绩效管理英文文献和参考文献
绩效管理 外文翻译 外文文献 中英翻译
Performance management-how to appraise employee performance AbstractPerformance appraisal is an important content of human resource management in modern enterprises. According to the problems existing at the present stage Chinese enterprise performance evaluation, put forward the improvement measures to improve the performance appraisal. Performance management is the responsibility between managers and employees and improve the communication performance of the ongoing. The partners should understand why they become partners, thereby supporting the work. Performance evaluation is a part of performance management, do not confuse the twoIntroductionChallenges of performance managementReasons to avoid performance management: Manager: reports and program has no meaning; no time; afraid of conflict; feedback and observation. (performance management, prevent problems in investment in time, ensure the managers have the time to do the thing you should do staff: bad experience; what was about to happen no bottom; do not understand the significance of performance management; don't like received criticism. Criterion two, performance management, organizational success: 1 Factors: coordination among units means, towards a common goal; problem, find the problems, find problems or prevent problems; obey the law, be protected by the law; make major decisions, a way of getting information; improve the quality of staff, to make the organization more competitive., performance management of organization,must be useful to managers, the only reason of performance management is to help employees to success. to understand better how to design and what made him act. , the performance management challenge is how to find practical,meaningful ways to finish it, which need thought and wisdom.Performance management is a systemThe performance plan -- starting point of performance management:employees and managers to work together, as employees do what, do what degree of problem identification, understanding.Continuous performance communication: both trackingprogress, find the obstacles that affect performance and process so that the two sides success required information. Communication methods: (1) around were observed;(2)employees; (3) allow employees to work review;Performance diagnosis: to identify individuals, departments and organizational performance by the real reason for the problem of communication and problem solving process.Performance management is a small system in the large system. If you want to get the maximum profit, must complete the performance management process,and not a part of.Performance management and strategic planning, budget, staff ,employee salary incentive system, improve the quality of plans are related. Do the performance management process to do the preparation of 1, there are two key points: with the staff to collect meaningful, to establish the information needed to measurable goals; to do some basic work, so that in the whole process of performance management and employee can fully cooperation. In part, access to information and data of performance management effect is it can help organizations, units and employees towards a direction some "target"information each employee's job description; (2) employee last performance review data and related documents.The performance plan three steps: preparation, meeting, finalize plans. your job, you should do what, how to measure your success, sets threat mosphere and seize the key; to review the relevant information, ask more,talk less; the job duties and specific goal; determine the success criteria; discuss what are the difficulties and need what help; discuss the importance level and authorized to ask problem; 4, note: in the performance management process, should pay attention to communication with staff thought is the action guide, to carry out effective performance communication, we must pay attention to in the thought. All aspects of the performance communication throughout the performance cycle, plays an important role in any one link in the chain, leaving the performance communication, any unilateral decisions managers will affect the enthusiasm of the staff, performance management. No performance communication there is no performance management. In order to make the performance management on the right track, truly play its role,enterprises mustput the supervisor and employee performance communication as a priority among priorities to research and development, through the system specification, performance management become competent habit, the habit of employees, to solve the performance problem employees work for dialogue and exchanges, the performance management into effect.Three methods of performance evaluation: Predicament 1, individual performance evaluation --: the best opera actor and amateur orchestra concert.The opera actors play the extreme, but the effect is very bad. No one is isolated,only focus on the individual, can not solve the problem. We call on an individual basis on employee performance evaluation, but if we emphasize individual performance but not the antecedents and consequences and conditions of performance, we do not progress, because we did not find the real reason -- may be because employees can not control things and punish employees, may also be because of the wrong reason 2, regardless of the what way to assess performance, avoid two traps are important: 1) don't do performance problems or"always the fault of employees" this hypothesis; 2) without any assessment can give the "why" and "what is happening in the picture". Evaluation is just the beginning, is a further discussion as well as the starting point of diagnosis. Three methods of performance evaluation: 3, 1) rating method:: features, to and behavior project; identify each project performance level gauge and other ways. Advantages: easy to finish the work of assessment. Disadvantages:forget why do this work; too vague, in the performance plan, prevention,protection and development staff and so did not what role in improving methods:with employees regularly write brief conversation; evaluation; interpretation and evaluation project meaning; together with the staff rating 2) ranking method:forcing staff to compete with each other, have stimulation can be short term, long term may cause internal malicious competition. 3) target and standard evaluation method: Standard: according to the prior and employees a series of established criteria to measure the performance of employees. Advantages: the personal goals and work together to reduce the possibility of target; both sides disagree;defect: need more time; text work more; more energy.Communication method and communication technologyWay of thinking: the process of performance management is the process of communication.Relationship with the staff is not only reflected in the behavior on performance management, but also should reflect the daily and how successful way of thinking: A, the process of performance management is a complete process together with the staff, not a for staff B, except for some unilateral disciplinary action, performance plan, communication and assessment should adopt a cooperative mode; C, most of the staff, once you understand what they are asked to do things, will try the method can meet the requirements D,performance management is not the purpose of staring past mistakes, clear posibility, but in the problem solving problems and possible e, performance deficit to be clear, the cause of the deficit, whether for personal reasons or the system reason; F, in most cases, if the manager will support staff as their work,so that each employee 2, must set some skills communication skills: Manager here guide employees to participate in the discussion process and understand the process of responsibility. Purpose: don't most probably it did not actually happen. Be prepared to establish a common responsibility and each stage all contribute to the relationship, the target. Clear the common responsibility: to improve the performance is not only the responsibility of the staff. Clear procedures: prevent conflict resolution skills: clear individual responsibility, invites employees to take advice. For the people of the criticism and comments: avoid if you don't listen, you don't know what you talking about,could you be quiet for a while, you read the report in the past did not remarks:avoid such as how many years, you always can't finish the job on time, we have ried that, there is no with the need need making guide guilty intent: to avoid if you really care about the team, you should work harder; I guess you don't care about this project not appropriate advice and sure: avoid as I know the project is late, but I'm sure you'll catch up; you will do well. You will understand the need,need to unsolicited advice and sure: avoid you must do it; this is the only way; to finish this today, and put it on my desk. A provocative question: Why did you say those who avoid. What you think; is the need to need; what is you get this conclusion? Don't trust to avoid language: are you sure you can finish on time?I've heard you need to exaggerate these need: avoid you never finish the work on time; you always try to reject my proposal. The cooling technique of fierce debate.The performance of a, discuss the process of dispute, we should pay attention to two goals: must make suggestions on conflict; avoid damage relations, cause new problems in the future performance. B, give employees a vent frustration and anger for feeling, not very fast counter attack. C, remember the people when they do appear conflict. D, the way of handling conflicts: conflicts through persuasion, won the right to try to understand the means; staff positions, find a solution. E, conflict is the most effective treatment technology is active listening.F, and be confused in mind or angry employees dealing, the basic principle is the first concern of his emotional. G, disputes arise, request the dispute settle ment measures, but never from the subject. H, too excited, communication should be suspended.The performance of communication is the core of performance management, is refers to between the employers and employees performance evaluation reflects the problems and evaluation mechanism itself to conduct substantive interviews,and tries to seek countermeasures, a management method for service in the later stage of enterprise and employee performance, improve and enhance the.A process of performance management is on the lower level on the performance target setting and implementation and ongoing two-way communication.绩效管理——如何考评员工表现摘要绩效考核是现代企业人力资源管理的重要内容。
人力资源管理绩效管理外文翻译文献
人力资源管理绩效管理外文翻译文献人力资源管理绩效管理外文翻译文献(文档含中英文对照即英文原文和中文翻译)原文：Performance Management: Reconciling Competing PrioritiesIan ZiskinFour HR thought leaders from academia— John Boudreau of the USC Center for Effective Organizations, Chris Collins of the Cornell Center for Advanced HR Studies, Pat Wright of the Moore College of Business at the University of South Carolina, and Dave Ulrich of University of Michigan and the RBL Group — engaged in discussions on Performance Management with Ian Ziskin, President, EXec EXcel Group LLC and Board member, HR People & Strategy. Ian asked John, Chris,Pat, and Dave to share their perspectives on topics including:• What Performance Management is?• What makes the biggest difference to effective vs. ineffective Performance Management?• What the biggest sources of debate and disagreement have been regarding Performance Management over the years, and whether we have made any progress in resolving these issues？• If they were going to fix or kill anything about Performance Management, w hat it would be and why？• What big implications there are for future required changes to Performance Management in light of future work, workforce and workplace trends？Ziskin: There is a lot of talk in organizations about whether Performance Management is working effectively or ever has. What do you think Performance Management is?Collins: This may be the question of the year. Performance Management has become everything and therefore nothing. It serves so many purposes —compensation, feedback, talent development, succession, etc. — that it may not serve any purpose very well.Boudreau: It's an ongoing relationship to balance the need to evaluate people with the need to develop them. It's not about bromides, forms, scores, tools orsystems.Wright: Performance Management is about aligning behavior in a way that increases organizational effectiveness.Ulrich: I think we need to look at Performance Management from three levels: cultural, systems and personal. At the cultural level, it's about whether the organization judges people based on meritocracy (results), hierarchy (power) or relationships (connections). At the systems level, it's about determining whether people meet or miss objectives. At the personal level, it's about assessing the individual's dedication to deliver both financial and social results.Ziskin: Given your point of view about Performance Management, what makes the biggest difference to whether it is effective vs. ineffective?Collins: It starts with having a culture of openness, honesty and real feedback —and then holding people accountable. This process begins and ends with good leaders, and all of our money should be invested in developing leaders to lead, rather than spending money on new Performance Management systems and tools.Boudreau: Effectiveness rests in the skills and motivations of the people involved, not in the Performance Management system itself. It is particularly important to create a shared framework and priorities between managers and their employees.Ulrich: The four generic steps of Performance Management have remained relatively stable over time: set standards, assess against those standards, allocate consequences and provide feedback. Improvements in the effectiveness of Performance Management have come from enabling external stakeholders to provide input on standards and performance, making the performance discussion more about the future than the past, using technology to simplify the process, tailoring the consequences to better reflect individual employee contributions and value, and accommodating both team as well as individual feedback.Wright: Bad tools, bad evaluations, bad feedback and bad links to reward systems lead to bad Performance Management.Ziskin: If you look back over the years of debate about Performance Management, what one or two things stand out in your mind as the biggest sources ofdebate and disagreement?Boudreau: The biggest debate has been about what are we trying to achieve? It's always been about development of people vs. evaluation of their performance, and whether these two different priorities can be reconciled.Collins: Do you separate performance feedback from compensation, and how do you do both? We also need to learn to separate the discussion about current performance from the future — future roles and future performance requirements.Wright: The debate continues over simplifying tools vs. customizing unique tools to specific jobs, roles, situations and individuals.Ulrich: There are a number of old debates and some new debates. The old debates include Performance Management should be used for discussing financial results or development potential (yes to both), whether we should measure results as well as behavior (yes to both), whether managers should be accountable to do performance reviews (yes), and who should own Performance Management— the line or HR (the line owns it, HR is the architect).Ziskin: Have we made any progress in resolving the debate over these issues?Boudreau: We have made progress in something, such as the growing recognition that effective Performance Management is much less about forms and much more about relationships.Collins: I am gravely disappointed in the progress we've made in the past 20 years, especially in accommodating new ways of working such as more distributed, virtual work. We also have not made enough progress in accounting for team performance instead of just individual performance.Wright: We are making progress in linking results, behaviors and rewards. I'd say we are beginning to achieve best principles in Performance Management, but we have not yet achieved best practices.Ulrich: The following new debates are more interesting to me than the old debates I mentioned above, and even though we are beginning to make some progress, we need much more: how we simplify the process, how we have meaningful personal conversations between leaders and employees and how we build a performanceculture where meritocracy is expected.Ziskin: In light of the Performance Management debates and related mixed progress we have discussed, if you were going to fix or kill one thing related to Performance Management, what it would it by and why?Collins: I would fix Performance Management by investing in better leaders giving better feedback, rather than trying to fix Performance Management by investing in better tools.Boudreau: I would kill the debate about Performance Management forms, tools and technology enhancements, and instead put more than 80 percent of our resources into teaching and developing leaders and employees to get the most out of the performance feedback discussion.Ulrich: I would kill Performance Management complexity, and simplify the process. Sometimes, the process becomes the end itself, and there is means/end inversion.Wright: I would kill the parochialism that comes from my way, my tool and my process. There is a lot to be learned from how others are doing Performance Management.Ziskin: When you consider the future of work, the workplace and the workforce —and how all these things are changing and affecting business performance — what one or two big implications are there for required changes to Performance Management in the future?Ulrich: The biggest implications for the future I see are simplification of the Performance Management process and more outside/in perspective whereby Performance Management is more connected to input from external stakeholders.Wright: We will see a greater emphasis on evaluating results, the end product, rather than behavior, because global dispersion of work will make it much more difficult to directly observe behavior.Boudreau: As a result of increasingly virtual, remote, temporary and independent work, performance assessment can no longer only be done by leaders — it will also be done by others including peers and employees themselves. PerformanceManagement will no longer be the province of leaders.Collins: Performance Management is going in the direction of more frequent, more transparent, more virtual, more raters and more team-based.Ziskin: Based on insights from our academic experts, as well as from my own experience, if you are working to reconcile the competing priorities associated with Performance Management, think about the following guidelines:• Simplify and de-emphasize forms and process in favor of improving the quality of relationships and conversation between leaders and employees• Accommodate trends toward more virtual and flexible work and changing demographics thorough Performance Management approaches that emphasize transparency, frequency and input from a broader range of internal and external constituents• Move from a relatively narrow focus on Performance Management to a broader emphasis on Performance CulturePeople & Strategy. 2013, Vol. 36 Issue 2, p24-25. 2p.译文：绩效管理：协调竞争的优先事项Ian Ziskin来自学术界的四位HR思想领袖：在南加州大学中心所研究有效组织的John Boudreau、在康奈尔大学高级人力资源研究中心工作的Chris Collins、在南卡罗来纳大学摩尔商学院的Pat Wright以及在密歇根大学和RBL集团工作的Dave Ulrich，与Ian总裁（掌管Excel集团有限责任公司、董事会成员、HR人员和策略）从事绩效管理事务。
公共部门绩效管理的回顾与反思文献
公共部门绩效管理的回顾与反思文献## Performance Management in the Public Sector: A Literature Review and Reflection.### Introduction.Performance management is a critical component of public sector management. It allows organizations to track their progress towards goals, identify areas for improvement, and hold employees accountable for their performance. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in performance management in the public sector, as governments around the world seek to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of their operations.This paper provides a review of the literature on performance management in the public sector. The review covers a wide range of topics, including the benefits and challenges of performance management, the different types of performance measures, and the best practices forimplementing performance management systems. The paper also provides a reflection on the current state of performance management in the public sector and offers some suggestions for future research.### Benefits of Performance Management.There are a number of benefits to implementing performance management in the public sector. These benefits include:Improved performance: Performance management systems can help to improve performance by providing employees with clear goals and expectations, and by providing them with feedback on their progress.Increased accountability: Performance management systems can help to increase accountability by holding employees responsible for their performance.Improved decision-making: Performance management systems can help to improve decision-making by providingmanagers with information on the performance of their employees and their programs.Increased transparency: Performance management systems can help to increase transparency by making performance information available to the public.### Challenges of Performance Management.There are also a number of challenges to implementing performance management in the public sector. These challenges include:Complexity: Performance management systems can be complex to design and implement.Cost: Performance management systems can be expensive to implement and maintain.Resistance to change: Employees may be resistant to change, especially if they feel that performance management systems are being used to punish them.Lack of data: Public sector organizations often lack the data necessary to measure performance effectively.### Types of Performance Measures.There are a variety of different types of performance measures that can be used in the public sector. These measures include:Outcome measures: Outcome measures measure the results of a program or activity.Output measures: Output measures measure the products or services produced by a program or activity.Efficiency measures: Efficiency measures measure the cost of producing a product or service.Effectiveness measures: Effectiveness measures measure the extent to which a program or activity achieves its goals.### Best Practices for Implementing Performance Management Systems.There are a number of best practices for implementing performance management systems in the public sector. These best practices include:Involve employees in the design and implementation of the system.Use a variety of performance measures to capture different aspects of performance.Provide employees with clear goals and expectations.Provide employees with feedback on their progress.Use performance management systems to reward and recognize good performance.### Current State of Performance Management in thePublic Sector.The current state of performance management in the public sector is mixed. Some organizations have made significant progress in implementing performance management systems, while others are still struggling to get started. There are a number of factors that have contributed to this uneven progress, including the complexity of performance management systems, the cost of implementation, and the resistance to change from employees.### Suggestions for Future Research.There are a number of areas for future research on performance management in the public sector. These areas include:The impact of performance management on organizational performance.The best ways to measure performance in the public sector.The best practices for implementing performance management systems in the public sector.The role of technology in performance management.## 总结。
绩效考核外文文献及其译文
