsuccessful

lear & easy to understand, If the performance standard is not clear, the
employees should be given great care to describe the standard
Mgt should comm.. the standard to all the employees of the org
Employees should be informed & the standard should be clearly explained to
] —    
 4Monitorining the performance of an employee
through out the year


] $     4
] @      if necessary-i.e.. improving the performance of an
Identifying individual needs
Performance feed back
Identifying individual strength & devpt. Needs
Recognition of Individual performance
Identifying poor performance
Hr planning
Determining Org. training needs
Evaluating Hr system
j    &  m
Improve Job performance
Provide data on past, present & expected performance of
an employee
Making correct decision-training, promotion,
compensation, transfer
Ensuring right man has been inducted
Effective training programme
Necessary training to the poor performance
(   m
Manager lacks information
Evaluation performance of an employee is not clear
Manager does not take appraisal seriously
Manager s not prepared for the appraisal review with the employees
Manager is not honest/sincere during the evaluation
Manager lack appraisal skill
Employee does not receive on going performance feedback
Insufficient resource offered to reward performance
There is ineffective discussion of employment development
Manager uses unclear/ambiguous language in the evaluation process
Poor appraisal form
-The rating scale may be quite vague & unclear
-Form is too lengthy & complex
  &   m
Environmental Hazards4 External & internal hazards for a
Nature of leadership
Personal like & dislike of superior ±affect the performance
Problem of favoritism & nepolism-religion, caste, mother
Different methods for evaluating the performance of an
empoyees-Influnce rating

Method of appraisal-once selected should be followed continuously
Performance analysis
Manager should also judge & examine the subordinates performance
No discrimination-Religion, caste, sex,and so on
Appraisal should be taken at regular interval
Feed back-communicated at the right time

onvening feed back is not enough ±the way & means to improve their
Suitable incentive must be given
Trust & confident b/w superior & subordinate

Developed by general electrical company of USA in 1992,
for other countries including india

ollection of performance data on individual or group,
which is derived from a no. of stakeholder
It includes performance information such as employee
skill, abilities, behavior
All-around information of an employee are collected from
his/her supervisor,subodinate,peer,& even customer &