Organizations adopt performance management systems as way of establishing structures enabling employees to within a given framework thereby facilitating the realization of the set goals and objectives. An effective system should mirrors the company’s corporate culture as well as values ( Landy, Zedeck, and Cleveland, 2017) . The system should also focus on the right performance measures and has a link between the job description and employee performance (Gomes & Romao 2014). Once adopted, the method should communicate the total reward system and differentiate performance fairly and effectively.
The following is the criteria can be used:
Strategic congruence is the extent to which the system elicits a job performance consistent with the strategy adopted by the company and its culture.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Validity is the extent to which the system adopted measures the relevant aspect of job performance (Shaout & Yousif 2014).
The third one relates to reliability , which is the consistency of a performance measure. It defines freedom from random errors.
Acceptability is the fourth aspect and deals with the extent to which those who are using it see the performance as satisfactory (Landy, Zedeck, and Cleveland, 2017).
Analysis of the Comparative Approach
The comparative approach to performance requires the person conducting the rating to compare the performance of an individual with that of other people. It is based on an overall assessment of an individual’s performance and their rankings within a group. When this approach, the employer may use a forced distribution where the manager usually puts a certain percentage of employees into categories that are predetermined (Shaout & Yousif 2014). In the ranking system, employees are graded from the highest to the lowest performer. The approach is advantageous because it is effective in differentiating employee performance. It also helps in eliminating the problems of strictness and leniency. It forms a good basis for pay rises as well as promotions and is easy to develop and use. However, it is prone to biases and opinion if enough evaluators are not used (Gomes & Romao 2014). Lastly, it lacks specificity regarding feedback provision and strategies for improvement.
References
Gomes, J. & Romao, M., 2014. Advantages and limitations of performance measurement tools: The balanced scorecard. In 7 th IADIS Information Systems 2014
Landy, F., Zedeck, S., and Cleveland, J., 2017. Performance measurement and theory . Routledge.
Shaout, A. & Yousif, M., 2014. Performance evaluation methods and techniques survey. International Journal of Computer and Information Technology, 3 (5), pp.966–979.