The Dilemma of Performance AppraisalPeter Prowse and Julie ProwseMeasuring Business Excellence,V ol.13 Iss:4,pp.69 - 77AbstractThis paper deals with the dilemma of managing performance using performance appraisal. The authors will evaluate the historical development of appraisals and argue that the critical area of line management development that was been identified as a critical success factor in appraisals has been ignored in the later literature evaluating the effectiveness of performance through appraisals.This paper willevaluatethe aims and methodsof appraisal, thedifficulties encountered in the appraisalprocess. It also re-evaluates the lack of theoretical development in appraisaland move from he psychological approachesof analysistoamorecritical realisation ofapproaches before re-evaluating the challenge to remove subjectivity and bias in judgement of appraisal.13.1IntroductionThis paper will define and outline performance management and appraisal. It will start by evaluating what form of performance is evaluated, then develop links to the development of different performance traditions (Psychological tradition, Management by Objectives, Motivation and Development).It will outline the historical development of performance management then evaluate high performance strategies using performance appraisal. It will evaluate the continuing issue of subjectivity and ethical dilemmas regarding measurement and assessment of performance. The paper will then examine how organisations measure performance before evaluation of research on some recent trends in performance appraisal.This chapter will evaluate the historical development of performance appraisal from management by objectives (MBO) literature before evaluating the debates between linkages between performance management and appraisal. It will outline the development of individual performance before linking to performance management in organizations. The outcomes of techniques to increase organizational commitment, increase job satisfaction will be critically evaluated. It will further examine the transatlantic debates between literature on efficiency and effectiveness in the North American and the United Kingdom) evidence to evaluate the HRM development and contribution of performance appraisal to individual and organizational performance.13.2 What is Performance Management?The first is sue to discuss is the difficulty of definition of Performance Management. Armstrong and Barron(1998:8) define performance management as: A strategic and integrated approach to delivering sustained success to organisations by Improving performance of people who work in them by developing the capabilities of teams And individual performance.13.2.1 Performance AppraisalAppraisal potentially is a key tool in making the most of an organisation’s human resources. The use of appraisal is widespread estimated that 80–90%of organizations in the USA and UK were using appraisal and an increase from 69 to 87% of organisations between 1998 and 2004 reported a formalperformance management system (Armstrong and Baron, 1998:200).There has been little evidence of the evaluation of the effectiveness of appraisal but more on the development in its use. Between 1998 and 2004 a sample from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD, 2007) of 562 firms found 506 were using performance appraisal in UK.What is also vital to emphasise is the rising use of performance appraisal feedback beyond performance for professionals and managers to nearly 95% of workplaces in the 2004 WERS survey (seeTable 13.1).Clearly the use of Appraisals has been the development and extension of appraisals to cover a large proportion of the UK workforce and the coverage of non managerial occupations and the extended use in private and public sectors.13.2.2 The Purpose of AppraisalsThe critical issue is what is the purpose of appraisals and how effective is it ？Researched and used in practice throughout organizations? The purpose of appraisals needs to be clearly identified. Firstly their purpose. Randell (1994) states they are a systematic evaluation of individual performance linked to workplace behaviour and/or specific criteria. Appraisals often take the form of an appraisal interview,usually annual,supported by standardised forms/paperwork.The key objective of appraisal is to provide feedback for performance is provided by the linemanager.The three key questions for quality of feedback:1. What and how are observations on performance made?2. Why and how are they discussed?3. What determines the level of performance in the job?It has been argued by one school of thought that these process cannot be performed effectively unless the line manager of person providing feedback has the interpersonal interviewing skills to providethat feedback to people being appraised. This has been defined as the “Bradford Approach” which places a high priority on appraisal skills development (Randell, 1994). This approach is outlined in Fig. 13.1 whichidentifies the linkages betweeninvolving,developing, rewarding and valuing people at work..13.2.3 Historical Development of AppraisalThe historical development of performance feedback has developed from a range of approaches.Formal observation of individual work performance was reported in Robert Owens’s Scottish factory inNew Lanarkin the early 1800s (Cole, 1925). Owen hung over machines a piece of coloured wood over machines to indicate the Super intendent’s assessment of the previous day’s conduct (white forexcellent, yellow, blue and then black for poor performance).The twentieth centuryled to F.W. Taylor and his measured performance and the scientific management movement (Taylor, 1964). The 1930sTraits Approaches identified personality and performance and used feedback using graphic rating scales, a mixed standard of performance scales noting behaviour in likert scale ratings.This was used to recruit and identify management potential in the field of selection. Later developments to prevent a middle scale from 5 scales then developed into a forced-choice scale which forced the judgement to avoid central ratings.The evaluation also included narrative statements and comments to support the ratings (Mair, 1958).In the 1940s Behavioural Methods were developed. These included Behavioural Anchored Rating Scales (BARS); Behavioural Observation Scales (BOS); Behavioural Evaluation Scales (BES); critical incident;job simulation. All these judgements were used to determine the specific levels of performance criteria to specific issues such as customer service and rated in factors such asexcellent,average orneeds to improve or poor.These ratings are assigned numerical values and added to a statement or narrative comment by the assessor. It would also lead to identify any potential need for training and more importantly to identify talent for careers in linemanagement supervision and future managerial potential.Post1945 developed into the Results-oriented approaches and led to the development of management by objectives (MBO). This provided aims and specific targets to be achievedand with in time frames such as pecific sales, profitability,and deadlines with feedback on previous performance (Wherry, 1957).The deadlines may have required alteration and led to specific performance rankings of staff. It also provided a forced distributionof rankingsof comparative performance and paired comparison ranking of performance and setting and achieving objectives.In the 1960s the developmentof Self-appraisal by discussion led to specific time and opportunity for the appraisee to reflectively evaluate their performance in the discussion and the interview developed into a conversation on a range of topics that the appraise needed to discuss in the interview. Until this period the success of the appraisal was dependent on skill of interviewer.In the 1990s the development of 360-degree appraisal developed where information was sought from a wider range of sources and the feedback was no longer dependent on the manager-subordinate power relationship but included groups appraising the performance of line managers and peer feedback from peer groups on individual performance (Redman and Snape, 1992). The final development of appraisal interviews developed in the 1990s with the emphasis on the linking performance with financial reward which will be discussed later in the paper.13.2.4 Measures of PerformanceThe dilemma of appraisal has always to develop performance measures and the use of appraisal is the key part of this process. Quantitative measure of performance communicated as standards in the business and industry level standards translated to individual performance. The introduction of techniques such as the balanced score card developed by Kaplan and Norton (1992).Performance measures and evaluation included financial, customer evaluation, feedback on internal processes and Learning and Growth. Performance standards also included qualitative measures Which argue that there is an over emphasis on metrics of quantitative approach above the definitions of quality services and total quality management.In terms of performance measures there has been a transformation in literature and a move in the 1990s to the financial rewards linked to the level of performance.The debates will be discussed later in the paper.13.3 Criticism of AppraisalsCritiques of appraisal have continued as appraisal shave increased in use and scope across sectors and occupations. The dominant critique is the management framework using appraisal as an orthodox technique that seeks to remedy the weakness and propose of appraisals as a system to develop performance.This “orthodox” approach argues there are conflicting pur poses of appraisal (Strebler et al, 2001). Appraisal can motivate staff by clarifying objectives and setting clear future objectives with provision for training and development needs to establish the performance objective. These conflicts withassessing past performance and distribution of rewards based on past performance (Bach, 2005:301).Employees are reluctant to confide any limitations and concerns on their current performance as this could impact on their merit related reward or promotion opportunities(Newton and Findley, 1996:43).This conflicts with performance as a continuum as appraisers are challenged with differing roles as both monitors and judges of performance but an understanding counsell or which Randell(1994)argues few manager shave not received the raining to perform.Appraisal Manager’s reluctance to criticise also stems from classic evidence fromMcGregor that managers are reluctant to make an egative judgement on an individual’s performance a sit could be demotivating,leadto accusationsoftheirown supportand contributiontoindividual poor performance and to also avoid interpersonal conflict (McGregor, 1957).One consequence of this avoidance of conflict is to rate all criterion as central and avoid any conflict known as the central tendency.In a study of senior managers by Long neckeretal.(1987),they found organisational politics influenced ratings of 60 senior executives.The findings were that politics involved deliberate attempts by individuals to enhance or protect self-interests when conflicting courses of action are possible and that ratings and decisions were affected by potential sources of bias or inaccuracy in their appraisal ratings (Longeneckeret al., 1987).There are methods of further bias beyond Longenecker’s evidence. The polit ical judgements and they have been distorted further by overrating some clear competencies in performance rather than being critical across all rated competencies known as the halo effect and if some competencies arelower they may prejudice the judgment acrossthe positive reviews known as the horns effect (ACAS, 1996).Some ratings may only cinclude recent events and these are known as the recency effects. In this case only recent events are noted compared to managers gathering and using data throughout the appraisal period .A particular concern is the equity of appraisal for ratings which may be distorted by gender ,ethnicity and the ratings of appraisers themselves .A range of studies in both the US and UK have highlighted subjectivity in terms of gender (Alimo-Metcalf, 1991;White, 1999) and ethnicity of the appraise and appraiser(Geddes and Konrad, 2003). Suggestions and solutions on resolving bias will be reviewed later.The second analysis is the radical critique of appraisal. This is the more critical management literature that argues that appraisal and performance management are about management control(Newton and Findley, 1996;Townley, 1993). It argues that tighter management control over employee behaviour can be achieved by the extension of appraisal to manual workers, professional as means to control. This develops the literature of Foucault using power and surveillance. This literature uses cases in examples of public service control on professionals such a teachers (Healy, 1997) and University professionals(Townley, 1990).This evidence argues the increased control of public services using appraisal as a method of control and that the outcome of managerial objectives ignores the developmental role of appraisal and ratings are awarded for people who accept and embrace the culture and organizational values . However, this literature ignores the employee resistance and the use of professional unions to challenge the attempts to exert control over professionals and staff in the appraisal process (Bach, 2005:306).One of the different issues of removing bias was the use of the test metaphor (Folgeretal.,1992).This was based on the assumption that appraisal ratings were a technical question of assessing “true” performance and there needed to be increased reliability and validity of appraisal as an instrument to develop motivation and performance. The sources of rater bias and errors can be resolvedby improved organisational justice and increasing reliability of appraiser’s judgement.However there were problems such as an assumption that you can state job requirements clearly and the organization is “rational” with objectives that reflect values and that the judgment by appraisers’ are value free from political agendas and personal objectives. Secondly there is the second issue of subjectivity if appraisal ratings where decisions on appraisal are rated by a “political metaphor”(Hart le, 1995).This “political view” argues that a appraisal is often done badly because there is a lack of training for appraisers and appraisers may see the appraisal as a waste of time. This becomes a process which managers have to perform and not as a potential to improve employee performance .Organisations in this context are “political” and the appraisers seek to maintain performance from subordinates and view appraises as internal customers to satisfy. This means managers use appraisal to avoid interpersonal conflict and develop strategies for their own personal advancement and seek a quiet life by avoiding censure from higher managers.This perception means managers also see appraisee seeks good rating and genuine feedback and career development by seeking evidence of combining employee promotion and pay rise.This means appraisal ratings become political judgements and seek to avoid interpersonal conflicts. The approaches of the “test” and “political” metaphors of appraisal are inaccurate and lack objec tivity and judgement of employee performance is inaccurate and accuracy is avoided.The issue is how can organisations resolve this lack of objectivity?13.3.1 Solutions to Lack of Objectivity of AppraisalGrint(1993)argues that the solutions to objectivity lies in part with McGregor’s (1957) classic critique by retraining and removal of “top down” ratings by managers and replacement with multiple rater evaluation which removes bias and the objectivity by upward performance appraisal. The validity of upward appraisal means there moval of subjective appraisal ratings.This approach is also suggested to remove gender bias in appraisal ratings against women in appraisals (Fletcher, 1999). The solution of multiple reporting(internal colleagues, customers and recipients of services) will reduce subjectivity and inequity of appraisal ratings. This argument develops further by the rise in the need to evaluate project teams and increasing levels of teamwork to include peer assessment. The solutions also in theory mean increased closer contact with individual manager and appraises and increasing services linked to customer facing evaluations.However, negative feedback still demotivates and plenty of feedback and explanation by manager who collates feedback rather than judges performance andfail to summarise evaluations.There are however still problems with accuracy of appraisal objectivity asWalker and Smither (1999)5year studyof 252 managers over 5 year period still identified issues with subjective ratings in 360 degree appraisals.There are still issues on the subjectivity of appraisals beyond the areas of lack of training.The contribution of appraisal is strongly related to employee attitudes and strong relationships with job satisfaction(Fletcher and Williams, 1996). The evidence on appraisal still remains positive in terms of reinvigo rating social relationships at work (Townley,1993)and the widespread adoption in large public services in the UK such as the national health Service (NHS)is the valuable contribution to line managers discussion with staff on their past performance, discussing personal development plans and training and development as positive issues.One further concern is the openness of appraisal related to employee reward which we now discuss.13.3.2 Linking Appraisals with Reward ManagementAppraisal and performance management have been inextricably linked to employee reward since the development of strategic human resource management in the 1980s. The early literature on appraisal linked appraisal with employee control (Randell, 1994;Grint, 1993;Townley, 1993, 1999) and discussed the use of performance related reward to appraisals. However therecent literature has substituted the chapter titles employee “appraisal” with “performance management”(Bach, 2005; Storey, 2007) and moved the focus on performance and performance pay and the limits of employee appraisal. The appraisal and performance pay link has developed into debates to three key issues:The first issue is has performance pay related to appraisal grown in use?The second issue is what type of performance do we reward?and the final issue is who judges management standards?The first discussion on influences of growth of performance pay schemes is the assumption that increasing linkage between individual effort and financial reward increases performance levels. This linkage between effort and financial reward increasing levels of performance has proved an increasing trend in the public and private sector (Bevan and Thompson, 1992;Armstrong and Baron, 1998). The drive to increase public sector performance effort and setting of targets may even be inconsistent in the experiences of some organizational settings aimed at achieving long-term targets(Kessler and Purcell, 1992;Marsden, 2007). The development of merit based pay based on performance assessed by a manager is rising in the UK Marsden (2007)reported that the: Use of performance appraisals as a basis for merit pay are used in65 percent of public sector and 69 percent of the private sector employees where appraisal covered all nonmanagerial staff(p.109).Merit pay has also grown in use as in 1998 20% of workplaces used performance related schemes compared to 32% in the same organizations 2004 (Kersley et al., 2006:191). The achievements of satisfactory ratings or above satisfactory performance averages were used as evidence to reward individual performance ratings in the UK Civil Service (Marsden, 2007).Table 13.2 outlines the extent of merit pay in 2004.The second issue is what forms of performance is rewarded. The use of past appraisal ratings as evidence of achieving merit-related payments linked to achieving higher performance was the predominant factor developed in the public services. The evidence on Setting performance targets have been as Kessler (2000:280) reported “inconsistent within organizations and problematic for certain professional or less skilled occupations where goals have not been easily formulated”. There has been inconclusive evidence from organizations on the impact of performance pay and its effectiveness in improving performance. Evidence from a number of individual performance pay schemes report organizations suspending or reviewing them on the grounds that individual performance reward has produced no effect in performance or even demotivates staff(Kessler, 2000:281).More in-depth studies setting performance goals followed by appraisal on how well they were resulted in loss of motivation whilst maintaining productivity and achieved managers using imposing increased performance standards (Marsden and Richardson, 1994). As Randell(1994) had highlighted earlier, the potential objectivity and self-criticism in appraisal reviews become areas that appraisees refuse to acknowledge as weaknesses with appraisers if this leads to a reduction in their merit pay.Objectivity and self reflection for development becomes a weakness that appraises fail to acknowledge as a developmental issue if it reduces their chances of a reduced evaluation that will reduce their merit reward. The review of civil service merit pay (Makinson, 2000)reported from 4major UK Civil Service Agencies and the National Health Service concluded that existing forms of performance pay and performance management had failed to motivate many staff.The conclusions were that employees found individual performance pay divisive and led to reduced willingness to co-operate with management ,citing managerial favorites and manipulation of appraisal scores to lower ratings to save paying rewards to staff (Marsden and French, 1998).This has clear implications on the relationship between line managers and appraises and the demotivational consequences and reduced commitment provide clear evidence of the danger to linking individual performance appraisal to reward in the public services. Employees focus on the issues that gain key performance focus by focusing on specific objectives related to key performance indicators rather than all personal objectives. A study of banking performance pay by Lewis(1998)highlighted imposed targets which were unattainable with a range of 20 performance targets with narrow short term financial orientatated goals. The narrow focus on key targets and neglect of other performance aspects leads to tasks not being delivered.This final issue of judging management standards has already highlighted issues of inequity and bias based on gender (Beyer, 1990; Chen and DiTomasio, 1996; Fletcher, 1999). The suggested solutions to resolved Iscrimination have been proposed as enhanced interpersonal skills training are increased equitable use of 360 degree appraisal as a method to evaluate feedback from colleagues as this reduces the use of the “political metaphor”(Randell, 1994;Fletcher, 1999).On measures linking performance to improvement require a wider approach to enhanced work design and motivation to develop and enhance employee job satisfaction and the design of linkages between effort and performance are significant in the private sector and feedback and awareness in the public sector (Fletcher and Williams, 1996:176). Where rises be in pay were determined by achieving critical rated appraisal objectives, employees are less self critical and open to any developmental needs in a performance review.13.4 ConclusionAs performance appraisal provides a major potential for employee feedback that could link strongly to increasing motivation ,and a opportunity to clarify goals and achieve long term individual performance and career development why does it still suffers from what Randell describes as a muddle and confusion which still surrounds the theory and practice?There are key issues that require resolution and a great deal depends on the extent to which you have a good relationship with your line manager . Barlow(1989)argued `if you get off badly with your first two managers ,you may just as well forget it (p. 515).The evidence on the continued practice of appraisals is that they are still institutionally elaborated systems of management appraisal and development is significant rhetoric in the apparatus of bureaucratic control by managers (Barlow, 1989). In reality the companies create, review, change and even abolish appraisals if they fail to develop and enhance organisational performance(Kessler, 2000). Despite all the criticism and evidence the critics have failed to suggest an alternative for a process that can provide feedback, develop motivation, identify training and potential and evidence that can justify potential career development and justify reward(Hartle, 1997).绩效考核的困境Peter Prowse and Julie Prowse摘要本文旨在用绩效考核方法来解决绩效管理的困境。
绩效考核外文翻译参考文献
