|
| |
BIAS IN PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT.
Term Paper ID:26516
|
|
|
Essay Subject:
Examines sterotyping & discrimination in evaluation of workers. Types of bias, standards & norms, role of evaluator, errors in judgment, task analysis, policy manuals.... More...
|
11 Pages / 2475 Words
11 sources, 34 Citations,
APA Format
$44.00
Return to List of Papers
|
Paper Abstract:
Examines sterotyping & discrimination in evaluation of workers. Types of bias, standards & norms, role of evaluator, errors in judgment, task analysis, policy manuals.
Paper Introduction:
BIAS, STEREOTYPES AND COMPARISONS IN PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS
Performance evaluations in business and organizations are often subjective processes that involve many different parties who each have different goals and expectations about the process. Performance appraisals involve the employee, the manager or immediate supervisor, and also the organization or company as a larger entity (King, 1984, p. 7). Each party has its own perspectives and objectives about what can be accomplished through a performance evaluation.
Corporations institute formal performance appraisals as a means to communicate their goals to the employees, who then work to achieve those goals. The performance apprai
Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.
The potential for error and bias due to subjective interpretation issubstantial. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 16). New York: AMACOMAmerican Management Association. There is an inherent conflict present in norm-referenced measures that can set employees up against one another and canpotentially create an environment of friction and hostility between theworkers. (1975). But, despite the deficiencies of performance evaluations, theseappraisals remain the predominant method for rating workplace successes andfailures, simply because there are few alternatives. (1996). 5). 1). The employee also finds work to be a source of personalidentity and accomplishment. For the employee, work is not solely the function of producing goodsand services. 2). This is often because the manager is most affected by the events inrecent memory, and is searching his or her memory to conduct a quickevaluation, complete the task and continue on with other pressingmanagerial duties. The judgment of whether bias errors have occurred in the evaluationprocess can be demonstrated by a comparison between groups and a comparisonamong individual raters. (1991). The forms and guidelines commonly used by businesses are routinelyupdated and reorganized. (1999). (1999). If the employee senses that there may havebeen unwarranted bias present in the evaluation, the employee may ask forwritten clarification of a negative review (Repa, 1996, p. 9). 14). Large companies especially need a format tomeasure achievement and a way to communicate what is acceptable behavior,because the levels of management become distant from the small-companypersonal relationships with the employees. In rank order evaluations, employees are set into ahierarchy from most productive employee to least productive employee (Landy& Farr, 1983, p. The exercise of managerial authority is muchcloser to the employee than the exercise of governmental authority. (1983). How is it done? Subjectivity in and of itself is not bad. 1 -6). (199 ). The London Financial Times, p.16. ix). Weiler, P.C. When a company spends large sums of money on employee training eachyear, naturally the company wants to measure the return on its investment(Edwards, 1999, p. Paper seems to be the safer mechanism for forcing data out whereit can be useful to the evaluators. It is also anopportunity for the employer to learn critical information from theperspective of the employee that would not otherwise be available(Steingold, 1997, p. Single source measures are either a self-evaluation or a reviewconducted by a supervisor (Edwards, 1999, p. The company tends to focus solely on the skills,knowledge and experience of the person as a worker. (King, 1984, p. It isessential to be able to identify what work behavior is being questioned.If this can be articulated specifically in writing, it will help pinpointand alleviate any potential bias in the evaluation process. A past evaluation may not be readily comparableto a newer and more complicated review procedure (King, 1984, p. It ultimately becomes asubjective judgment that can only be made on incomplete information(Kellogg, 1975, p. It can be very uncomfortable for amanager to sit in judgment of an employee, especially considering that themanager will be thinking about the future work relationship with thatemployee. There are various measures that can be incorporated into anevaluation system to help counteract the negative effects of bias andstereotypes in the employee evaluation process. Formality paralysis: A review of the indispensable requirement for jobperformance evaluations. Such a systemcould be more costly and use more the employees' time. The employer should be prepared to back up the performance evaluationwith written justifications. HRFocus Special Report on Training & Development Supplement, p. However, thecommittee approach could reduce the risk that an employee's performancereview will be tainted by a single person's propensity to impose on othersany unconscious bias and stereotyping. Althoughthe work environment may be hard to adapt to the personal preferences ofeach employee, a sincere attempt by management