绩效考核外文翻译参考文献(文档含中英文对照即英文原文和中文翻译)原文:Performance management - how to appraise employeeperformanceAbstractPerformance appraisal is an important content of human resource management in modern enterprises. According to the problems existing atthe present stage Chinese enterprise performance evaluation, put forward the improvement measures to improve the performance appraisal. Performance management is the responsibility between managers and employees and improve the communication performance of the ongoing. The partners should understand why they become partners, thereby supporting the work. Performance evaluation is a part of performance management, do not confuse the twoIntroductionChallenges of performance managementReasons to avoid performance management: Manager: reports and program has no meaning; no time; afraid of conflict; feedback and observation. (performance management, prevent problems in investment in time, ensure the managers have the time to do the thing you should do staff: bad experience; what was about to happen no bottom; do not understand the significance of performance management; don't like received criticism. Criterion two, performance management, organizational success: 1 Factors: coordination among units means, towards a common goal; problem, find the problems, find problems or prevent problems; obey the law, be protected by the law; make major decisions, a way of getting information; improve the quality of staff, to make the organization more competitive., performance management of organization,must be useful to managers, the only reason of performancemanagement is to help employees to success. to understand better how to design and what made him act. , the performance management challenge is how to find practical,meaningful ways to finish it, which need thought and wisdom.Performance management is a systemThe performance plan -- starting point of performance management:employees and managers to work together, as employees do what, do what degree of problem identification, understanding.Continuous performance communication: both tracking progress, find the obstacles that affect performance and process so that the two sides success required information. Communication methods: (1) around were observed; (2)employees; (3) allow employees to work review;Performance diagnosis: to identify individuals, departments and organizational performance by the real reason for the problem of communication and problem solving process.Performance management is a small system in the large system. If you want to get the maximum profit, must complete the performance management process,and not a part of.Performance management and strategic planning, budget, staff ,employee salary incentive system, improve the quality of plans are related. Do the performance management process to do the preparation of1, there are two key points: with the staff to collect meaningful, to establish the information needed to measurable goals; to do some basic work, so that in the whole process of performance management and employee can fully cooperation. In part, access to information and data of performance management effect is it can help organizations, units and employees towards a direction some "target"information each employee's job description; (2) employee last performance review data and related documents.The performance plan three steps: preparation, meeting, finalize plans. your job, you should do what, how to measure your success, sets threat mosphere and seize the key; to review the relevant information, ask more,talk less; the job duties and specific goal; determine the success criteria; discuss what are the difficulties and need what help; discuss the importance level and authorized to ask problem; 4, note: in the performance management process, should pay attention to communication with staff thought is the action guide, to carry out effective performance communication, we must pay attention to in the thought. All aspects of the performance communication throughout the performance cycle, plays an important role in any one link in the chain, leaving the performance communication, any unilateral decisions managers will affect the enthusiasm of the staff, performance management. No performance communication there is no performancemanagement. In order to make the performance management on the right track, truly play its role,enterprises must put the supervisor and employee performance communication as a priority among priorities to research and development, through the system specification, performance management become competent habit, the habit of employees, to solve the performance problem employees work for dialogue and exchanges, the performance management into effect.Three methods of performance evaluation: Predicament 1, individual performance evaluation --: the best opera actor and amateur orchestra concert.The opera actors play the extreme, but the effect is very bad. No one is isolated,only focus on the individual, can not solve the problem. We call on an individual basis on employee performance evaluation, but if we emphasize individual performance but not the antecedents and consequences and conditions of performance, we do not progress, because we did not find the real reason -- may be because employees can not control things and punish employees, may also be because of the wrong reason 2, regardless of the what way to assess performance, avoid two traps are important: 1) don't do performance problems or"always the fault of employees" this hypothesis; 2) without any assessment can give the "why" and "what is happening in the picture". Evaluation is just the beginning, is a further discussion as well as the starting point of diagnosis. Three methods of performance evaluation: 3, 1) rating method:: features,to and behavior project; identify each project performance level gauge and other ways. Advantages: easy to finish the work of assessment. Disadvantages:forget why do this work; too vague, in the performance plan, prevention,protection and development staff and so did not what role in improving methods:with employees regularly write brief conversation; evaluation; interpretation and evaluation project meaning; together with the staff rating 2) ranking method:forcing staff to compete with each other, have stimulation can be short term, long term may cause internal malicious competition. 3) target and standard evaluation method: Standard: according to the prior and employees a series of established criteria to measure the performance of employees. Advantages: the personal goals and work together to reduce the possibility of target; both sides disagree;defect: need more time; text work more; more energy. Communication method and communication technologyWay of thinking: the process of performance management is the process of communication.Relationship with the staff is not only reflected in the behavior on performance management, but also should reflect the daily and how successful way of thinking: A, the process of performance management is a complete process together with the staff, not a for staff B, except for some unilateral disciplinary action, performance plan, communication and assessment should adopt a cooperative mode; C, most of the staff, once you understand what they are asked to do things,will try the method can meet the requirements D,performance management is not the purpose of staring past mistakes, clear posibility, but in the problem solving problems and possible e, performance deficit to be clear, the cause of the deficit, whether for personal reasons or the system reason; F, in most cases, if the manager will support staff as their work,so that each employee 2, must set some skills communication skills: Manager here guide employees to participate in the discussion process and understand the process of responsibility. Purpose: don't most probably it did not actually happen. Be prepared to establish a common responsibility and each stage all contribute to the relationship, the target. Clear the common responsibility: to improve the performance is not only the responsibility of the staff. Clear procedures: prevent conflict resolution skills: clear individual responsibility, invites employees to take advice. For the people of the criticism and comments: avoid if you don't listen, you don't know what you talking about,could you be quiet for a while, you read the report in the past did not remarks:avoid such as how many years, you always can't finish the job on time, we have ried that, there is no with the need need making guide guilty intent: to avoid if you really care about the team, you should work harder; I guess you don't care about this project not appropriate advice and sure: avoid as I know the project is late, but I'm sure you'll catch up; you will do well. You will understand the need,need to unsolicited advice and sure: avoid you mustdo it; this is the only way; to finish this today, and put it on my desk. A provocative question: Why did you say those who avoid. What you think; is the need to need; what is you get this conclusion? Don't trust to avoid language: are you sure you can finish on time?I've heard you need to exaggerate these need: avoid you never finish the work on time; you always try to reject my proposal. The cooling technique of fierce debate. The performance of a, discuss the process of dispute, we should pay attention to two goals: must make suggestions on conflict; avoid damage relations, cause new problems in the future performance. B, give employees a vent frustration and anger for feeling, not very fast counter attack. C, remember the people when they do appear conflict. D, the way of handling conflicts: conflicts through persuasion, won the right to try to understand the means; staff positions, find a solution. E, conflict is the most effective treatment technology is active listening.F, and be confused in mind or angry employees dealing, the basic principle is the first concern of his emotional. G, disputes arise, request the dispute settle ment measures, but never from the subject. H, too excited, communication should be suspended.The performance of communication is the core of performance management, is refers to between the employers and employees performance evaluation reflects the problems and evaluation mechanism itself to conduct substantive interviews,and tries to seek countermeasures,a management method for service in the later stage of enterprise and employee performance, improve and enhance the.A process of performance management is on the lower level on the performance target setting and implementation and ongoing two-way communication.译文:绩效管理——如何考评员工表现摘要绩效考核是现代企业人力资源管理的重要内容。
人力资源专业绩效考核管理方面英文文献及中文翻译
人力资源专业绩效考核管理方面英文文献及中文翻译Performance assessment inquiryAbstractIn the aspect of human resource management, performance appraisal methods of diversity, in the end should adopt what kind of performance evaluation method is more reasonable, performance appraisal should be by what kind of way is easier to implement and achieve the better management results, is a question worth pondering. This paper will focus on the types of performance assessment and its effect, analyze the types of performance assessment, and explore how to correctly andappropriately assess the performance, and do a good job in management.1.Performance appraisals - purpose and how to make it easierPerformance appraisals are essential for the effective managementand evaluation of staff. Appraisals help develop individuals, improve organizational performance, and feed into business planning. Formal performance appraisals are generally conducted annually for all staff in the organization. His or her line manager appraises each staff member. Directors are appraised by the CEO, who is appraised by the chairman or company owners, depending on the size and structure of the organization.Annual performance appraisals enable management and monitoring of standards, agreeing expectations and objectives, and delegation of responsibilities and tasks. Staff performance appraisals also establishindividual training needs and enable organizational training needs analysis and planning.Performance appraisals also typically feed into organizationalannual pay and grading reviews, which commonly also coincide with the business planning for the next trading year.Performance appraisals generally review each individual'sperformance against objectives and standards for the trading year,agreed at the previous appraisal meeting. Performance appraisals arealso essential for career and succession planning - for individuals, crucial jobs, and for the organization as a whole.Performance appraisals are important for staff motivation, attitude and behavior development, communicating and aligning individual and organizational aims, andfostering positive relationships between management and staff.Performance appraisals provide a formal, recorded, regular review ofan individual's performance, and a plan for future development.Job performance appraisals - in whatever form they take - aretherefore vital for managing the performance of people and organizations.Managers and appraises commonly dislike appraisals and try to avoid them. To these people the appraisal is daunting and time-consuming. The process is seen as a difficult administrative chore and emotionally challenging. The annual appraisal is maybe the only time since last year that the two people have sat down together for a meaningful one-to-onediscussion. No wonder then that appraisals are stressful - which then defeats the whole purpose.Appraisals are much easier, and especially more relaxed, if the boss meets each of the team members individually and regularly for one-to-one discussion throughout the year.Meaningful regular discussion about work, career, aims, progress, development, hopes and dreams, life, the universe, the TV, common interests, etc., whatever, makes appraisals so much easier because people then know and trust each other - which reduces all the stress and the uncertainty.Put off discussions and of course they loom very large. So don'twait for the annual appraisal to sit down and talk. The boss or the appraises can instigate this.If you are an employee with a shy boss, then take the lead. If you are a boss who rarely sits down and talks with people - or whose people are not used to talking with their boss - then set about relaxing the atmosphere and improving relationships. Appraisals (and work) all tend to be easier when people communicate well and know each other.So sit down together and talk as often as you can, and then when the actual formal appraisals are due everyone will find the whole process to be far more natural, quick, and easy - and a lot more productive too.2.Appraisals, social responsibility and whole-person developmentThere is increasingly a need for performance appraisals of staff and especiallymanagers, directors and CEO's, to include accountabilities relating to corporate responsibility, represented by various converging corporate responsibility concepts including: the “Triple Bottom Line”; corporate social responsibility (CSR);Sustainability; corporate integrity and ethics; Fair Trade, etc. The organization must decide the extent to which these accountabilities are reflected in job responsibilities, which would then naturally feature accordingly in performance appraisals. More about this aspect of responsibility is in the directors’ job descriptions section.Significantly also, while this appraisal outline is necessarily a formal structure this does not mean that the development discussed with the appraises must be formal and constrained. In fact the opposite applies. Appraisals must address “whole person”development - not just job skills or the skills required for thenext promotion.Appraisals must not discriminate against anyone on the grounds of age, gender, sexual orientation, race, religion, disability, etc.The UK Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006, (consistent with Europe), effective from 1st October 2006, make it particularly important to avoid any comments, judgments, suggestions, questions or decisions which might be perceived by the appraises to be based on age. This means people who are young as well as old. Age, along with other characteristics stated above, is not a lawful basis for assessing andmanaging people, unless proper 'objective justification' can be proven. See the Age Diversity information.When designing or planning and conducting appraisals, seek to help the 'whole-person' to grow in whatever direction they want, not just to identify obviously relevant work skills training. Increasingly, the best employers recognize that growing the 'whole person' promotes positive attitudes, advancement, motivation, and also develops lots of new skills that can be surprisingly relevant to working productively andeffectively in any sort of organization.Developing the whole-person is also an important aspect of modern corporate responsibility, and separately (if you needed a purely business-driven incentive for adopting these principles), whole-person development is a crucial advantage in the employment market, in whichall employers compete to attract the best recruits, andto retain the best staff.Therefore in appraisals, be creative and imaginative in discussing, discovering and agreeing 'whole-person' development that people will respond to, beyond the usual job skill-set, and incorporate this sort of development into the appraisal process. Abraham Maslow recognized this over fifty years ago.If you are an employee and your employer has yet to embrace or even acknowledge these concepts, do them a favor at your own appraisal and suggest they look at these ideas, or maybe mention it at your exitinterview prior to joining a better employer who cares about the people, not just the work.Incidentally the Multiple Intelligences test and VAK Learning Styles test are extremely useful tools for appraisals, before or after, to help people understand their natural potential and strengths and to help managers understand this about their people too. There are a lot of people out there who are in jobs which don't allow them to use and develop their greatest strengths; so the more we can help folk understand their own special potential, and find roles that really fit well, the happier we shall all be.3 .Are performance appraisals still beneficial and appropriateIt is sometimes fashionable in the 'modern age' to dismisstraditional processes such as performance appraisals as being irrelevant or unhelpful. Be very wary however if considering removing appraisals from your own organizational practices. It is likely that the critics of the appraisal process are the people who can't conduct them very well.It's a common human response to want to jettison something that onefinds difficult. Appraisals - in whatever form, and there are various - have been a mainstay of management for decades, for good reasons.Think about everything that performance appraisals can achieve and contribute to when they are properly managed, for example:(1)performance measurement - transparent, short, medium and longterm(2)clarifying, defining, redefining priorities and objectives(3)motivation through agreeing helpful aims and targets(4)motivation though achievement and feedback(5)training needs and learning desires - assessment and agreement(6)identification of personal strengths and direction - including unused hidden strengths(7)career and succession planning - personal and organizational(8)team roles clarification and team building(9)organizational training needs assessment and analysis(10)appraise and manager mutual awareness, understanding and relationship(11)resolving confusions and misunderstandings(12)reinforcing and cascading organizational philosophies, values, aims, strategies, priorities, etc(13)delegation, additional responsibilities, employee growth and development(14)counseling and feedback(15)manager development - all good managers should be able to conduct appraisals well - it's a fundamental process(16)the list goes onPeople have less and less face-to-face time together these days. Performance appraisals offer a way to protect and manage these valuable face-to-face opportunities. My advice is to hold on to and nurture these situations, and if you are under pressure to replace performance appraisals with some sort of (apparently) more efficient and costeffective methods, be very sure that you can safely cover all the aspects of performance and attitudinal development that a well-run performance appraisals system is naturally designed to achieve.There are various ways of conducting performance appraisals, and ideas change over time as to what are the most effective appraisals methods and systems. Some people advocate traditional appraisals and forms; others prefer 360-degree-type appraisals; others suggest using little more than a blank sheet of paper.In fact performance appraisals of all types are effective if theyare conducted properly, and better still if the appraisal process is clearly explained to, agreed by, the people involved.Managers need guidance, training and encouragement in how to conduct appraisals properly. Especially the detractors and the critics. Help anxious managers (and directors) develop and adapt appraisals methods that work for them. Be flexible. There are lots of ways to conduct appraisals, and particularly lots of ways to diffuse apprehension and fear - for managers and appraises alike. Particularly - encourage people to sit down together and review informally and often - this removes much of the pressure for managers and appraises at formal appraisals times. Leaving everything to a single make-or-break discussion once a year is asking for trouble and trepidation.Look out especially for the warning signs of 'negative cascaded attitudes' towards appraisals. This is most often found where a senior manager or director hates conducting appraisals, usually because theyare uncomfortable and inexperienced in conducting them. The senior manager/director typically will be heard to say that appraisals don't work and are a waste of time, which for them becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.All that said, performance appraisals that are administered without training (for those who need it), without explanation or consultation, and conducted poorly will be counter-productive and is a waste of everyone's time.Well-prepared and well-conducted performance appraisals provide unique opportunities to help appraise and managers improve and develop, and thereby also the organizations for whom they work.Just like any other process, if performance appraisals aren't working, don't blame the process, ask yourself whether it is being properly trained, explained, agreed and conducted.4. Effective performance appraisalsAside from formal traditional (annual, six-monthly, quarterly, or monthly) performance appraisals, there are many different methods of performance evaluation. The use of any of these methods depends on the purpose of the evaluation, the individual, the assessor, and the environment.The formal annual performance appraisal is generally the over-riding instrument, which gathers together and reviews all other performance data for the previous year.Performance appraisals should be positive experiences. Theappraisals process provides the platform for development and motivation, so organizations should foster a feeling that performance appraisals are positive opportunities, in order to get the best out of the people and the process. In certain organizations, performance appraisals are widely regarded as something rather less welcoming ('blocking sessions' is not an unusual description), which provides a basis only on which to develop fear and resentment, so never, never, never use a staff performance appraisal to handle matters of discipline or admonishment, which should instead be handled via separately arranged meetings.5. Types of performance and aptitude assessments(1)Formal annual performance appraisals(2)Probationary reviews(3)Informal one-to-one review discussions(4)Counseling meetings(5) Observation post(6) Skills or career-related tests(7) Assignment or task to follow the review, including the secondment(8)Assessment Centre, including the observation group exercises, presentations and other tests(9)Communicate with people who investigate the views of others(10) Acts of psychological tests and other assessment(11)Handwriting analysis绩效考核探究摘要在人力资源管理方面，绩效考核的方法多种多样，到底应该采用哪一种绩效考核方法更为合理，绩效考核又应该通过什么样的途径更易于实现并取得更好的管理成效，是一个值得深思的问题。
企业绩效管理外文翻译文献综述
企业绩效管理外文翻译文献综述企业绩效管理外文翻译文献(文档含中英文对照即英文原文和中文翻译)原文：Can Performance Management Foster Intelligent Behavior?Bjarte BogsnesThe world has changed, not just in increasingly fast-changing and unpredictable ways, but also the competence and expectations of people in our organizations. Unfortunately, too few seem to understand or accept that these developments call for radically new and different ways of leading and managing. Traditional management practices do not make usthe agile organizations we need to be.The problem starts with the label, "Performance Management" implying, "If I don't manage you, there will be no performance."We need a new mindset, one that is less about managing performance and more about creating conditions for great performance to occur. We need self-regulating models, requiring less management, but more leadership from everyone.Think about traffic, where we want good performance and a safe good flow. Traffic authorities have different ways of making this happen. The traffic light is a popular choice, but those managing the process (programmers) are not in the situation; information used in their process is not fresh, which is clear as you wait in front of that red light.The roundabout is a very different alternative. Those managing are the drivers themselves. The information used isreal time, coming from own observations. While that information is also available in front of the traffic light, drivers do not have the authority to act on it. By the way, the "zipper" or "every second car through" is not a rule, but a guiding principle.The roundabout normally is more efficient than the traffic light, because of two significant differences in the decision-making process, information and authority. A third element is also required for the roundabout to be more efficient: while the traffic light is a simple-rulesbased system, the roundabout is values-based. A value-set based on, "Me first, I don't care about the rest," is not a big a problem in front of the red light, but is a serious problem in a roundabout. Here, a positive common purpose of wanting a safe and good flow is critical. Drivers must be more considerate, open about own intentions while trying to understand the intentions of peers. Instead of managing performance, traffic authorities have created conditions for self-managed performance to occur.What would the implications be for the loathed performance review? The principles and practices described at Return Path are sensible and interesting. I like the concept of horizontal commitments toward peers, instead of vertical commitments to higher management. At the same time, we need to broaden our definition of performance. In traditional performance, a commitment is too often about "hitting the number." This is too narrow. We need to ask questions such as, how are we doing compared to peers? How are we using KPIs to reflect on performance, or using hindsight and management assessment to verify results? Did we really move toward our longer-term ambitions? How sustainable are the results? Last but not least, there has to be room for values if performance systems are tofoster intelligent behavior; we need to ask, how where those results achieved?At Statoil our integrated performance management approach links ambitions to actions. Our targets reflect a broad set of ambitions,including people, health, safety, environment, operations and financial performance. Read more about our management model and how we apply a holistic and values-based approach to this broader performance agenda.The words of Dee Hock, former GEO of Visa, should guide the design of our management processes, including our performance reviews: "Simple, clear purpose and principles give rise to complex, intelligent behavior. Complex rules and regulations give rise to simple, stupid behavior."While researching my book. Talent Economics, I interviewed employees about what really motivates today's workforce. I discovered a disconnect between the performance support my interviewees wanted versus how managers recounted their contribution to these conversations.Over the last 20 years, the employee mindset has evolved faster than has the art and science of management. Nowhere is this starker than in the area of performance management practices, particularly the annual review. In both the developed and developing world, employees report that this end-of-year activity breeds stress, anxiety and mistrust. How ironic that a process aimed at improving organizational performance, is itself underperforming!It's time to "reboot" our performance management operating system, installing two specific system updates: l. The "Democracy" update. As much as we try to make theperformance appraisal a two way dialogue, we cannot run away from the fact that at its core, the conversation today is often a top-down review. My research shows that many 21st century employees are rejecting conversations that are one-way: in hot job markets today, managers must realize "who is appraising whom." With other offers readily available, many employees enter a performance dialogue privately considering if their manager is worth another year of their career. The performance management conversation now reflects a company's Employee Value Proposition, much as we learn in the lead Perspective.The Democracy update means that managers only gain the right to give feedback when they first genuinely seek the same on their own performance as leaders. Not just through 360-degree reviews, but also through authentic conversations asking, "How am I performing as your manager? " and "How can I help you succeed?" Only then can the conversation shift to, "How you can improve?"and "This is what you should focus on."2. The Success module. Greater employee autonomy and empowerment also changes the meaning of management. We have gone from a "supervisor of task and outcomes" to an "enabler of performance, innovative thinking and collective success." To make this shift, we must give up the judge's robes for the coach's uniform. If employees don't succeed, managers are on the hook, too.This is particularly relevant when coaching a team to success. People bring different skills to a team and how well they work together really matters. If team reviews work better to achieve a goal, so be it. The Return Path story illustrates how review processes can be designed and executed around what matters most, and where everyone dons the uniforms of player and coach.What if, instead of making the heart of a performance conversation the evaluation, it became a vehicle to improve success of the individual, the team and the business? What if performance feedback was paired with dialogue about transforming the business, the product or customer experience? This genuinely reboots and upgrades performance management to focus on individual and organizational success.It is indeed time to upgrade performance management practices: we can no longer manage a 21st century employee using 20th century mindsets.People & Strategy. 2013, V ol. 36 Issue 2, p12-13. 2p.译文：绩效管理能促进自我管理行为吗?Bjarte Bogsnes世界随着时间的推移而变化莫测，连那些与时变化而不可预测的通道也随之改变，与此同时组织人员的能力和期望也顺应时代潮流。
绩效考核外文文献及翻译
外文文献1.Performance appraisals - purpose and how to make it easierPerformance appraisals are essential for the effective management and evaluation of staff. Appraisals help develop individuals, improve organizational performance, and feed into business planning. Formal performance appraisals are generally conducted annually for all staff in the organization. His or her line manager appraises each staff member. Directors are appraised by the CEO, who is appraised by the chairman or company owners, depending on the size and structure of the organization.Annual performance appraisals enable management and monitoring of standards, agreeing expectations and objectives, and delegation of responsibilities and tasks. Staff performance appraisals also establish individual training needs and enable organizational training needs analysis and planning.Performance appraisals also typically feed into organizational annual pay and grading reviews, which commonly also coincide with the business planning for the next trading year. Performance appraisals generally review each individual's performance against objectives and standards for the trading year, agreed at the previous appraisal meeting. Performance appraisals are also essential for career and succession planning - for individuals, crucial jobs, and for the organization as a whole.Performance appraisals are important for staff motivation, attitude and behavior development, communicating and aligning individual and organizational aims, and fostering positive relationships between management and staff.Performance appraisals provide a formal, recorded, regular review of an individual's performance, and a plan for future development.Job performance appraisals - in whatever form they take - are therefore vital for managing the performance of people and organizations.Managers and appraises commonly dislike appraisals and try to avoid them. To these people the appraisal is daunting and time-consuming. The process is seen as a difficult administrative chore and emotionally challenging. The annual appraisal is maybe the only time since last year that the two people have sat down together for a meaningful one-to-one discussion. No wonder then that appraisals are stressful - which then defeats the whole purpose.Appraisals are much easier, and especially more relaxed, if the boss meets each of the team members individually and regularly for one-to-one discussion throughout the year. Meaningful regular discussion about work, career, aims, progress, development, hopes and dreams, life, the universe, the TV, common interests, etc., whatever, makes appraisals so much easier because people then know and trust each other - which reduces all the stress and the uncertainty.Put off discussions and of course they loom very large. So don't wait for the annual appraisal to sit down and talk. The boss or the appraises can instigate this.If you are an employee with a shy boss, then take the lead. If you are a boss who rarely sits down and talks with people - or whose people are not used to talking with their boss - then set about relaxing the atmosphere and improving relationships. Appraisals (and work) all tend to be easier when people communicate well and know each other.So sit down together and talk as often as you can, and then when the actual formal appraisals are due everyone will find the whole process to be far more natural, quick, and easy - and a lotmore productive too.2.Appraisals, social responsibility and whole-person developmentThere is increasingly a need for performance appraisals of staff and especially managers, directors and CEO's, to include accountabilities relating to corporate responsibility, represented by various converging corporate responsibility concepts including: the “Triple Bottom Line”; corporate social responsibility (CSR); Sustainability; corporate integrity and ethics; Fair Trade, etc. The organization must decide the extent to which these accountabilities are reflected in job responsibilities, which would then naturally feature accordingly in performa nce appraisals. More about this aspect of responsibility is in the directors’ job descriptions section.Significantly also, while this appraisal outline is necessarily a formal structure this does not mean that the development discussed with the appraises must be formal and constrained. In fact the opposite applies. Appraisals must address “whole person” development - not just job skills or the skills required for the next promotion.Appraisals must not discriminate against anyone on the grounds of age, gender, sexual orientation, race, religion, disability, etc.The UK Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006, (consistent with Europe), effective from 1st October 2006, make it particularly important to avoid any comments, judgments, suggestions, questions or decisions which might be perceived by the appraises to be based on age. This means people who are young as well as old. Age, along with other characteristics stated above, is not a lawful basis for assessing and managing people, unless proper 'objective justification' can be proven. See the Age Diversity information.When designing or planning and conducting appraisals, seek to help the 'whole-person' to grow in whatever direction they want, not just to identify obviously relevant work skills training. Increasingly, the best employers recognize that growing the 'whole person' promotes positive attitudes, advancement, motivation, and also develops lots of new skills that can be surprisingly relevant to working productively and effectively in any sort of organization. Developing the whole-person is also an important aspect of modern corporate responsibility, and separately (if you needed a purely business-driven incentive for adopting these principles), whole-person development is a crucial advantage in the employment market, in which all employers compete to attract the best recruits, and to retain the best staff.Therefore in appraisals, be creative and imaginative in discussing, discovering and agreeing 'whole-person' development that people will respond to, beyond the usual job skill-set, and incorporate this sort of development into the appraisal process. Abraham Maslow recognized this over fifty years ago.If you are an employee and your employer has yet to embrace or even acknowledge these concepts, do them a favor at your own appraisal and suggest they look at these ideas, or maybe mention it at your exit interview prior to joining a better employer who cares about the people, not just the work.Incidentally the Multiple Intelligences test and VAK Learning Styles test are extremely useful tools for appraisals, before or after, to help people understand their natural potential and strengths and to help managers understand this about their people too. There are a lot of people out there who are in jobs which don't allow them to use and develop their greatest strengths; so the more we can help folk understand their own special potential, and find rolesthat really fit well, the happier we shall all be.3 .Are performance appraisals still beneficial and appropriateIt is sometimes fashionable in the 'modern age' to dismiss traditional processes such as performance appraisals as being irrelevant or unhelpful. Be very wary however if considering removing appraisals from your own organizational practices. It is likely that the critics of the appraisal process are the people who can't conduct them very well. It's a common human response to want to jettison something that one finds difficult. Appraisals - in whatever form, and there are various - have been a mainstay of management for decades, for good reasons. Think about everything that performance appraisals can achieve and contribute to when they are properly managed, for example:(1)performance measurement - transparent, short, medium and long term(2)clarifying, defining, redefining priorities and objectives(3)motivation through agreeing helpful aims and targets(4)motivation though achievement and feedback(5)training needs and learning desires - assessment and agreement(6)identification of personal strengths and direction - including unused hidden strengths(7)career and succession planning - personal and organizational(8)team roles clarification and team building(9)organizational training needs assessment and analysis(10)appraise and manager mutual awareness, understanding and relationship(11)resolving confusions and misunderstandings(12)reinforcing and cascading organizational philosophies, values, aims, strategies, priorities, etc(13)delegation, additional responsibilities, employee growth and development(14)counseling and feedback(15)manager development - all good managers should be able to conduct appraisals well - it'sa fundamental process(16)the list goes onPeople have less and less face-to-face time together these days. Performance appraisals offer a way to protect and manage these valuable face-to-face opportunities. My advice is to hold on to and nurture these situations, and if you are under pressure to replace performance appraisals with some sort of (apparently) more efficient and cost effective methods, be very sure that you can safely cover all the aspects of performance and attitudinal development that a well-run performance appraisals system is naturally designed to achieve.There are various ways of conducting performance appraisals, and ideas change over time as to what are the most effective appraisals methods and systems. Some people advocate traditional appraisals and forms; others prefer 360-degree-type appraisals; others suggest using little more than a blank sheet of paper.In fact performance appraisals of all types are effective if they are conducted properly, and better still if the appraisal process is clearly explained to, agreed by, the people involved. Managers need guidance, training and encouragement in how to conduct appraisals properly. Especially the detractors and the critics. Help anxious managers (and directors) develop and adapt appraisals methods that work for them. Be flexible. There are lots of ways to conduct appraisals, and particularly lots of ways to diffuse apprehension and fear - for managers andappraises alike. Particularly - encourage people to sit down together and review informally and often - this removes much of the pressure for managers and appraises at formal appraisals times. Leaving everything to a single make-or-break discussion once a year is asking for trouble and trepidation.Look out especially for the warning signs of 'negative cascaded attitudes' towards appraisals. This is most often found where a senior manager or director hates conducting appraisals, usually because they are uncomfortable and inexperienced in conducting them. The senior manager/director typically will be heard to say that appraisals don't work and are a waste of time, which for them becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.All that said, performance appraisals that are administered without training (for those who need it), without explanation or consultation, and conducted poorly will be counter-productive and is a waste of everyone's time.Well-prepared and well-conducted performance appraisals provide unique opportunities to help appraise and managers improve and develop, and thereby also the organizations for whom they work.Just like any other process, if performance appraisals aren't working, don't blame the process, ask yourself whether it is being properly trained, explained, agreed and conducted.4. Effective performance appraisalsAside from formal traditional (annual, six-monthly, quarterly, or monthly) performance appraisals, there are many different methods of performance evaluation. The use of any of these methods depends on the purpose of the evaluation, the individual, the assessor, and the environment.The formal annual performance appraisal is generally the over-riding instrument, which gathers together and reviews all other performance data for the previous year.Performance appraisals should be positive experiences. The appraisals process provides the platform for development and motivation, so organizations should foster a feeling that performance appraisals are positive opportunities, in order to get the best out of the people and the process. In certain organizations, performance appraisals are widely regarded as something rather less welcoming ('blocking sessions' is not an unusual description), which provides a basis only on which to develop fear and resentment, so never, never, never use a staff performance appraisal to handle matters of discipline or admonishment, which should instead be handled via separately arranged meetings.5. Types of performance and aptitude assessments(1)Formal annual performance appraisals(2)Probationary reviews(3)Informal one-to-one review discussions(4)Counseling meetings(5) Observation post(6) Skills or career-related tests(7) Assignment or task to follow the review, including the secondment(8)Assessment Centre,including the observation group exercises, presentations and other tests(9)Communicate with people who investigate the views of others(10) Acts of psychological tests and other assessment(11)Handwriting analysis外文文献译文1、考绩考核的用途和如何使其易于实现绩效考核根本上是对职员有效的管理和评估。
#PerformanceManagement(绩效管理英文文献)
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT POLICYThe Governing Body of Homerton Children’s Centre adoptedthis performance management policy on31 October 2007.APPLICATION OF THE POLICYThe policy applies to the head teacher and to all teachers employed by the school except teachers on contracts of less than one term, those undergoing induction (ie NQTs> and those who are the subject of capability procedures.PURPOSEThis policy sets out the framework for a clear and consistent assessment of the overall performance of teachers and the head teacherand for supporting their development needs within the context of the school's improvement plan and their own professional needs. Where teachers are eligible for pay progression, the assessment of performance throughout the cycle against the performance criteria specified in the statement will be the basis on which the recommendation is made by the reviewer.This policy should be read in conjunction with the school's pay policy which provides details of the arrangements relating to teacher's pay in accordance with the School Teachers' Pay and Conditions Document.LINKS TO SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT, SCHOOL SELF EVALUATION AND SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLANNINGTo comply with the requirement to show howthe arrangements for performance management link with those for school improvement, school self-evaluation and school development planningand to minimise workload and bureaucracy the performance management process will be the main source of information as appropriate for school self-evaluation and the wider school improvement process.Similarly, the school improvement and development plan and the school's self evaluation form are key documents for the performance management process.All reviewers are expected to explore the alignment of reviewees' objectives with the school's priorities and plans. The objectives should also reflect reviewees' professionalaspirations.CONSISTENCY OF TREATMENT AND FAIRNESSThe Governing Body is committed to ensuring consistency of treatment and fairness in the operation of performance management.To ensure this the following provisions are made in relation to moderation, quality assurance and objective setting.Quality assuranceThe head teacher has determined that she will delegate the reviewer role for some or all teachers for whom she is not the line manager.In these circumstances the head teacher will moderate all the planning statements to check that the plans recorded in the statements of teachers at the school:• are consistent between those who have similar experience and similar levels of responsibility• comply with the school's performance management policy, the regulations and the requirements of equality legislationThe Governing Body will review the quality assurance processes when the performance policy is reviewed.OBJECTIVE SETTINGThe objectives set will be rigorous, challenging, achievable, time-bound, fair and equitable in relation to teachers with similar roles/responsibilities and experience, and wil l have regard to what can reasonably be expected of any teacher in that position given the desirability of the reviewee being able to achieve a satisfactorybalance between the time required to discharge his professional duties and the time required to pursue his personal interests outside work, consistent with the school's strategy for bringing downward pressure on working hours. They shall also take account of the teacher's professional aspirations and any relevant pay progression criteria. They should be such that, if they are achieved, they will contribute to improving the progress of children at the school.The reviewer and reviewee will seek to agree the objectives butwhere a joint determination cannot be made the reviewer will make the determination.In this school:all teachers, includingthe head teacher, will have no more than 3objectivesteachers, including the head teacher, will not necessarily all have the samenumber of objectivesall teachers, including the head teacher, will have a whole school objective Though performance management is an assessment of overall performance of teachers and the head teacher, objectives cannot cover the full range of a teacher's roles/responsibilities. Objectives will, therefore, focus on the priorities for an individual for the cycle. At the review stage it will be assumed that those aspects of a teacher's roles/responsibilities not covered by the objectives or any amendment to the statement which may have been necessary in accordance with the provisions of theregulations have been carried out satisfactorily.Reviewing ProgressAt the end of the cyc l e assessment of performance against an objective will be on the basis of the performance criteria set at the beginning of the cycle. Good progress towards the achievement of a challenging objective, even if the performance criteria have not been met in full, will be assessed favourably.The performance management cycle is annual, but on occasions it may be appropriate to set objectives that will cover a period over more than one cycle. In such cases, the basis on which the progress being made towards meeting the performance criteria for the objective will be assessed at the end of the first cycle and will be recorded in the planning and review statement at the beginning of the cycle.APPEALSAt specified points in the performance management process teachers and head teachers have a right of appeal against any of the entries in their planning and review statements.Where a reviewee wishes to appeal on the basis of more than one entry this would constitute one appeal hearing.Details of the appeals process are covered in the school's paypolicy.CONFIDENTIALITYThe whole performance management process and the statements generated under it, in particular, will be treated with strict confidentiality at all times. Only the reviewee's line manager or, where she has more than one, each of her line managers will be provided with access to the reviewee's plan recorded in her statement, upon request, where this is necessary to enable the line manager to discharge her line management responsibilities. Reviewees will be told who has requested and has been granted access.TRAINING AND SUPPORTThe school's CPD programme will be informed by the training and development needs identified in the training annex of the reviewees' planning and review statements.The governing body will ensure in the budget planning that, as far as possible, appropriate resources are made available in the school budget for any training and support agreed for reviewees.An account of the training and development needs of teachers in general, including the instances where it did not prove possible to provide any agreed CPD, will form a part of the head teacher's annual report to the governing body about the operation of the per f ormance management in the school.With regard to the provision of CPD in the case of competing demands on the school budget, a decision on relative priority will be taken with regard to the extent to which: (a> the CPD identified is essential for a reviewee to meet their objectives。
绩效考核英文文献