to recognize and accommodatethe concerns of the employees will be appreciated and respected. Weiss, D.H. Most large companies write policy manuals to help govern themanagement activities of training, evaluating performance, promoting anddisciplining. Another problematic area of employee performance evaluations arisesin the discrepancies between past and current performance ratings andperformance procedures. Workers want the same respect, equality, personal integrity and dueprocess that is afforded through the political process (Weiler, 199 , p.144). But, despite having these policies in place, managersfrequently get into legal trouble. King, P. 25). This allows the employee a chance to be heard and keepscommunication open between management and workers. Meanwhile, theemployee may incorporate a broader perspective of personal identity and jobsatisfaction. Most employees areevaluated solely by their immediate supervisors. The traditional employee performance evaluation is a single sourceappraisal. Landy, F.J. In therank order comparisons, the employees that get ranked lower in the scalemay resent those employees that get ranked higher. Another way to reduce thebias problems of the evaluation process is to implement an evaluationinterview system that uses a panel or committee of raters. One way to combat the inherent presence of bias in the evaluationprocess is to give the employee a voice in the process. Corporations institute formal performance appraisals as a means tocommunicate their goals to the employees, who then work to achieve thosegoals. In medium to large organizations, employees tend to be more honest inwritten rather than verbal, face-to-face comments about themselves or theirmanagers. If the evaluation process becomes a positive experience forthe employees and the managers, the company as a whole can becomeincreasingly more cooperative internally, as well as more competitive inthe marketplace. Modernreview systems are expected to accomplish job planning and control, salarysurveys, promotion justification, personnel records and histories, anddocumentation of possible personnel problems. Edwards, M.R. The bias that can be present may not be malicious. Generally, the evaluator is hesitantto differentiate between the persons being rated, and the ultimate resultsall look centralized or strikingly similar (Cardy & Dobbins, 1994, p. The typical form-filling, artificial interview between a boss and asubordinate is usually not conducive to openness and trust. The evaluation process cansupply that psychological need for recognition, and encourage furtherproductivity from the workers (King, 1984, p. Task analysis is defined as the progressive process of examiningeach job in order to yield, at the highest level, the principal tasksinvolved in doing that job. Sincepeople have the long-standing expectation of having a voice in governmentalauthority, workers also feel the need to have a voice in the managerialarena (Weiler, 199 , p. The company may hold high ideals and set goals thatmay be unrealistic in the business environment in which it operates. 2). This system tends todisrupt organizational groups that must work well together as a team toaccomplish the company's goals. Any rating will be a subjective interpretation ofthe information that is available at that time. 73). (1997). 2-21). Because the work environment is generally fixed and difficult tomodify for each individual employee, the work environment frequentlycreates needless barriers to performance. A manager with a negative attitude toward the process may bein a subjective position to render a more critical evaluation of anemployee. By assessingperformance, the evaluator is essentially predicting the reward ("Formalityparalysis", 1999, p. REFERENCES Cardy, R.L. Many managers are uncomfortable with the confrontational aspects ofthe review process, and fear the potential responses of an employee to anegative evaluation (King, 1984, p.2). New York: McGraw-Hill. 9). Steingold, F.S. Norm-referenced comparisons between co-workers may be evaluationsbetween pairs or evaluations by rank order. 58). These supervisors oftenfeel burdened with this responsibility, and usually have very littletraining on how to conduct an evaluation (King, 1984, p. 4). 143). 16). Rank order comparisons are like pairing comparisons, buton a broader scale. The "demon's jaws" effect can occur when the supervisor isadversely impacted by some bad act or behavior of the employee that eitheroccurs immediately before the evaluation or that has made a lastingnegative impression (Weiss, 1991, p. Performance planning & appraisal: A how-to bookfor managers. Berkeley,California: Nolo Press. (1984). Also, performance is the outcome of effort and reward. Cincinnati, Ohio: College Division South-WesternPublishing Co. & Dobbins, G.H. Kellogg, M.S. One way to identify the principal tasks thatare a part of a particular job is by asking certain questions about theskills, experience and activities needed to complete the task. When companies initiate a new evaluation system, they tend to choosemeasures that they think will be simple to implement within the company.Some of the simplest measures for employee job performance evaluations arebased in judgmental classifications that inherently include a large degreeof subjectivity. The evaluationprocedures should incorporate a method for the employees to give their ownevaluation of their performance and of the performance of theirsupervisors. Restriction of range is the tendency of the rater to restrict his orher view of the evaluation system causing, a small standard of deviationamong the results of the evaluations. However, subjectivetreatment and bias in the system can decrease the confidence of theemployees in the company and create an atmosphere of dissatisfaction andhostility that can prevent the company from achieving its goals. A goodevaluation system will also use the evaluation data to provide feedback toworkers and guide future development of the employees' progress (Cardy &Dobbins, 1994, p. The leniency and severity error is the tendency to rate an employee'sperformance as being high or low, in one extreme or the other. 