The Dilemma of Performance AppraisalAbstractThis paper deals with the dilemma of managing performance using performance appraisal. The authors will evaluate the historical development of appraisals and argue that the critical area of line management development that was been identified as a critical success factor in appraisals has been ignored in the later literature evaluating the effectiveness of performance through appraisals.This paper will evaluate the aims and methods of appraisal, the difficulties encountered in the appraisal process. It also re-evaluates the lack of theoretical development in appraisal and move from he psychological approaches of analysis to a more critical real is ation of approaches before re-evaluating the challenge to remove subjectivity and bias in judgement of appraisal.13.1IntroductionThis paper will define and outline performance management and appraisal. It will start by evaluating what form of performance is evaluated, then develop links to the development of different performance traditions (Psychological tradition, Management by Objectives, Motivation and Development).It will outline the historical development of performance management then evaluate high performance strategies using performance appraisal. It will evaluate the continuing issue of subjectivity and ethical dilemmas regarding measurement and assessment of performance. The paper will then examine how organisations measure performance before evaluation of research on some recent trends in performance appraisal.This chapter will evaluate the historical development of performance appraisal from management by objectives (MBO) literature before evaluating the debates between linkages between performance management and appraisal. It will outline the development of individual performance before linking to performance management in organizations. The outcomes of techniques to increase organizational commitment, increase job satisfaction will be critically evaluated. It will further examine the transatlantic debates between literature on efficiency and effectiveness in the North American and the United Kingdom) evidence to evaluate the HRM development and contribution of performance appraisal to individual and organizational performance.13.2 What is Performance Management?The first is sue to discuss is the difficulty of definition of Performance Management. Armstrong and Barron(1998:8) define performance management as: A strategic and integrated approach to delivering sustained success to organisations by Improving performance of people who work in them by developing the capabilities of teams And individual performance.13.2.1 Performance AppraisalAppraisal potentially is a key tool in making the most of an organisation’s human resources. The use of appraisal is widespread estimated that 80–90%of organizations in the USA and UK were using appraisal and an increase from 69 to 87% of organisations between 1998 and 2004 reported a formal performance management system (Armstrong and Baron, 1998:200).There has been little evidence of the evaluation of the effectiveness of appraisal but more on the development in its use. Between 1998 and 2004 a sample from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD, 2007) of 562 firms found 506 were using performance appraisal in UK.What is also vital to emphasise is the rising use of performance appraisal feedback beyond performance for professionals and managers to nearly 95% of workplaces in the 2004 WERS survey (seeTable 13.1).Clearly the use of Appraisals has been the development and extension of appraisals to cover a large proportion of the UK workforce and the coverage of non managerial occupations and the extended use in private and public sectors.13.2.2 The Purpose of AppraisalsThe critical issue is what is the purpose of appraisals and how effective is it ？Researched and used in practice throughout organizations? The purpose of appraisals needs to be clearly identified. Firstly their purpose. Randell (1994) states they are a systematic evaluation of individual performance linked to workplace behaviour and/or specific criteria. Appraisals often take the form of an appraisal interview,usually annual,supported by standardised forms/paper work.The key objective of appraisal is to provide feedback for performance is provided by the linemanager.The three key questions for quality of feedback:1. What and how are observations on performance made?2. Why and how are they discussed?3. What determines the level of performance in the job?It has been argued by one school of thought that these process cannot be performed effectively unless the line manager of person providing feedback has the interpersonal interviewing skills to providethat feedback to people being appraised. This has been defined as the “Bradford Approach” which places a high priority on appraisalskills development (Randell, 1994). This approach is outlined in Fig. 13.1 which identifies the linkages be tween involving,developing, rewarding and valuing people at work..13.2.3 Historical Development of AppraisalThe historical development of performance feedback has developed from a range of approaches.Formal observation of individual work performance was reported in Robert Owens’s Scottish factory inNew Lanarkin the early 1800s (Cole, 1925). Owen hung over machines a piece of coloured wood over machines to indicate the Super intendent’s assessment of the previous day’s conduct (white forexcellent, yellow, blue and then black for poor performance).The twentieth century led to F.W. Taylor and his measured performance and the scientific management movement (Taylor, 1964). The 1930sTraits Approaches identified personality and performance and used feedback using graphic rating scales, a mixed standard of performance scales noting behaviour in likert scale ratings.This was used to recruit and identify management potential in the field of selection. Later developments to prevent a middle scale from 5 scales then developed into a forced-choice scale which forced the judgement to avoid central ratings.The evaluation also included narrative statements and comments to support the ratings (Mair, 1958).In the 1940s Behavioural Methods were developed. These included Behavioural Anchored Rating Scales (BARS); Behavioural Observation Scales (BOS); Behavioural Evaluation Scales (BES); critical incident;job simulation. All these judgements were used to determine the specific levels of performance criteria to specific issues such as customer service and rated in factors such asexcellent,average or needs to improve or poor.These ratings are assigned numerical values and added to a statement or narrative comment by the assessor. It would also lead to identify any potential need for training and more importantly to identify talent for careers in linemanagement supervision and future managerial potential.Post1945 developed into the Results-oriented approaches and led to the development of management by objectives (MBO). This provided aims and specific targets to be achievedand with in time frames such as pecific sales, profitability,and deadlines with feedback on previous performance (Wherry, 1957).The deadlines may have required alteration and led to specific performance rankings of staff. It also provided a forced distributionof rankingsof comparative performance and paired comparison ranking of performance and setting and achieving objectives.In the 1960s the developmentof Self-appraisal by discussion led to specific time and opportunity for the appraisee to reflectively evaluate their performance in thediscussion and the interview developed into a conversation on a range of topics that the appraise needed to discuss in the interview. Until this period the success of the appraisal was dependent on skill of interviewer.In the 1990s the development of 360-degree appraisal developed where information was sought from a wider range of sources and the feedback was no longer dependent on the manager-subordinate power relationship but included groups appraising the performance of line managers and peer feedback from peer groups on individual performance (Redman and Snape, 1992). The final development of appraisal interviews developed in the 1990s with the emphasis on the linking performance with financial reward which will be discussed later in the paper.13.2.4 Measures of PerformanceThe dilemma of appraisal has always to develop performance measures and the use of appraisal is the key part of this process. Quantitative measure of performance communicated as standards in the business and industry level standards translated to individual performance. The introduction of techniques such as the balanced score card developed by Kaplan and Norton (1992).Performance measures and evaluation included financial, customer evaluation, feedback on internal processes and Learning and Growth. Performance standards also included qualitative measures Which argue that there is an over emphasis on metrics of quantitative approach above the definitions of quality services and total quality management.In terms of performance measures there has been a transformation in literature and a move in the 1990s to the financial rewards linked to the level of performance.The debates will be discussed later in the paper.13.3 Criticism of AppraisalsCritiques of appraisal have continued as appraisal shave increased in use and scope across sectors and occupations. The dominant critique is the management framework using appraisal as an orthodox technique that seeks to remedy the weakness and propose of appraisals as a system to develop performance.This “orthodox” approach argues there are conflicting purposes of appraisal (Strebleretal, 2001). Appraisal can motivate staff by clarifying objectives and setting clear future objectives with provision for training and development needs to establish the performance objective. These conflicts with assessing past performance and distribution of rewards based on past performance (Bach, 2005:301).Employees are reluctant to confide any limitations and concerns on their currentperformance as this could impact on their merit related reward or promotion opportunities(Newton and Findley, 1996:43).This conflicts with performance as a continuum as appraisers are challenged with differing roles as both monitors and judges of performance but an understanding counsell or which Randell(1994)argues few manager shave not received the raining to perform.Appraisal Manager’s reluctance to criticise also stems from classic evidence from McGregor that managers are reluctant to make an egative judgement on an individual’s performance a sit could be demotivating,leadto accusationsoftheirown supportand contributiontoindividual poor performance and to also avoid interpersonal conflict (McGregor, 1957).One consequence of this avoidance of conflict is to rate all criterion as central and avoid any conflict known as the central tendency.In a study of senior managers by Long neckeretal.(1987),they found organisational politics influenced ratings of 60 senior executives.The findings were that politics involved deliberate attempts by individuals to enhance or protect self-interests when conflicting courses of action are possible and that ratings and decisions were affected by potential sources of bias or inaccuracy in their appraisal ratings (Longeneckeret al., 1987).There are methods of further bias beyond Longenecker’s evidence. The political judgements and they have been distorted further by overrating some clear competencies in performance rather than being critical across all rated competencies known as the halo effect and if some competencies arelower they may prejudice the judgment acrossthe positive reviews known as the horns effect (ACAS, 1996).Some ratings may only cinclude recent events and these are known as the recency effects. In this case only recent events are noted compared to managers gathering and using data throughout the appraisal period .A particular concern is the equity of appraisal for ratings which may be distorted by gender ,ethnicity and the ratings of appraisers themselves .A range of studies in both the US and UK have highlighted subjectivity in terms of gender (Alimo-Metcalf, 1991;White, 1999) and ethnicity of the appraise and appraiser(Geddes and Konrad, 2003). Suggestions and solutions on resolving bias will be reviewed later.The second analysis is the radical critique of appraisal. This is the more critical management literature that argues that appraisal and performance management are about management control(Newton and Findley, 1996;Townley, 1993). It argues that tighter management control over employee behaviour can be achieved by the extension of appraisal to manual workers, professional as means to control. This develops the literature of Foucault using power and surveillance. This literature uses cases in examples of public service control on professionals such a teachers (Healy, 1997) and University professionals(Townley, 1990).This evidence argues the increased control of public services using appraisal as amethod of control and that the outcome of managerial objectives ignores the developmental role of appraisal and ratings are awarded for people who accept and embrace the culture and organizational values . However, this literature ignores the employee resistance and the use of professional unions to challenge the attempts to exert control over professionals and staff in the appraisal process (Bach, 2005:306).One of the different issues of removing bias was the use of the test metaphor (Folgeretal.,1992).This was based on the assumption that appraisal ratings were a technical question of assessing “true” performance and there needed to be increased reliability and validity of appraisal as an instrument to develop motivation and performance. The sources of rater bias and errors can be resolved by improved organisational justice and increasing reliability of appraiser’s judgement.However there were problems such as an assumption that you can state job requirements clearly and the organization is “rational” with objectives that reflect values and that the judgment by appraisers’ are value free from political agendas and personal objectives. Secondly there is the second issue of subjectivity if appraisal ratings where decisions on appraisal are rated by a “political metaphor”(Hartle, 1995).This “political view” argues that a appraisal is often done badly because there is a lack of training for appraisers and appraisers may see the appraisal as a waste of time. This becomes a process which managers have to perform and not as a potential to improve employee performance .Organisations in this context are “political” and the appraisers seek to maintain performance from subordinates and view appraises as internal customers to satisfy. This means managers use appraisal to avoid interpersonal conflict and develop strategies for their own personal advancement and seek a quiet life by avoiding censure from higher managers.This perception means managers also see appraisee seeks good rating and genuine feedback and career development by seeking evidence of combining employee promotion and pay rise.This means appraisal ratings become political judgements and seek to avoid interpersonal conflicts. The approaches of the “test” and “political” metaphors of appraisal are inaccurate and lack objectivity and judgement of employee performance is inaccurate and accuracy is avoided.The issue is how can organisations resolve this lack of objectivity?13.3.1 Solutions to Lack of Objectivity of AppraisalGrint(1993)argues that the solutions to objectivity lies in part with McGregor’s (1957) classic critique by retraining and removal of “top down” ratings by managers and replacement with multiple rater evaluation which removes bias and the objectivity by upward performance appraisal. The validity of upward appraisal means there moval of subjective appraisal ratings.This approach is also suggested to remove gender bias inappraisal ratings against women in appraisals (Fletcher, 1999). The solution of multiple reporting(internal colleagues, customers and recipients of services) will reduce subjectivity and inequity of appraisal ratings. This argument develops further by the rise in the need to evaluate project teams and increasing levels of teamwork to include peer assessment. The solutions also in theory mean increased closer contact with individual manager and appraises and increasing services linked to customer facing evaluations.However, negative feedback still demotivates and plenty of feedback and explanation by manager who collates feedback rather than judges performance andfail to summarise evaluations.There are however still problems with accuracy of appraisal objectivity asWalker and Smither (1999)5year studyof 252 managers over 5 year period still identified issues with subjective ratings in 360 degree appraisals.There are still issues on the subjectivity of appraisals beyond the areas of lack of training.The contribution of appraisal is strongly related to employee attitudes and strong relationships with job satisfaction(Fletcher and Williams, 1996). The evidence on appraisal still remains positive in terms of reinvigo rating social relationships at work (Townley,1993)and the widespread adoption in large public services in the UK such as the national health Service (NHS)is the valuable contribution to line managers discussion with staff on their past performance, discussing personal development plans and training and development as positive issues.One further concern is the openness of appraisal related to employee reward which we now discuss.13.3.2 Linking Appraisals with Reward ManagementAppraisal and performance management have been inextricably linked to employee reward since the development of strategic human resource management in the 1980s. The early literature on appraisal linked appraisal with employee control (Randell, 1994;Grint, 1993;Townley, 1993, 1999) and discussed the use of performance related reward to appraisals. However therecent literature has substituted the chapter titles employee “appraisal” with “performance management”(Bach, 2005; Storey, 2007) and moved the focus on performance and performance pay and the limits of employee appraisal. The appraisal and performance pay link has developed into debates to three key issues:The first issue is has performance pay related to appraisal grown in use?The second issue is what type of performance do we reward?and the final issue is who judges management standards?The first discussion on influences of growth of performance pay schemes is the assumption that increasing linkage between individual effort and financial reward increases performance levels. This linkage between effort and financial reward increasing levels of performance has proved an increasing trend in the public and privatesector (Bevan and Thompson, 1992;Armstrong and Baron, 1998). The drive to increase public sector performance effort and setting of targets may even be inconsistent in the experiences of some organizational settings aimed at achieving long-term targets(Kessler and Purcell, 1992;Marsden, 2007). The development of merit based pay based on performance assessed by a manager is rising in the UK Marsden (2007)reported that the: Use of performance appraisals as a basis for merit pay are used in65 percent of public sector and 69 percent of the private sector employees where appraisal covered all nonmanagerial staff(p.109).Merit pay has also grown in use as in 1998 20% of workplaces used performance related schemes compared to 32% in the same organizations 2004 (Kersley et al., 2006:191). The achievements of satisfactory ratings or above satisfactory performance averages were used as evidence to reward individual performance ratings in the UK Civil Service (Marsden, 2007).Table 13.2 outlines the extent of merit pay in 2004.The second issue is what forms of performance is rewarded. The use of past appraisal ratings as evidence of achieving merit-related payments linked to achieving higher performance was the predominant factor developed in the public services. The evidence on Setting performance targets have been as Kessler (2000:280) reported “inconsistent within organizations and problematic for certain professional or less skilled occupations where goals have not been easily formulated”. There has been inconclusive evidence from organizations on the impact of performance pay and its effectiveness in improving performance. Evidence from a number of individual performance pay schemes report organizations suspending or reviewing them on the grounds that individual performance reward has produced no effect in performance or even demotivates staff(Kessler, 2000:281).More in-depth studies setting performance goals followed by appraisal on how well they were resulted in loss of motivation whilst maintaining productivity and achieved managers using imposing increased performance standards (Marsden and Richardson, 1994). As Randell(1994) had highlighted earlier, the potential objectivity and self-criticism in appraisal reviews become areas that appraisees refuse to acknowledge as weaknesses with appraisers if this leads to a reduction in their merit pay.Objectivity and self reflection for development becomes a weakness that appraises fail to acknowledge as a developmental issue if it reduces their chances of a reduced evaluation that will reduce their merit reward. The review of civil service merit pay (Makinson, 2000)reported from 4 major UK Civil Service Agencies and the National Health Service concluded that existing forms of performance pay and performance management had failed to motivate many staff.The conclusions were that employees found individual performance pay divisive and led to reduced willingness to co-operate with management ,citing managerial favorites and manipulation of appraisal scores to lower ratings to save paying rewards to staff (Marsden and French, 1998).This has clear implications on the relationship between line managers and appraises and the demotivational consequences and reduced commitment provide clear evidence of the danger to linking individual performance appraisal to reward in the public services. Employees focus on the issues that gain key performance focus by focusing on specific objectives related to key performance indicators rather than all personal objectives. A study of banking performance pay by Lewis(1998)highlighted imposed targets which were unattainable with a range of 20 performance targets with narrow short term financial orientatated goals. The narrow focus on key targets and neglect of other performance aspects leads to tasks not being delivered.This final issue of judging management standards has already highlighted issues of inequity and bias based on gender (Beyer, 1990; Chen and DiTomasio, 1996; Fletcher, 1999). The suggested solutions to resolved Iscrimination have been proposed as enhanced interpersonal skills training are increased equitable use of 360 degree appraisal as a method to evaluate feedback from colleagues as this reduces the use of the “political metaphor”(Randell, 1994;Fletcher, 1999).On measures linking performance to improvement require a wider approach to enhanced work design and motivation to develop and enhance employee job satisfaction and the design of linkages between effort and performance are significant in the private sector and feedback and awareness in the public sector (Fletcher and Williams, 1996:176). Where rises be in pay were determined by achieving critical rated appraisal objectives, employees are less self critical and open to any developmental needs in a performance review.13.4 ConclusionAs performance appraisal provides a major potential for employee feedback that could link strongly to increasing motivation ,and a opportunity to clarify goals and achieve long term individual performance and career development why does it still suffers from what Randell describes as a muddle and confusion which still surrounds the theory and practice?There are key issues that require resolution and a great deal depends on the extent to which you have a good relationship with your line manager . Barlow(1989)argued `if you get off badly with your first two managers ,you may just as well forget it (p. 515). The evidence on the continued practice of appraisals is that they are still institutionally elaborated systems of management appraisal and development is significant rhetoric inthe apparatus of bureaucratic control by managers (Barlow, 1989). In reality the companies create, review, change and even abolish appraisals if they fail to develop and enhance organisational performance(Kessler, 2000).Despite all the criticism and evidence the critics have failed to suggest an alternative for a process that can provide feedback, develop motivation, identify training and potential and evidence that can justify potential career development and justify reward(Hartle, 1997).10。
绩效管理外文
Improved performance management1 Introduction.The performances management occupies the core status in the modern enterprise human resources management, carries on the effective performances management is promotes the enterprise the management potency, the enhancement enterprise core competitive ability important method. But, how did the performances manage effectively implement were still the present stage our country enterprise extremely urgent problem. The performances management is an enterprise super in ten dent unusual headache question, is regarded it is "the weak". The author attempts to unify in recent years the human resources management working practice, how deepens the performances management, the display performances management biggest potency discussed several humble opinions, to the time offer a few ordinary introductory remarks so that others may offer their valuable ideas.2 Common reasons why the performances management has not achieved the tangible affect several .2.1 Imitates copies verbatim, blind imitation.Each enterprise's performances management system all should fully consider enterprise own characteristic, enterpriseculture ,development phase, strategic target, staff's factor and so on quality ,does not give a thought to the enterprise own characteristic, the blind imitation, continues to use the west or domestic certain compares the successful major industry the management theory and the practice, definitely can’t good cause the digestion, to be unaccustomed to the climate, the management defeat.Our country industrialization time short, manages the theory and the experience all quite is deficient, profits from the overseas management theory and the experience extremely has the necessity. But some enterprises eagerly enhance the enterprise performances not to know how begins, the implementation "brings the principle", copies mechanically and applies slavishly the western experience, not to enterprise factor and so on itself development condition, strategy and management goal, values, enterprise culture carries on the full analysis, acts appropriately to the situation, its result inevitably is defeats the purpose, is contrary to what expects.2.2 Heavy performances inspection, light performances management.The performances management is a complete management system management system; it has contained the performances plan, theperformances management implementation, the performances appraisal as well as the feedback and so on four modules. The performances inspection merely is a link; certainly it is an essential link. Only pays attention to the performances inspection is manages the idea and the localization mistakes . This involves to the enterprise high level super in ten dent sand the human resources administrative personnel to the performances management understanding depth and the breadth question.We said the performances management the goal is for promote the enterprise the competitive ability and staff's working ability and the performance, needs to understand the performances management the connotation and the flow, need to pay great attention to the entire management process the communication and the coordination, pays attention to each flow the realization.Merely pays attention to the performances inspection, often creates the staff to the performances management valid question, because it lacks with in staff's necessity communication and the personal it respect, thus also could not achieve displays staff's work enthusiasm, the initiative goal. Only pays great attention to the performances inspection, itsresult is merely fills in a big pile of form, becomes a mere formality, but lacks the substantive effect, regards as by the administrative personnel and the staff "wastes the time". 2.3 Performances management is only the human resources control section’s work.In the human resources management department manager's post instruction booklet, the performances management is its important responsibility. Therefore has quite many superintendents wrongly to think the performances management is only the human resources control section’s responsibility, but other departments' superintendents regard it are "the extra burden". Certainly, the human resources department has the important responsibility to the performances management, but the first responsibility person should be various services unit and the function department's superintendent. They are shouldering the business goal realization, the entire journey communication, the performance appraisal as well as the performances feedback and so on.In the practical work, the human resources control section withstands the pressure biggest department in the performances management process. How lets the straight line department managers accept and the coordinate performances management?Could not achieve how the performances management effect does manage? This needs in our thousandth of a Yuan clear performances management process superintendent’s role, wants the cognition each superintendent, even each staffs all are the indispensable superintendent.2.4 Performances management goal is not clear about.The performances management goal is for the entire organization and the staff individual performances improvement. We not only must perform for this goal to the outstanding staff's performance to award, but also must work on insufficiency to the staff to carry on the discussion, the improvement, promotes each staff's growth, simultaneously staff's growth and organization's strategy and management goal close union.We note have many enterprises not only merely to locate the performances management in the performances inspection, moreover limits the performances management goal to sending the bonus, in the accent wages. As for them that, "the inspection = hits the minute = today out the bonus".2.5 Performances management system lacks the scientific nature.The performances management system is from the performancesplan, the performances management implementation, the performances examination and critique, a closed loop which and so on several modules unceasingly circulates to the performances feedback and the improvement, unceasingly promotes. The performances management first step is the performances goal hypothesis. The performances goal request satisfies concrete, may weigh, may realize, and the timely request, and is decided the work goal achieves or not key aspect. Cannot hold the key point, or said the goal too is tedious, is all disadvantageous to the staff and the organization goal realization.The performances system scientific nature also manifests in the performances communication, the performances appraisal result utilization and so on. The communication passes through to entire performances management process. The good communication channel and the communication method realize the performances management necessary condition. Will lack the communication or the ditch canal impeded all inevitably creates the management process the barrier and is invalid. But the performances appraisal result realization, like has not been able appropriately to utilize including the rewards and punishment and the feedback, the necessity affects the staffto the performances supervisory work enthusiasm and the confidence level.3 Effective performances management foundation.3.1 Good enterprise culture atmosphere.The enterprise culture is enterprise's core value orientation; it has included acupuncture needle industry management idea, values, and management pattern and enterprise image and so on. It has the crucial to enterprise's human resources management result influence, is the performances management most basic foundation. The good enterprise culture environment mainly includes:1. This enterprise takes the staff own growth as well as their work performances, but is not the big stick -like perhaps guardian's -like management way;2. This enterprise has the full authorization and the responsible culture. A department manager must to from already the department takes the complete responsibility, simultaneously also must fully be authorized. Has the control subordinate, promotes the subordinate, the decision wages increase scope, the bonus assignment, subordinate training and so on the right which arrives.3. This enterprise has the open style communication culture.Including the strategic target public, the performances public, the rewards and punishment public, training is public and so on.4. Bring employers into line with the staff the performances management in the main body group. The staff not only is by the inspection, also is the inspection, fully displays the staff to participate in the management the enthusiasm, the initiative.Above the enterprise culture essential factor is restricting the performances management success or failure. In turn, the performances management effective implementation also can become the outstanding enterprise culture a constituent.3.2 Explicit strategic target localization.The enterprise needs to have an explicit strategic localization, but enterprise’s management goal is the enterprise strategy concrete application. The success performances management is unceasingly decomposes enterprise's strategic target, through the explicit responsibility division of labor and the effective communication method, carries out in each staff's behavior. In other words, the performances management target is takeenterprise’s strategic target as the basis, establishes each department and individual performances target and the standard. In under strategic guidance premise, in enterprise's value chain, each pitch point (department) the activity can obtain unified and the effective synchromesh.Does not have the strategy, the strategy not to be clear about or various departments, the staff did not understand the enterprise the strategy, the performances management does not have explicit the unity, or pauses in short-term or the local interest consideration, has lost the potency which the whole enhances.3.3 Reasonable organization overhead construction and unimpeded service flow.The enterprise organizes the overhead construction the establishments can be able effectively to implement take the enterprise strategy’s the premise. The reasonable organization overhead construction meant the realization enterprise strategy each work all has the responsible department, between various departments all has the explicit responsibility division of labor, also non- responsibility power overlapping. The service flow unimpeded is unimpeded, each superintendent and the staffs all can accurately thecognition role, own in enterprise's service chain, the value chain be in any type the position, can make the big contribution for the enterprise strategy implementation.The performances management only has in the organization overhead construction is reasonable and under the service flow unimpeded premise, can implement the PDCA system, can enable the plan, the implementation, the appraisal, the feedback flow the effective realization, causes the staff performances and the enterprise performances can the comprehensive promotion.3.4 High level leader's correct guidance and force impetus.When we approve the human resources to take when the enterprise the main resources, and regards it for the core competitive ability important constituent, then on the full reason said that, the performances management is one of business management core contents. Because it not only limited has decided the business management result, also directly affected the staff, specially is the core staff to enterprise's loyalty, affected "keeps the person" to the human resources management important task whether could achieve.Because of this, the high level superintendent does not have the reason to affect this item the overall situation,affects the enterprise core competitive ability, and even closes the entire enterprise life and death supervisory work, merely gave a department---- human resources control section to complete. In fact, the human resources control section took a function department does not have the command jurisdiction and the order power to other departments, if cannot have the high level leader's force support, human resources manager also only can the person call how.4 Several questions in the performances management implementation process should be paid attention to4.1 Performances management division of labor and coorperation .As mentioned earlier, performances management defeat important reason is has distinguished clearly in the management process respective responsibility.Distinguishes clearly the responsibility is the performances management organization safeguard. The concrete division of labor tries to state as follows:1 the human resources control section, in the entire performances management process, is the supporter and the inspector general. The concrete responsibility includes: (1) Designs the performances appraisal system;(2) Is the valuator which the participation performances apprised provides training;(3) Supervises and the appraisal performances appraisal system implementation.2 the intermediate deck superintendent's main function decomposes the organization goal which the department undertakes, and instructs and helps the subordinate implementation program goal, the intermediate deck superintendent is the performances management essential main body. They undertake the responsibility mainly has:(1) Rests on the enterprise the developmental strategy and the KPI system, is clear about this department year and the quarter strategy goal and the management key;(2) Designs this department two level of KPI, responds the enterprise strategy and a level of KPI system from the department responsibility;(3) Organizes the department performances inspection;(4) Links up the determination improvement goal and the plan with the subordinate.3 the high level superintendent, has in the performances management body primary interest;(1) is clear about the mission and the pursue;(2) Determines the enterprise strategy plan;(3) Organizes and the design strategy succeeds the essential factor and the finance evaluation criteria;(4) Organizes to draw up the enterprise year after the management strategy goal, provides the resources and the policy support;(5) Organizes to draw up the company level the KPI system.4.2 Enterprise performances and staff performances conformity.The enterprise overall performances have included the enterprise performances, the team performances and individual performances. The overall performances omni-directional promotion can enable the enterprise the resources to obtain the best use, causes the enterprise in the core competitive ability a stair. The author thought may achieve through following several aspects:1 the human resources superintendent participates in the entire enterprise strategy plan, the human resources superintendent may carefully examine the enterprise from the human resources angle the overall strategy, simultaneously from the overall angle, joins staff’s performances and the overall strategy;2 records the branch customs station using the balance (BSC) the principle to decompose the enterprise strategy into theessential performances target (KPI) the system, guaranteed the enterprise strategy carries out each staff;3 realizes the PDCA circulation management, achieves the plan -monitoring - examination and critique - improvement the overall process effective operation. Benign to the performances circulation is the management movement which we hoped.4.3 Performances management already must pay great attention to the result, also must take the process.The performances management attention is the entire process, it has already contained the performances inspection result, also includes the performances goal the hypothesis, the performances application and the feedback, these four modules are indispensable. The performances inspection result has contained the performance, the efficiency, the accomplishment promotion, it certainly is the enterprise to staff’s request, is the board of directors to the high level superintendent’s request, says from the big aspect, also is the society to enterprise’s expectation. But the resul t production is through a series of behaviors, impel through cannot the few flows and be facilitated.In the entire performances management process, in is clearabout the overall goal and in respective performances target foundation, carries on tracing and the weight to the performances goal, through continues the unceasing performances communication and the performances face-to-face talk guarantees the performances to be possible the execution and may achieve the nature. From the performances plan contract pledge to the performances appraisal and the improvement confirmation, all cannot seep the inspection with by the inspection positive communication trace, and therefore achieves the ability, the quality and the performance directional promotion.4.4Performance inspection and the quality appraised should be played equally attention .The performances examination and critique aims at the work which in the enterprise each staff undertakes, applies each kind scientific qualitative and the quota method, to staff's actual behavior, the work effect and its carries on the inspection and the appraisal to enterprise’s contribution or the value, is overall assessment which to staff’s Germany, can, be industrious, twist. We not merely must pay great attention to the staff performance the performance, makes the contribution to the company, also must grasp staff's moralvalue orientation as necessary, their work manner and behavior performance.In the real life, we are not difficult to discover certain staffs have talent non- Germany the phenomenon. Has not satisfied some aspect in the company the request or thought other enterprises have when the future changes job, carries off the massive customers, even is certain companies' core technologies, and often creates the company significant economic loss. Worked the legal system in our country at present was still in the serious not perfect situation, the condition was quite common. Advertises for in the process in the staff, we must pay attention to the moral character, but we can’t but acknowledge, how is very difficult in the employment advertise face-to-face talk very short time to discover person's personal character. Therefore unceasingly is circulating in the performances management closed loop which, unceasingly promotes, while performance inspection, to staff's moral character, to company's loyalty, as wells the work manner and so on the non- quantification target has no alternative but to give to inspect and the management.4.5 Must have the unimpeded performances feedback and the appeal flow.The performances appraised the result the utilization lies in to staff’s rewards and punishment and the performances improve two aspects. Because exterior factor, or is the inspection with is been bad and so on the reason by the inspection communication, appraised and the face-to-face talk often can have certain deficiency, creates the direct economic loss conflict in the management process is unavoidable, in this kind of situation, the unimpeded performances feedback and the appeal flow plays extremely essential is making up the role. Regarding exists in the performances management process unfair or has loses the biased phenomenon, extremely needs the information the feedback, as well as when subsides staff’s disaffection, in order to avoid dampens their work enthusiasm.The performances management, puts briefly is "the goal +communication" process. Had the explicit goal, carries out and achieves the goal the process, are the communication and the feedback process which continues, unceasingly to strengthen. The performances feedback in the time is regular. In the staff short-term goal realization process, has any result, in the ability and the method of work has any flaw, took its manager should perform to remind and counsel ling as necessary. Enables the staff to correct own as necessary in the work shortcomingand diligently the direction, smoothly achieves the performances goal. But appealed the flow has not set, is helpful to the human resources control section to the performances management monitoring, is helpful to solves between the staff and manager's conflict, also is helpful to reminds the responsible staff to strengthen own accomplishment, the ability, also wants the autonomy in the language and the motion, must fully manifest fairly, the fair principle in the management process in the formula.Conclusion:In summary, the performances management is a quite complex systems engineering, it already needs the high level superintendent to propose the explicit strategic target and the force impetus, also needs the intermediate deck superintendent as well as the entire recuperation staff’s joint effort, it already needs the staff fully to understand, also needs staff's unremitting endeavor, from the work manner, the values orientation, the work diligently direction and so on all want to perform to adjust and the promotion as necessary.。
绩效管理英语参考文献
绩效管理英语参考文献绩效管理英语参考文献大全绩效管理，是指各级管理者和员工共同参与的.绩效计划制定、绩效辅导沟通、绩效考核评价、绩效结果应用、绩效目标提升的持续循环过程，绩效管理的目的是持续提升个人、部门和组织的绩效。
下面列出绩效管理英语参考文献，希望对你的论文写作有所帮助。
绩效管理英语参考文献一:[1]Mohammad Moshtari. Inter‐Organizational Fit, Relationship Management Capability, and Collaborative Performance within a Humanitarian Setting[J]. Prod Oper Manag,20XX,259:.[2]David B. Zoogah. Tribal diversity, human resources management practices, and firm performance[J]. Can J Adm Sci,20XX,333:.[3]Torsten Doering,Nallan C. Suresh. Forecasting and Performance: Conceptualizing Forecasting Management Competence as a Higher‐Order Construct[J]. J Supply Chain Manag,20XX,524:.[4]T. Danielle Samulski,Virginia A. LiVolsi,Lawrence Q.Wong,Zubair Baloch. Usage trends and performance characteristics of a “gene expression classifier” in the management of thyroid nodules: An institutional experience[J]. Diagn. Cytopathol.,20XX,4411:.[5]Arsalan Safari. A New Quantitative‐Based Performance Management Framework for Service Operations[J]. Know. ProcessMgmt.,20XX,234:.[6]Ali M. Shahzad,Matthew A. Rutherford,Mark P. Sharfman. In Good Times but Not in Bad: The Role of Managerial Discretion in Moderating the Stakeholder Management and Financial Performance Relationship[J]. Business and Society Review,20XX,12XX:.[7]Martin Zühlke,Daniel Riebe,Toralf Beitz,Hans‐GerdL?hmannsr?ben,Sandro Andreotti,Knut Reinert,Karl Zenichowski,Marc Diener. High‐performance liquid chromatography with electrospray ionization ion mobility spectrometry: Characterization, data management, andapplications[J]. J. Sep. Science,20XX,3924:.[8]Erin K. Melton,Kenneth J. Meier. For the Want of a Nail: The Interaction of Managerial Capacity and Human Resource Management on Organizational Performance[J]. Public Admin Rev,20XX,771:.[9]Mostafa Khanamani,Yaghoub Fathipour,Ali AsgharTalebi,Mohammad Mehrabadi. Linking pollen quality and performance of Neoseiulus californicus （Acari: Phytoseiidae）in two‐spotted spider mite management programmes[J]. Pest. Manag. Sci.,20XX,732:.[10]Adri enn Kocsis,Tibor Takács,Csaba Jeney,Zsuzsa Schaff,Róbert Koiss,Balázs Járay,Gábor Sobel,Károly Pap,István Székely,TamásFerenci,Hung‐Cheng Lai,Miklós Nyíri,Márta Benczik. Performance of a new HPV and biomarker assay in the management of hrHPV positive women: Subanalysis of the ongoing multicenter TRACE clinical trial （ n >6,000） to evaluate POU4F3 methylation as a potential biomarker of cervical precancer and cancer[J]. Int. J. Cancer,20XX,XX05:.[11]Liz Done,Mike Murphy,Mia Watt. Change management and the SENCo role: developing key performance indicators in the strategic development of inclusivity[J]. Support for Learning,20XX,3XX:.[12]Tae Hyung Kim,M. Jae Moon. Using Social Enterprises for Social Policy in South Korea: Do Funding and Management Affect Social and Economic Performance?[J]. Public Admin. Dev.,20XX,371:.[13]Prashant Kale,Harbir Singh. Management of Overseas Acquisitions by Developing Country Multinationals and Its Performance Implications: The Indian Example[J]. Thunderbird International Business Review,20XX,592:.[XX]Rafael Arantes,Rodrigo Schveitzer,Caio Magnotti,Katt Regina Lapa,Luis Vinatea. A comparison between water exchange and settling tank as a method for suspended solids management in intensive biofloc technology systems: effects on shrimp （ Litopenaeus vannamei ）performance, water quality and water use[J]. Aquac Res,20XX,484:.[XX]Simone Fanelli,Marco Ferretti,Antonello Zangrandi. The impact of regional policies on emergency department management and performance: the case of the regional government of Sicily[J]. Int J Health Plann Mgmt,20XX,321:.[XX]LIANG MA. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT AND CITIZEN SATISFACTION WITH THE GOVERNMENT: EVIDENCE FROM CHINESE MUNICIPALITIES[J]. Public Admin,20XX,951:.[XX]ALEXANDER KROLL. CAN PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT FOSTER SOCIAL EQUITY? STAKEHOLDER POWER, PROTECTIVE INSTITUTIONS, AND MINORITY REPRESENTATION[J]. Public Admin,20XX,951:.[18]Guan Fanglan,Zhang Luoyu,Li Yinghui. Color management for enhancing the performance of superfine nylon ink jet printing with reactive dyes inks[J]. Color Res. Appl.,20XX,423:.[19]Ying Yang,Dong‐Ling Xu. A methodology for assessing the effect of portfolio management on NPD performance based on Bayesian network scenarios[J]. Expert Systems,20XX,342:.[20]Gary Cokins. Enterprise Performance Management （EPM） and the Digital Revolution[J]. Perf. Improv.,20XX,564:.[21]Anirut Pipatprapa,Hsiang‐Hsi Huang,Ching‐Hsu Huang. The Role of Quality Management & Innovativeness on Green Performance[J]. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Mgmt.,20XX,243:.[22]C. Allen Gorman,John P. Meriac,Sylvia G. Roch,Joshua L. Ray,Jason S. Gamble. An exploratory study of current performance management practices: Human resource executives' perspectives[J]. Int J Select Assess,20XX,252:.绩效管理英语参考文献二:[23]John C. Adams,Takeshi Nishikawa,Ramesh P. Rao. Mutual Fund Performance, Management Teams, and Boards[J]. Journal of Banking and Finance,20XX,:.[24]C. Silva,J. Saldanha Matos,M.J. Rosa. Performance indicators and indices of sludge management in urban wastewater treatment plants[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,20XX,:.[25]Kais Brik,Faouzi ben Ammar. Improved performance and energy management strategy for proton exchange membrane fuel cell/backupbattery in power electronic systems[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy,20XX,:.[26]Patrik J.G. Henriksson,Malcolm Dickson,Ahmed Nasr Allah,Diaa Al-Kenawy,Michael Phillips. Benchmarking the environmental performance of best management practice and genetic improvements in Egyptian aquaculture using life cycle assessment[J]. Aquaculture,20XX,468:.[27]Ruoqi Geng,S. Afshin Mansouri,Emel Aktas. The relationship between green supply chain management and performance: A meta-analysis of empirical evidences in Asian emerging economies[J]. International Journal of Production Economics,20XX,:.[28]Chiara Masci,Kristof De Witte,Tommaso Agasisti. The influence of school size, principal characteristics and school management practices on educational performance: An efficiency analysis of Italian students attending middle schools[J]. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences,20XX,:.[29]J. Román-Padilla,A. Rodríguez-Rúa,M. Ponce,M. Manchado,I. Hachero-Cruzado. Effects of dietary lipid profile on larval performance and lipid management in Senegalese sole[J]. Aquaculture,20XX,468:.[30]Katri Kauppi,Annachiara Longoni,Federico Caniato,Markku Kuula. Managing country disruption risks and improving operational performance: risk management along integrated supply chains[J]. International Journal of Production Economics,20XX,:.[31]Cindy Yoonjoung Heo. New performance indicators for restaurant revenue management: ProPASH and ProPASM[J]. International Journal of Hospitality Management,20XX,:.[32]J. De Waele,K. D'Haene,J. Salomez,G. Hofman,S. De Neve. Simulating the environmental performance of post-harvest management measures to comply with the EU Nitrates Directive[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,20XX,:.[33]Dapeng Liang,Tiansen Liu. Does environmental management capability of Chinese industrial firms improve the contribution of corporate environmental performance to economic performance? Evidence from 2010 to 20XX[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production,20XX,:.[34]?. Bodin,D. Nohrstedt. Formation and performance of collaborative disaster management networks: Evidence from a Swedish wildfire response[J]. Global Environmental Change,20XX,41:.[35]Alessandro Sarra,Marialisa Mazzocchitti,Agnese Rapposelli. Evaluating Joint Environmental and Cost Performance in Municipal Waste Management Systems through Data Envelopment Analysis: Scale Effects and Policy Implications[J]. Ecological Indicators,20XX,:.[36]Gokce S. Avcioglu,Berker Ficicilar,Inci Eroglu. Influence of FEP nanoparticles in catalyst layer on water management and performance of PEM fuel cell with high Pt loading[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy,20XX,:.[37]. Digital management system controls, monitors and analyses seal performance[J]. Sealing Technology,20XX,20XX10:.[38]Jiateng Zhao,Peizhao Lv,Zhonghao Rao. Experimental study on the thermal management performance of phase change material coupled with heat pipe for cylindrical power battery pack[J]. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science,20XX,:.[39]Necmi Karagozoglu. Antecedents of team performance on case studies in a strategic management capstone course[J]. International Journal of Management Education,20XX,:.[40]Anuradha Pughat,Vidushi Sharma. Performance Analysis of an Improved Dynamic Power Management Model in Wireless Sensor Node[J]. Digital Communications and Networks,20XX,:.