27). Instead, theindividual's performance is referenced to some set standards of performance(Landy & Farr, 1983, p. Using a criterion-referenced measure, asopposed to the norm-referenced measure discussed earlier, can help toreduce the bias and stereotypes that can invade an evaluation system.Criterion-referenced measures tend to rely less on the subjective judgmentsof the raters by providing them specific guidelines and written checkliststo use in evaluation training and interviews. The measurement of workperformance: Methods, theory and applications. 16). 24-28. Fair, square and legal: Safe hiring, managing &firing practices to keep you & your company out of court. Among co-workers, one significant bias is that most people disdainthe performance evaluation process. Criterion-referencedmeasures try to describe or evaluate an individual's work performancewithout comparing it to the performance of other individuals. (1999, May 19). The employee's performance can then becompared to the standard set to see if the employee is adequatelyaccomplishing the tasks of the job. Since the job performance evaluation is a necessary part of themanagers' duties, it is important to perform those duties in a mannerrespecting and encouraging his or her subordinates to achieve theirpersonal best. What to do about performance appraisal. 24). Governing the workplace: The future of laborand employment law. 7). A properly appliedsystem should be geared toward planning, appraisal and rewards orcorrection. Peoplehave the inherent tendency to interpret actions based upon their ownlimited perspectives. 16). Relying on thesupervisor's memory often results in one or two common evaluation errors:the "halo effect" and the "demon's jaws effect." The "halo effect" can result from a supervisor placing too muchemphasis on a good action of an employee that occurs just before theevaluation and neglecting to consider the prior performance of theemployee. BIAS, STEREOTYPES AND COMPARISONS IN PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS Performance evaluations in business and organizations are oftensubjective processes that involve many different parties who each havedifferent goals and expectations about the process. Thesequestions are commonly referred to using the abbreviation of "W2H2." Thequestions this abbreviation represents are as follows: What does theperformer (employee) do? ("Formalityparalysis," 1999, p. 9, 1 . One judgmental classification commonly found in evaluation systemsused by organizations and businesses is a norm-referenced measure. Performance appraisal is demanding,and most organizations complicate the process with confusing systems (King,1984, p. The performance appraisal can be an effective tool for managing andcontrolling the direction of the organization. It is not possible to reward good achievementand encourage further achievements, unless it is first possible to identifyachievement. Ruyle, K.E. Measurement as a catalyst for learning. Theseefforts will positively influence the corporate culture and feelings towardthe company's procedures for hiring, promoting, and terminating employeesby increasing the level and quality of communication between management andemployees. & Farr, J.L. Sometimes, the policies themselves cancause more problems than they prevent (Weiss, 1991, p. And, how doesthe performer know when the task is done (correctly)? 98). Performance appraisalsinvolve the employee, the manager or immediate supervisor, and also theorganization or company as a larger entity (King, 1984, p. (1994). Job performance appraisals are a means for setting a value on anemployee or a project (Kellogg, 1975, p. But,managers routinely compare past performance to the present activities as acheck to see if the employee is maintaining or improving his or herproductivity. This formof bias manifests itself in a person's actions when the evaluator seems togo easy on some workers, while acting harshly toward others (Cardy &Dobbins, 1994, p. Repa, B.K. Each partyhas its own perspectives and objectives about what can be accomplishedthrough a performance evaluation. New York: Academic Press,Inc. 58). Feedback isoften most productive when it is spontaneous, immediate and specific to thecurrent situation. These barriers are a more likelysource of performance problems than are the lack of motivation to do thenecessary tasks or the shortage of job skills and experience. In apairing comparison, one worker becomes labeled as the lower performer, eventhough that employee may be a dedicated and productive employee. Employees have a basic need to berecognized and appreciated for their efforts. The halo error appears to themost prevalent type of subjective bias error (Cardy & Dobbins, 1994, p.27). Because performance ratings are used in the essential businessfunctions of selection, promotion, training, salary