[41]Inma ?lvarez-Fernández,Nuria Fernández,Noela Sánchez-Carnero,Juan Freire. The management performance of marine protected areas in the North-east Atlantic Ocean[J]. Marine Policy,20XX,76:.[42]Chantel R. Wetzel,André Punt. The perform ance and trade-offs of alternative harvest control rules to meet management goals for U.S. west coast flatfish stocks[J]. Fisheries Research,20XX,187:.[43]?zer Uygun,Ay?e Dede. Performance evaluation of green supply chain management using integrated fuzzy multi-criteria decision making techniques[J]. Computers & Industrial Engineering,20XX,102:.[44]Ajay Raghavan,Peter Kiesel,Lars Wilko Sommer,Julian Schwartz,Alexander Lochbaum,Alex Hegyi,Andreas Schuh,KyleArakaki,Bhaskar Saha,Anurag Ganguli,Kyung Ho Kim,ChaeAh Kim,Hoe Jin Hah,SeokKoo Kim,Gyu-Ok Hwang,Geun-Chang Chung,Bokkyu Choi,Mohamed Alamgir. Embedded fiber-optic sensing for accurate internal monitoringof cell state in advanced battery management systems part 1: Cell embedding method and performance[J]. Journal of Power Sources,20XX,:.绩效管理英语参考文献三:[45]Ramit Debnath,Ronita Bardhan. Daylight Performance of a Naturally Ventilated Building as Parameter for Energy Management[J]. Energy Procedia,20XX,90:.[46]Graham Currie,Rico Merkert. Workshop 1 report: Innovationsin Service Delivery and Performance Management[J]. Research in Transportation Economics,20XX,:.[47]Piero Danti,Lorenzo Pezzola,Sandro Magnani. Performance Analysis of an Optimization Management Algorithm on a Multi-generation Small Size Power Plant[J]. Energy Procedia,20XX,101:.[48]Salih ?etiner,Alev ?etin duran,Filiz Kibar,Akgün Yaman. Performance comparison of new generation HCV core antigen test versus HCV RNA test in management of hepatitis C virus infection[J].Transfusion and Apheresis Science,20XX,:.[49]V.S. Machado,R.C. Neves,F.S. Lima,R.C. Bicalho. The effectof Presynch-Ovsynch protocol with or without estrus detection on reproductive performance by parity, and the long-term effect of these different management strategies on milk production, reproduction, health and survivability of dairy cows[J]. Theriogenology,20XX,93:.[50]Chiung-Lin Liu,Kuo-Chung Shang,Taih-Cherng Lirn,Kee-Hung Lai,Y.H. Venus Lun. Supply Chain Resilience, Firm Performance, and Management Policies in the Liner Shipping Industry[J]. Transportation Research Part A,20XX,:.[51]F. Cucchiella,M. Gastaldi,M. Miliacca. The management of greenhouse gas emissions and its effects on firm performance[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production,20XX,:.[52]Juneho Um,Andrew Lyons,Hugo K.S. Lam,T.C.E. Cheng,Carine Dominguez-Pery. Product variety management and supply chain performance: A capability perspective on their relationships and competitiveness implications[J]. International Journal of Production Economics,20XX,187:.[53]Weixiong Wu,Xiaoqing Yang,Guoqing Zhang,Kai Chen,Shuangfeng Wang. Experimental investigation on the thermal performance of heatpipe-assisted phase change material based battery thermal management system[J]. Energy Conversion and Management,20XX,138:.[54]Michael J. Turner,Sean A. Way,Demian Hodari,Wiarda Witteman. Hotel property performance: The role of strategic managementaccounting[J]. International Journal of Hospitality Management,20XX,63:.[55]Carolyn Callahan,Jared Soileau. Does Enterprise risk management enhance operating performance?[J]. Advances inAccounting,20XX,:.[56]Marc Colaco,Maxx K. Caveney,Ryan P. Terlecki. Performance of adult pyeloplasty relative to endourological management in the era of robotic surgery: Data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample[J]. Urology Practice,20XX,:.[57]J. Carmona-Murillo,I. Soto,F. J. Rodríguez-Pérez,D. Cortés-Polo,J. L. González-Sánchez,Juan C. Cano. Performance Evaluation of Distributed Mobility Management Protocols: Limitations and Solutions for Future Mobile Networks[J]. Mobile Information Systems,20XX,20XX:.[58]Aloysius Byaruhanga. Contractor Monitoring and Performance of Road Infrastructure Projects in Uganda: A Management Model[J]. Journal of Building Construction and Planning Research,20XX,0501:.[59]Sachin Modgil,Sanjay Sharma. Total productive maintenance, total quality management and operational performance[J]. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering,20XX,224:.[60]Peter Heisig,Olunifesi Adekunle Suraj,Aino Kianto,Cosmas Kemboi,Gregorio Perez Arrau,Nasser Fathi Easa. Knowledge management and business performance: global experts' views on future research needs[J]. Journal of Knowledge Management,20XX,206:.[61]. The influence of information, knowledge and technology management on the performance of manufacturing enterprises[J]. Strategic Direction,20XX,3211:.[62]Stephen Korutaro Nkundabanyanga,Brendah Akankunda,Irene Nalukenge,Immaculate Tusiime. The impact of financial managementpractices and competitive advantage on the loan performance of MFIs[J]. International Journal of Social Economics,20XX,441:.[63]Shradha Ashok Gawankar,Sachin Kamble,Rakesh Raut. An investigation of the relationship between supply chain management practices （SCMP） on supply chain performance measurement （SCPM） of Indian retail chain using SEM[J]. Benchmarking: An International Journal,20XX,241:.[64]Chieh-Peng Lin,Min-Ling Liu,Sheng-Wuu Joe,Yuan-Hui Tsai. Predicting top management approval and team performance in technology industry[J]. Personnel Review,20XX,461:.[65]Lisa Rogan,Ruth Boaden. Understanding performance management in primary care[J]. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance,20XX,301:.[66]Huy Quang Truong,Maria Sameiro,Ana Cristina Fernandes,Paulo Sampaio,Binh An Thi Duong,Hiep Hoang Duong,Estela Vilhenac. Supply chain management practices and firms' operational performance[J].International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management,20XX,342:.绩效管理英语参考文献四:[67]Hadi Shirouyehzad,Farimah Mokhatab Rafiee,Negin Berjis. Performance evaluation and prioritization of organizations based on knowledge management and safety management approaches using DEA[J]. Journal of Modelling in Management,20XX,121:.[68]Vishal Singh Patyal,Maddulety Koilakuntla. The impact of quality management practices on performance: an empirical study[J]. Benchmarking: An International Journal,20XX,242:.[69]Ra'ed Masa'deh,Rifat Shannak,Mahmoud Maqableh,Ali Tarhini. The impact of knowledge management on job performance in higher education[J]. Journal of Enterprise Information Management,20XX,302:.[70]Mohsen Sadegh Amalnick,Mansour Zarrin. Performance assessment of human resource by integration of HSE and ergonomics and EFQM management system[J]. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance,20XX,302:.[71]Fan Yang,Xiongfei Zhang. The impact of sustainable supplier management practices on buyer-supplier performance[J]. Review of International Business and Strategy,20XX,271:.[72]Jens K. Roehrich,Stefan U. Hoejmose,Victoria Overland. Driving green supply chain management performance through supplier selection and value internalisation[J]. International Journal of Operations & Production Management,20XX,374:.[73]Aradhana Vikas Gandhi,Ateeque Shaikh,Pratima Amol Sheorey. Impact of supply chain management practices on firm performance[J]. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management,20XX,454:.[74]Ahmad Fathi Al-Sa'di,Ayman Bahjat Abdallah,Samer Eid Dahiyat. The mediating role of product and process innovations on therelationship between knowledge management and operational performance in manufacturing companies in Jordan[J]. Business Process Management Journal,20XX,232:.[75]Alex Koohang,Joanna Paliszkiewicz,Jerzy Goluchowski. The impact of leadership on trust, knowledge management, and organizational performance[J]. Industrial Management & Data Systems,20XX,1XX3:.[76]Lokesh Vijayvargy,Jitesh Thakkar,Gopal Agarwal. Green supply chain management practices and performance[J]. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management,20XX,283:.[77]Daniele Giampaoli,Massimo Ciambotti,Nick Bontis. Knowledge management, problem solving and performance in top Italian firms[J]. Journal of Knowledge Management,20XX,212:.[78]Anupam Kumar,David E. Cantor,Curtis M. Grimm,Christian Hofer. Environmental management rivalry and firm performance[J]. Journal of Strategy and Management,20XX,102:.[79]Laura Bini,Francesco Dainelli,Francesco Giunta. Is a loosely specified regulatory intervention effective in disciplining management commentary? The case of performance indicator disclosure[J]. Journal of Management & Governance,20XX,211:.[80]Simon Holmbacka,Erwan Nogues,Maxime Pelcat,SébastienLafond,Daniel Menard,Johan Lilius. Energy-Awareness and PerformanceManagement with Parallel Dataflow Applications[J]. Journal of Signal Processing Systems,20XX,871:.[81]Roop Kishore,Ashish Dwivedi,Raghuvir Singh,R. K.Naresh,Vineet Kumar,Priyanka Bankoti,Dinesh Kumar Sharma,Nishant Yadav. Integrated effect of population and weed management regimes on weed dynamics, performance, and productivity of basmati rice （ Oryza sativa L.）[J]. Paddy and Water Environment,20XX,XX1:.[82]Encarnación García-Sánchez,Víctor Jesús García-Morales,María Teresa Bolívar-Ramos. The influence of top management support for ICTs on organisational performance through knowledge acquisition, transfer, and utilisation[J]. Review of Managerial Science,20XX,111:.[83]Marek Vochozka,Anna Marou?ková。
PerformanceManagement绩效管理英文文献-14页word资料
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT POLICYThe Governing Body of Homerton Children’s Centre adoptedthis performance management policy on 31 October 2007.APPLICATION OF THE POLICYThe policy applies to the head teacher and to all teachers employed by the school except teachers on contracts of less than one term, those undergoing induction (ie NQTs)and those who are the subject of capability procedures.PURPOSEThis policy sets out the framework for a clear and consistent assessment of the overall performance of teachers and the head teacher and for supporting their development needs within the context of the school's improvement plan and their own professional needs. Where teachers are eligible for pay progression, the assessment of performance throughout the cycle against the performance criteria specified in the statement will be the basis on which the recommendation is made by the reviewer.This policy should be read in conjunction with the school's pay policy which provides details of the arrangements relating to teacher's pay in accordance with the School Teachers' Pay and Conditions Document.LINKS TO SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT, SCHOOL SELF EVALUATION AND SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLANNINGTo comply with the requirement to show how the arrangements for performance management link with those for school improvement, school self-evaluation and school development planning and to minimise workload and bureaucracy the performance management process will be the main source of information as appropriate for school self-evaluation and the wider school improvement process.Similarly, the school improvement and development plan and the school's self evaluation form are key documents for the performance management process.All reviewers are expected to explore the alignment of reviewees' objectives with the school's priorities and plans. The objectives should also reflect reviewees' professional aspirations.CONSISTENCY OF TREATMENT AND FAIRNESSThe Governing Body is committed to ensuring consistency of treatment and fairness in the operation of performance management. To ensure this the following provisions are made in relation to moderation, quality assurance and objective setting.Quality assuranceThe head teacher has determined that she will delegate the reviewer role for some or all teachers for whom she is not the line manager.In these circumstances the head teacher will moderate all the planning statements to check that the plans recorded in the statements of teachers at the school:•are consistent between those who have similar expe rience and similar levels of responsibility• comply with the school's performance management policy, the regulations and the requirements of equality legislationThe Governing Body will review the quality assurance processes when the performance policy is reviewed.OBJECTIVE SETTINGThe objectives set will be rigorous, challenging, achievable, time-bound, fair and equitable in relation to teachers with similar roles/responsibilities and experience, and wil l have regard to what can reasonably be expected of any teacher in that position given the desirability of the reviewee being able to achieve a satisfactory balance between the time required to discharge his professional duties and the time required to pursue his personal interests outside work, consistent with the school's strategy for bringing downward pressure on working hours. They shall also take account of the teacher's professional aspirations and any relevant pay progression criteria. They should be such that, if they are achieved, they will contribute to improving the progress of children at the school.The reviewer and reviewee will seek to agree the objectives but where a joint determination cannot be made the reviewer will make the determination.In this school:all teachers, including the head teacher, will have no more than3 objectivesteachers, including the head teacher, will not necessarily all have the same number of objectivesall teachers, including the head teacher, will have a whole school objectiveThough performance management is an assessment of overall performance of teachers and the head teacher, objectives cannot cover the full range of a teacher's roles/responsibilities. Objectives will, therefore, focus on the priorities for an individual for the cycle. At the review stage it will be assumed that those aspects of a teacher's roles/responsibilities not covered by the objectives or any amendment to the statement which may have been necessary in accordance with the provisions of the regulations have been carried out satisfactorily.Reviewing ProgressAt the end of the cyc l e assessment of performance against an objective will be on the basis of the performance criteria set at the beginning of the cycle. Good progress towards the achievement of a challenging objective, even if the performance criteria have not been met in full, will be assessed favourably.The performance management cycle is annual, but on occasions it may be appropriate to set objectives that will cover a period over more than onecycle. In such cases, the basis on which the progress being made towards meeting the performance criteria for the objective will be assessed at the end of the first cycle and will be recorded in the planning and review statement at the beginning of the cycle.APPEALSAt specified points in the performance management process teachers and head teachers have a right of appeal against any of the entries in their planning and review statements. Where a reviewee wishes to appeal on the basis of more than one entry this would constitute one appeal hearing. Details of the appeals process are covered in the school's paypolicy.CONFIDENTIALITYThe whole performance management process and the statements generated under it, in particular, will be treated with strict confidentiality at all times. Only the reviewee's line manager or, where she has more than one, each of her line managers will be provided with access to the reviewee's plan recorded in her statement, upon request, where this is necessary to enable the line manager to discharge her line management responsibilities. Reviewees will be told who has requested and has been granted access.TRAINING AND SUPPORTThe school's CPD programme will be informed by the training anddevelopment needs identified in the training annex of the reviewees' planning and review statements.The governing body will ensure in the budget planning that, as far as possible, appropriate resources are made available in the school budget for any training and support agreed for reviewees.An account of the training and development needs of teachers in general, including the instances where it did not prove possible to provide any agreed CPD, will form a part of the head teacher's annual report to the governing body about the operation of the per f ormance management in the school.With regard to the provision of CPD in the case of competing demands on the school budget, a decision on relative priority will be taken with regard to the extent to which: (a) the CPD identified is essential for a reviewee to meet their objectives; and (b) the extent to which the training and support will help the school to achieve its priorities. The school's priorities will have precedence. Teachers should not be held accountable for failing to make good progress towards meeting their performance criteria where the support recorded in the planning statement has not been provided.APPOINTMENT OF REVIEWERS FOR THE HEAD TEACHERAppointment of GovernorsThe Governing Body is the reviewer for the head teacher and to discharge thisresponsibility on its behalf may appoint 2 or 3 governors.Where a head teacher is of the opinion that any of the governors appointed by the governing body under this regulation is unsuitable for professional reasons, s/he may submit a written request to the governing body for that governor to be replaced, stating those reasons.Appointment of School Improvement Partner or External AdviserThe local authority has appointed a School Improvement Partner for the school, who will provide the Governing Body with advice and support in relation to the management and review of the performance of the head teacher.APPOINTMENT OF REVIEWERS FOR TEACHERSIn the case where the head teacher is not the teacher's line manager, the head teacher may delegate the duties imposed upon the reviewer, in their entirety, to the teacher's line manager. In this school the head teacher has decided that:The head teacher will be the reviewer for those teachers she directly line manages and will delegate the role of reviewer, in its entirety, to the relevant line managers for some or all other teachers.Line managers will be the reviewers for all those teachers they line manage.Where a teacher is of the opinion that the person to whom the head teacher has delegated the reviewer's duties is unsuitable for professional reasons, she may submit a written request to the head teacher for that reviewer to be replaced, stating those reasons.Where it becomes apparent that the reviewer will be absent for the majority of the cycle or is unsuitable for professional reasons the head teacher may perform the duties herself or delegate them in their entirety to another teacher. Where this teacher is not the reviewee's line manager the teacher will have an equivalent or higher status in the staffing structure as the teacher's line manager.A performance management cycle will not begin again in the event of the reviewer being changed.All line managers to whom the head teacher has delegated the role of reviewer will receive appropriate preparation for that role.THE PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT CYCLEThe performance of teachers must be reviewed on an annual basis. Performance planning and reviews must be completed for all teachers by 31 October and for head teachers by 31 December.The performance management cycle in this school, therefore, will run fromthe end of autumn half term to the end of the summer term for teachers, and from the end of autumn term to the end of the summer termfor the head teacher.Teachers who are employed on a fixed term contract of less than one year, will have their performance managed in accordance with the principles underpinning the provisions of this policy. The length of the cycle will be determined by the duration of their contract.Where a teacher starts their employment at the school part-way through a cycle, the head teacher or, the governing body shall determine the length of the first cycle for that teacher, with a view to bringing her cycle into line with the cycle for other teachers at the school as soon as possible.Where a teacher transfers to a new post within the school part-way through a cycle, the head teacher or, the governing body shall determine whether the cycle shall begin again and whether to change the reviewer.RETENTION OF STATEMENTSPerformance management planning and review statements will be retained for a minimum period of 6 years.MONITORING AND EVALUATIONThe governing body will monitor the operation and outcomes of performance management arrangements.The head teacher will provide the governing body with a report on the operation of the school's performance management policy annually. The report will not contain any information which would enable any individual to be identified. The report will include:• the operation of the performance management policy;• the effectiveness of the school's performance managementprocedures;• teachers' training and development needs.The Governing Body is committed to ensuring that the performance management process is fair and non-discriminatory and the following monitoring data should be included in the head teacher's report because they represent the possible grounds for unlawful discrimination:• Race• Sex• Sexual orientation• Disability• Religion and belief•Age• Part-time contracts•Trade union membership.The head teacher will also report on whether there have been any appeals or representations on an individual or collective basis on the grounds of alleged discrimination under any of the categories above.REVIEW OF THE POLICYThe Governing Body will review the performance management policy every school year in the summer term.The Governing Body will take account of the head teacher's report in its review of the performance management policy. The policy will be revised as required to introduce any changes in regulation and statutory guidance to ensure that it is always up to date.The Governing Body will seek to agree any revisions to the policy with the recognised trade unions having regard to the results of the consultation with all teachers.To ensure teachers are fully conversant with the performance management arrangements, all new teachers who join the school will be briefed on them as part of their introduction to the school.ACCESS TO DOCUMENTATIONCopies of the school improvement and development plan and SEF can be obtained from the school office.CLASSROOM OBSERVATION PROTOCOLAll classroom observation will be undertaken in accordance with the performance management regulations,the associated guidance published by the Rewards and Incentives Group and the classroom observation protocol that is appended to this policy in Annex 1.ANNEX 1 - CLASSROOM OBSERVATION PROTOCOLThe Governing Body is committed to ensuring that classroom observation is developmental and supportive and that those involved in the process will:• carry out th e role with professionalism, integrity and courtesy;• evaluate objectively;•report accurately and fairly; and• respect the confidentiality of the information gained.The total period for classroom observation arranged for any teacher will not exceed three hours per cycle having regard to the individual circumstances of the teacher. There is no requirement to use all of the three hours. The amount of observation for each teacher should reflect and be proportionate to the needs of the individual.In this school 'proportionate to need' will be determined by the head teacher.The arrangements for classroom observation will be included in the plan in the planning and review statement and will include the amount of observation, specify its primary purpose, any particular aspects of the teacher's performance which will be assessed, the duration of the observation, when during the performance management cycle the observation will take place and who will conduct the observation.Where evidence emerges about the reviewee's teaching performance whichgives rise to concern during the cycle classroom observations may be arranged in addition to those recorded at the beginning of the cycle subject to a revision meeting being held in accordance with the Regulations.Information gathered during the observation will be used, as appropriate, for a variety of purposes including informing school self-evaluation and school improvement strategies in accordance with the school's commitment to streamlining data collection and minimising bureaucracy and workload burdens on staff.In keeping with the commitment to supportive and developmental classroom observation those being observed will be notified in advance.Classroom observations will only be undertaken by persons with QTS. In addition, in this school classroom observation will only undertaken by those who have had adequate preparation and the appropriate professional skills to undertake observation and to provide constructive oral and written feedback and support, in the context of professional dialogue between colleagues.Oral feedback will be given as soon as possible after the observation and no later than the end of the following working day. It will be given during directed time in a suitable, private environment.Written feedback will be provided within five working days of the observation taking place. If issues emerged from an observation that werenot part of the focus of the observation as recorded in the planning and review statement these should also be covered in the written feedback and the appropriate action taken in accordance with the regulations and guidance.The written record of feedback also includes the date on which the observation took place, the lesson observed and the length of the observation.The teacher has the right to append written comments on the feedback document. No written notes in addition to the written feedback will be kept.A head teacher has a duty to evaluate the standards of teaching and learning and to ensure that proper standards of professional performance are established and maintained. Heads have a right to drop in to inform their monitoring of the quality of learning.Drop ins will only be undertaken by the headteacher.October 2007希望以上资料对你有所帮助，附励志名言3条：1、要接受自己行动所带来的责任而非自己成就所带来的荣耀。
绩效考核与管理外文翻译文献
绩效考核与管理外文翻译文献(文档含中英文对照即英文原文和中文翻译)原文：The Dilemma of Performance AppraisalPeter Prowse and Julie ProwseMeasuring Business Excellence,V ol.13 Iss:4,pp.69 - 77AbstractThis paper deals with the dilemma of managing performance using performance appraisal. The authors will evaluate the historical development of appraisals and argue that the critical area of line management development that was been identified as a critical success factor in appraisals has been ignored in the later literature evaluating the effectiveness of performance through appraisals.This paper willevaluatethe aims and methodsof appraisal, thedifficulties encountered in the appraisalprocess. It also re-evaluates the lack of theoretical development in appraisaland move from he psychological approachesof analysistoamorecritical realisation ofapproaches before re-evaluating the challenge to remove subjectivity and bias in judgement of appraisal.13.1IntroductionThis paper will define and outline performance management and appraisal. It will start byevaluating what form of performance is evaluated, then develop links to the development of different performance traditions (Psychological tradition, Management by Objectives, Motivation and Development).It will outline the historical development of performance management then evaluate high performance strategies using performance appraisal. It will evaluate the continuing issue of subjectivity and ethical dilemmas regarding measurement and assessment of performance. The paper will then examine how organisations measure performance before evaluation of research on some recent trends in performance appraisal.This chapter will evaluate the historical development of performance appraisal from management by objectives (MBO) literature before evaluating the debates between linkages between performance management and appraisal. It will outline the development of individual performance before linking to performance management in organizations. The outcomes of techniques to increase organizational commitment, increase job satisfaction will be critically evaluated. It will further examine the transatlantic debates between literature on efficiency and effectiveness in the North American and the United Kingdom) evidence to evaluate the HRM development and contribution of performance appraisal to individual and organizational performance.13.2 What is Performance Management?The first is sue to discuss is the difficulty of definition of Performance Management. Armstrong and Barron(1998:8) define performance management as: A strategic and integrated approach to delivering sustained success to organisations by Improving performance of people who work in them by developing the capabilities of teams And individual performance.13.2.1 Performance AppraisalAppraisal potentially is a key tool in making the most of an organisation’s human resources. The use of appraisal is widespread estimated that 80–90%of organizations in the USA and UK were using appraisal and an increase from 69 to 87% of organisations between 1998 and 2004 reported a formal performance management system (Armstrong and Baron, 1998:200).There has been little evidence of the evaluation of the effectiveness of appraisal but more on the development in its use. Between 1998 and 2004 a sample from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD, 2007) of 562 firms found 506 were using performance appraisal in UK.What is also vital to emphasise is the rising use of performance appraisal feedback beyond performance for professionals and managers to nearly 95% of workplaces in the 2004 WERS survey (seeTable 13.1).Clearly the use of Appraisals has been the development and extension of appraisals to cover a large proportion of the UK workforce and the coverage of non managerial occupations and the extended use in private and public sectors.13.2.2 The Purpose of AppraisalsThe critical issue is what is the purpose of appraisals and how effective is it ？Researched and used in practice throughout organizations? The purpose of appraisals needs to be clearly identified. Firstly their purpose. Randell (1994) states they are a systematic evaluation of individual performance linked to workplace behaviour and/or specific criteria. Appraisals often take the form of an appraisal interview,usually annual,supported by standardised forms/paperwork.The key objective of appraisal is to provide feedback for performance is provided by the linemanager.The three key questions for quality of feedback:1. What and how are observations on performance made?2. Why and how are they discussed?3. What determines the level of performance in the job?It has been argued by one school of thought that these process cannot be performed effectively unless the line manager of person providing feedback has the interpersonal interviewing skills to providethat feedback to people being appraised. This has been defined as the “Bradford Approach” which places a high priority on appraisal skills development (Randell, 1994). This approach is outlined in Fig. 13.1 whichidentifies the linkages betweeninvolving,developing, rewarding and valuing people at work..13.2.3 Historical Development of AppraisalThe historical development of performance feedback has developed from a range of ap proaches.Formal observation of individual work performance was reported in Robert Owens’s Scottish factory inNew Lanarkin the early 1800s (Cole, 1925). Owen hung over machines a piece of coloured wood over machines to indicate the Super intendent’s assessment of the previous day’s conduct (white forexcellent, yellow, blue and then black for poor performance).The twentieth centuryled to F.W. Taylor and his measured performance and the scientific management movement (Taylor, 1964). The 1930sTraits Approaches identified personality and performance and used feedback using graphic rating scales, a mixed standard of performance scales noting behaviour in likert scale ratings.This was used to recruit and identify management potential in the field of selection. Later developments to prevent a middle scale from 5 scales then developed into a forced-choice scale which forced the judgement to avoid central ratings.The evaluation also included narrative statements and comments to support the ratings (Mair, 1958).In the 1940s Behavioural Methods were developed. These included Behavioural Anchored Rating Scales (BARS); Behavioural Observation Scales (BOS); Behavioural Evaluation Scales (BES); critical incident;job simulation. All these judgements were used to determine the specific levels of performance criteria to specific issues such as customer service and rated in factors such asexcellent,average or needs to improve or poor.These ratings are assigned numerical values and added to a statement or narrative comment by the assessor. It would also lead to identify any potential need for training and more importantly to identify talent for careers in linemanagement supervision and future managerial potential.Post1945 developed into the Results-oriented approaches and led to the development of management by objectives (MBO). This provided aims and specific targets to be achievedand with in time frames such as pecific sales, profitability,and deadlines with feedback on previous performance (Wherry, 1957).The deadlines may have required alteration and led to specific performance rankings of staff. It also provided a forced distributionof rankingsof comparative performance and paired comparison ranking of performance and setting and achieving objectives.In the 1960s the developmentof Self-appraisal by discussion led to specific time and opportunity for the appraisee to reflectively evaluate their performance in the discussion and the interview developed into a conversation on a range of topics that the appraise needed to discuss in the interview. Until this period the success of the appraisal was dependent on skill of interviewer.In the 1990s the development of 360-degree appraisal developed where information was sought from a wider range of sources and the feedback was no longer dependent on the manager-subordinate powerrelationship but included groups appraising the performance of line managers and peer feedback from peer groups on individual performance (Redman and Snape, 1992). The final development of appraisal interviews developed in the 1990s with the emphasis on the linking performance with financial reward which will be discussed later in the paper.13.2.4 Measures of PerformanceThe dilemma of appraisal has always to develop performance measures and the use of appraisal is the key part of this process. Quantitative measure of performance communicated as standards in the business and industry level standards translated to individual performance. The introduction of techniques such as the balanced score card developed by Kaplan and Norton (1992).Performance measures and evaluation included financial, customer evaluation, feedback on internal processes and Learning and Growth. Performance standards also included qualitative measures Which argue that there is an over emphasis on metrics of quantitative approach above the definitions of quality services and total quality management.In terms of performance measures there has been a transformation in literature and a move in the 1990s to the financial rewards linked to the level of performance.The debates will be discussed later in the paper.13.3 Criticism of AppraisalsCritiques of appraisal have continued as appraisal shave increased in use and scope across sectors and occupations. The dominant critique is the management framework using appraisal as an orthodox technique that seeks to remedy the weakness and propose of appraisals as a system to develop performance.This “orthodox” approach argues there are conflicting purposes of appraisal (Strebler et al, 2001). Appraisal can motivate staff by clarifying objectives and setting clear future objectives with provision for training and development needs to establish the performance objective. These conflicts with assessing past performance and distribution of rewards based on past performance (Bach, 2005:301).Employees are reluctant to confide any limitations and concerns on their current performance as this could impact on their merit related reward or promotion opportunities(Newton and Findley, 1996:43).This conflicts with performance as a continuum as appraisers are challenged with differing roles as both monitors and judges of performance but an understanding counsell or which Randell(1994)argues few manager shave not received the raining to perform.Appraisal Manager’s reluctance to criticise also stems from classic evidence fromMcGregor that managers are reluctant to make an egative judgement on an individual’s performance a si t could be demotivating,leadto accusationsoftheirown supportand contributiontoindividual poor performance and to also avoid interpersonal conflict (McGregor, 1957).One consequence of this avoidance of conflict is to rate all criterion as central and avoid any conflict known as the central tendency.In a study of senior managers by Long neckeretal.(1987),they found organisational politics influenced ratings of 60 senior executives.The findings were that politics involved deliberate attempts by individuals to enhance or protect self-interests when conflicting courses of action are possible and that ratings and decisions were affected by potential sources of bias or inaccuracy in their appraisal ratings (Longeneckeret al., 1987).There are methods of further bias beyond Longenecker’s evidence. The political judgements andthey have been distorted further by overrating some clear competencies in performance rather than being critical across all rated competencies known as the halo effect and if some competencies arelower they may prejudice the judgment acrossthe positive reviews known as the horns effect (ACAS, 1996).Some ratings may only cinclude recent events and these are known as the recency effects. In this case only recent events are noted compared to managers gathering and using data throughout the appraisal period .A particular concern is the equity of appraisal for ratings which may be distorted by gender ,ethnicity and the ratings of appraisers themselves .A range of studies in both the US and UK have highlighted subjectivity in terms of gender (Alimo-Metcalf, 1991;White, 1999) and ethnicity of the appraise and appraiser(Geddes and Konrad, 2003). Suggestions and solutions on resolving bias will be reviewed later.The second analysis is the radical critique of appraisal. This is the more critical management literature that argues that appraisal and performance management are about management control(Newton and Findley, 1996;Townley, 1993). It argues that tighter management control over employee behaviour can be achieved by the extension of appraisal to manual workers, professional as means to control. This develops the literature of Foucault using power and surveillance. This literature uses cases in examples of public service control on professionals such a teachers (Healy, 1997) and University professionals(Townley, 1990).This evidence argues the increased control of public services using appraisal as a method of control and that the outcome of managerial objectives ignores the developmental role of appraisal and ratings are awarded for people who accept and embrace the culture and organizational values . However, this literature ignores the employee resistance and the use of professional unions to challenge the attempts to exert control over professionals and staff in the appraisal process (Bach, 2005:306).One of the different issues of removing bias was the use of the test metaphor (Folgeretal.,1992).This was based on the assumption that appraisal ratings were a technical question of assessing “true” performance and there needed to be increased reliability and validity of appraisal as an instrument to develop motivation and performance. The sources of rater bias and errors can be resolved by improved organisational justice and increasing reliability of appraiser’s judgement.However there were problems such as an assumption that you can state job requirements clearly and the org anization is “rational” with objectives that reflect values and that the judgment by appraisers’ are value free from political agendas and personal objectives. Secondly there is the second issue of subjectivity if appraisal ratings where decisions on appra isal are rated by a “political metaphor”(Hartle, 1995).This “political view” argues that a appraisal is often done badly because there is a lack of training for appraisers and appraisers may see the appraisal as a waste of time. This becomes a process which managers have to perform and not as a potential to improve employee performance .Organisations in this context are “political” and the appraisers seek to maintain performance from subordinates and view appraises as internal customers to satisfy. This means managers use appraisal to avoid interpersonal conflict and develop strategies for their own personal advancement and seek a quiet life by avoiding censure from higher managers.This perception means managers also see appraisee seeks good rating and genuine feedback and career development by seeking evidence of combining employee promotion and pay rise.This means appraisal ratings become political judgements and seek to avoid interpersonal conflicts. The approaches of the “test” and “political” metapho rs of appraisal are inaccurate and lack objectivity and judgement ofemployee performance is inaccurate and accuracy is avoided.The issue is how can organisations resolve this lack of objectivity?13.3.1 Solutions to Lack of Objectivity of AppraisalGrin t(1993)argues that the solutions to objectivity lies in part with McGregor’s (1957) classic critique by retraining and removal of “top down” ratings by managers and replacement with multiple rater evaluation which removes bias and the objectivity by upward performance appraisal. The validity of upward appraisal means there moval of subjective appraisal ratings.This approach is also suggested to remove gender bias in appraisal ratings against women in appraisals (Fletcher, 1999). The solution of multiple reporting(internal colleagues, customers and recipients of services) will reduce subjectivity and inequity of appraisal ratings. This argument develops further by the rise in the need to evaluate project teams and increasing levels of teamwork to include peer assessment. The solutions also in theory mean increased closer contact with individual manager and appraises and increasing services linked to customer facing evaluations.However, negative feedback still demotivates and plenty of feedback and explanation by manager who collates feedback rather than judges performance andfail to summarise evaluations.There are however still problems with accuracy of appraisal objectivity asWalker and Smither (1999)5year studyof 252 managers over 5 year period still identified issues with subjective ratings in 360 degree appraisals.There are still issues on the subjectivity of appraisals beyond the areas of lack of training.The contribution of appraisal is strongly related to employee attitudes and strong relationships with job satisfaction(Fletcher and Williams, 1996). The evidence on appraisal still remains positive in terms of reinvigo rating social relationships at work (Townley,1993)and the widespread adoption in large public services in the UK such as the national health Service (NHS)is the valuable contribution to line managers discussion with staff on their past performance, discussing personal development plans and training and development as positive issues.One further concern is the openness of appraisal related to employee reward which we now discuss.13.3.2 Linking Appraisals with Reward ManagementAppraisal and performance management have been inextricably linked to employee reward since the development of strategic human resource management in the 1980s. The early literature on appraisal linked appraisal with employee control (Randell, 1994;Grint, 1993;Townley, 1993, 1999) and discussed the use of performance related reward to appraisals. However therecent literature has substituted the chapter titles employ ee “appraisal” with “performance management”(Bach, 2005; Storey, 2007) and moved the focus on performance and performance pay and the limits of employee appraisal. The appraisal and performance pay link has developed into debates to three key issues:The first issue is has performance pay related to appraisal grown in use?The second issue is what type of performance do we reward?and the final issue is who judges management standards?The first discussion on influences of growth of performance pay schemes is the assumption that increasing linkage between individual effort and financial reward increases performance levels. This linkage between effort and financial reward increasing levels of performance has proved an increasing trend in the public and private sector (Bevan and Thompson, 1992;Armstrong and Baron, 1998). The drive to increase public sector performance effort and setting of targets may even be inconsistent in the experiences of some organizational settings aimed at achieving long-term targets(Kessler and Purcell,1992;Marsden, 2007). The development of merit based pay based on performance assessed by a manager is rising in the UK Marsden (2007)reported that the: Use of performance appraisals as a basis for merit pay are used in65 percent of public sector and 69 percent of the private sector employees where appraisal covered all nonmanagerial staff(p.109).Merit pay has also grown in use as in 1998 20% of workplaces used performance related schemes compared to 32% in the same organizations 2004 (Kersley et al., 2006:191). The achievements of satisfactory ratings or above satisfactory performance averages were used as evidence to reward individual performance ratings in the UK Civil Service (Marsden, 2007).Table 13.2 outlines the extent of merit pay in 2004.The second issue is what forms of performance is rewarded. The use of past appraisal ratings as evidence of achieving merit-related payments linked to achieving higher performance was the predominant factor developed in the public services. The evidence on Setting performance targets have been as Kessler (2000:280) reported “inconsistent within organizations and problematic for certain professional or less skilled occupations where goals have not been easily formulated”. There has been inconclusive evidence from organizations on the impact of performance pay and its effectiveness in improving performance. Evidence from a number of individual performance pay schemes report organizations suspending or reviewing them on the grounds that individual performance reward has produced no effect in performance or even demotivates staff(Kessler, 2000:281).More in-depth studies setting performance goals followed by appraisal on how well they were resulted in loss of motivation whilst maintaining productivity and achieved managers using imposing increased performance standards (Marsden and Richardson, 1994). As Randell(1994) had highlighted earlier, the potential objectivity and self-criticism in appraisal reviews become areas that appraisees refuse to acknowledge as weaknesses with appraisers if this leads to a reduction in their merit pay.Objectivity and self reflection for development becomes a weakness that appraises fail to acknowledge as a developmental issue if it reduces their chances of a reduced evaluation that will reduce their merit reward. The review of civil service merit pay (Makinson, 2000)reported from 4 major UK Civil Service Agencies and the National Health Service concluded that existing forms of performance pay and performance management had failed to motivate many staff.The conclusions were that employees found individual performance pay divisive and led to reduced willingness to co-operate with management ,citing managerial favorites and manipulation of appraisal scores to lower ratings to save paying rewards to staff (Marsden and French, 1998).This has clear implications on the relationship between line managers and appraises and the demotivational consequences and reduced commitment provide clear evidence of the danger to linking individual performance appraisal to reward in the public services. Employees focus on the issues that gain key performance focus by focusing on specific objectives related to key performance indicators rather than all personal objectives. A study of banking performance pay by Lewis(1998)highlighted imposed targets which were unattainable with a range of 20 performance targets with narrow short term financial orientatated goals. The narrow focus on key targets and neglect of other performance aspects leads to tasks not being delivered.This final issue of judging management standards has already highlighted issues of inequity and bias based on gender (Beyer, 1990; Chen and DiTomasio, 1996; Fletcher, 1999). The suggested solutions to resolved Iscrimination have been proposed as enhanced interpersonal skills training are increased equitable use of 360 degree appraisal as a method to evaluate feedback from colleagues asthis reduces the use of the “political metaphor”(Randell, 1994;Fletcher, 1999).On measures linking performance to improvement require a wider approach to enhanced work design and motivation to develop and enhance employee job satisfaction and the design of linkages between effort and performance are significant in the private sector and feedback and awareness in the public sector (Fletcher and Williams, 1996:176). Where rises be in pay were determined by achieving critical rated appraisal objectives, employees are less self critical and open to any developmental needs in a performance review.13.4 ConclusionAs performance appraisal provides a major potential for employee feedback that could link strongly to increasing motivation ,and a opportunity to clarify goals and achieve long term individual performance and career development why does it still suffers from what Randell describes as a muddle and confusion which still surrounds the theory and practice?There are key issues that require resolution and a great deal depends on the extent to which you have a good relationship with your line manager . Barlow(1989)argued `if you get off badly with your first two managers ,you may just as well forget it (p. 515).The evidence on the continued practice of appraisals is that they are still institutionally elaborated systems of management appraisal and development is significant rhetoric in the apparatus of bureaucratic control by managers (Barlow, 1989). In reality the companies create, review, change and even abolish appraisals if they fail to develop and enhance organisational performance(Kessler, 2000). Despite all the criticism and evidence the critics have failed to suggest an alternative for a process that can provide feedback, develop motivation, identify training and potential and evidence that can justify potential career development and justify reward(Hartle, 1997).译文：绩效考核的困境Peter Prowse and Julie Prowse摘要本文旨在用绩效考核方法来解决绩效管理的困境。
绩效考核国外研究文献
绩效考核国外研究文献1. 引言绩效考核作为管理领域的重要工具，被广泛应用于各个行业和组织中。
国内外学者对绩效考核的研究也已有多年历史，为组织和管理者提供了许多有益的启示和指导。
本文将介绍一些国外的绩效考核研究文献，以期为读者提供一些对绩效考核的新思路和理念。
2. 文献一：《The Balanced Scorecard: Measures that Drive Performance》这篇文章由国外知名学者 Robert S. Kaplan 和 David P. Norton 合著，于1992年发表。
文章提出了平衡计分卡（Balanced Scorecard）作为一种新的绩效考核工具。
平衡计分卡综合了财务、顾客、内部流程、学习与成长等不同维度的考核指标，从而使组织能够全面衡量绩效，推动绩效改进。
文章详细介绍了平衡计分卡的设计与实施，并通过实证案例验证了其有效性。
3. 文献二：《Employee Performance Management: A Solution-Focused Approach》这篇文章由美国学者 Robert Van Haverbeke 在2010年发表。
文章探讨了以解决方案为导向的员工绩效管理方法。
相比传统的问题导向方法，解决方案导向方法更加注重发现和发展员工的潜力和优势，通过激励和支持员工的成长，提升整体绩效。
文章还强调了管理者的角色转变和积极心理学在绩效管理中的应用。
4. 文献三：《Performance Appraisal: A Strategic Tool for Improving Employee Productivity and Organizational Effectiveness in Service Organizations》这篇文章由英国学者 Tom Redman 在1993年发表。
文章研究了绩效考核在服务型组织中的应用。
作者通过调研和案例分析，探讨了绩效考核对员工生产力和组织效能的影响，并提出了一套适用于服务型组织的绩效考核方法和策略。