increases, layoffs andterminations, it is important that a good evaluation system be in place andthat the managers be trained in how to implement the system. The employer's legal handbook. However, the annual performance evaluation focuses onthe past, rather than the present ("Formality paralysis," 1999, p. To set performance standards that will encourage improvement ofemployee performance, the organization or business should conduct taskanalysis. This type ofsubjectivity can occur between co-workers, can surface between past andcurrent ratings, and can arise in the gaps between standards andperformance. Social scientists, such as Douglas McGregor and Rensis Likert,recognize that managers are uncomfortable "playing god" when sitting injudgment over their employees (Kellogg, 1975, p. An employee with anxiety about the evaluation process may beunable to productively participate in the review and would miss theopportunity to improve communication with the manager. Your rights in the workplace. When is it done? 6). 27).If the result is that all the employees appear to have performed at exactlythe same level, the hard workers will become dissatisfied with not beingrecognized and the overall performance and productivity of the businesswill ultimately be dragged down. 16). 3). Berkeley,California: Nolo Press. Feedback, guidance and communication shouldbe essential aspects of the evaluation process. Norm-referenced measures consist of comparisons that set one individual upagainst either another individual or up against a group of other employees(Landy & Farr, 1999, p. Pairing comparisons look forthe "better" employee when compared to another employee in a similar jobclassification. 4) But,performance evaluations cannot accomplish all things. Subjective treatment in the evaluation process can come in the formof rater bias, stereotypes, and impractical comparisons. A proactive managementtechnique and proper training can help to prevent problems and preventproblems from getting out of hand. Two significant rater errors that occur in theevaluation process include the leniency-severity error and restriction ofrange error (Cardy & Dobbbins, 1994, p. To alleviatethis burden on managers and to prevent some of the bias that can be presentin a system that relies solely on the employee's immediate supervisor, theevaluation system may need to incorporate different levels of evaluationsor the use of an evaluation committee or group. Elements inthe physical work space that affect performance can include the flow ofassembly materials, human and vehicular traffic in the workspace, lightinglevels and quality noise levels, workstation design, availability anddesign of tools, availability of parts and supplies, and the level ofcontrol afforded employees over processes (Ruyle, 1999, p. The open communication between managers and workerscan help to reduce the inherent anxiety that is present in the jobappraisal process. Personnelpolicies must be fairly and consistently applied. Analyzing tasks to improve performance.Technical Training, 1 , p. 27). If the performance evaluation procedure is conducted only on anannual basis, rater bias can come into play quite unintentionally.Subjective judgments can cloud the process in systems where supervisorsrely on their memory for an employee's performance rating. NewYork: AMACOM American Management Association. One of the main problems with this type of norm-referenced comparisonbetween co-workers is that someone usually ends up being the loser. A successful system will also have the benefit of achievingunderstanding, communication and cooperation between employees and theorganization. Form questions can reduce the risk ofdestroying confidence by becoming too intrusive or making a person feel asthough they are committing a character assassination ("Formalityparalysis," 1999, p. For example, since the typical job evaluationprocess is conducted only once a year, the demand against the memory of theemployee's manager can also lead to subjectivity problems simply becausethe manager cannot adequately recall what the employee has accomplishedover the course of the whole year (Cardy & Dobbins, 1994, p. Performance appraisal specialists often incorporate evaluationprocedures that promise more than is realistically achievable. Thiskind of evaluation bias can unintentionally set the employees up to fail.The company has an obligation to set realistic and achievable goals thatthe employees can work towards and be recognized for their accomplishments. Once the importanttasks in the job are identified, a job description can formally be set outin writing (Ruyle, 1999, p. This distance can make it moredifficult to conduct accurate and effective performance reviews. Performance appraisal:Alternative perspectives. 4). Annual performance reviews are often highly selective in the choiceof feedback provided between the manager and the employee because there isa contrast in the objectives of both parties involved ("Formalityparalysis," 1999, p. However, suchsubjectivity can be abused or misused in the evaluation process to hinderan employee's progress and prevent the company from achieving its goals. The future of the company can be made more secure if itcan take the necessary measures to be flexible with its employees andencourage the employees to achieve their personal goals within theobjectives of the company's efforts.
If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:
or
Click here to request an essay written just for you.
|
|
|
