公共部门绩效评论外文翻译文献

合集下载

公共部门绩效评论外文翻译文献

公共部门绩效评论外文翻译文献4-1 公共部门绩效评论外文翻译文献(文档含中英文对照即英文原文和中文翻译)译文：公共部门中的绩效悖论一、引言现在，国家投入了比以往任何时候都要多的注意力、时间和金钱在公共部门的绩效衡量和评价上（经济合作与发展组织［的绩效衡量和评价上（经济合作与发展组织［OECD OECD OECD］］，19961996；；Pollitt & Bouckaert ，2000；p.87；Power ，1997）。

基于结果的管理是各级公共部门一整天的话题，从地方、区域、国家，甚至前国家。

学校和大学，地方政府，其他行政组织，发展援助机构（非政府组织和国际非政府组织），和组织，世界银行都参与绩效结果上的数据和信息制造，如果可能的话，也包括对绩效结果的影响。

上的数据和信息制造，如果可能的话，也包括对绩效结果的影响。

Power Power Power（（19941994，，19971997，，20002000）甚至提到“审计爆炸”或“审计的社会”）甚至提到“审计爆炸”或“审计的社会”。

新公共管理领域的信徒将一个高度优先事项归于计量产出和成果。

他们旨在根据这种理想信息基础上的新政策和管理活动，使得政策的执行更有效率和效力。

但是，评价研究表明，很多试图引进基于结果的管理方式最后仍然不成功（例如Leeuw & Van Gils, 1999, 荷兰研究述评）。

不过，衡量产出、成果、和评价活动的需要在政治家和行政人员发表的改善政府工作表现的声明中仍然是一个重要的组成部分。

员发表的改善政府工作表现的声明中仍然是一个重要的组成部分。

下面，我们将表明以下观点：公共部门产出计量的增加会导致某些意想不到的后果，的后果，不仅可能会废止公共部门绩效的结论，不仅可能会废止公共部门绩效的结论，不仅可能会废止公共部门绩效的结论，也会消极地影响这个绩效。

也会消极地影响这个绩效。

我们我们将通过一些不同的例子表明，公共部门的一些特征在发展和使用绩效指标之后还会适得其反。

绩效评估中英文资料外文翻译文献

绩效评估中英文资料外文翻译文献绩效评估在组织管理中起着重要的作用，它帮助机构确定员工的工作绩效，以便提供具体的反馈和制定相应的奖励和激励措施。

为了进一步深入了解绩效评估的相关内容，本文提供了一些中英文资料的外文翻译文献。

1. 文献标题：《绩效评估：理论与实践》英文标题："Performance Evaluation: Theory and Practice"摘要：该文献探讨了绩效评估的理论基础和实际应用，介绍了不同的绩效评估方法和工具，并探讨了评估结果对员工激励和组织发展的影响。

2. 文献标题：《绩效评估的关键成功因素》英文标题："Key Success Factors in Performance Evaluation"摘要：该文献分析了绩效评估的关键成功因素，包括目标设定、反馈机制、评估标准和评估者的素质等。

研究结果可以帮助机构提高绩效评估的有效性和准确性。

3. 文献标题：《绩效评估的最佳实践》英文标题："Best Practices in Performance Evaluation"摘要：该文献介绍了绩效评估的最佳实践，包括定期评估、360度评估、绩效目标的设定和沟通等方面。

这些实践可以帮助机构建立有效的绩效评估制度，以实现组织发展的目标。

4. 文献标题：《绩效评估的技术支持》英文标题："Technological Support for Performance Evaluation"摘要：该文献介绍了利用技术手段支持绩效评估的方法和工具，包括绩效管理软件、在线评估平台和数据分析工具等。

这些技术支持可以提高绩效评估的效率和准确性。

这些外文文献提供了关于绩效评估的理论基础、实践经验和最佳实践，可以为机构设计和实施绩效评估方案提供有益的参考。

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。

绩效评价绩效考核工具外文文献翻译(节选)

中文3100字，2000单词，1.1万英文字符出处：Kipchumba T B, Yano K L. Perceived Usefulness of the 360-Degrees Appraisal Tool and Its Usage in Performance in Nakuru, Kenya[J]. Journal of Emerging Trends in Economics & Management Sciences, 2014, 5.原文Perceived Usefulness of the 360-Degrees Appraisal Tool and Its Usage in Performance in Nakuru, KenyaKipchumba, Tarus Benjamin; Yano, Kuto LukaAbstractThe study examined the perceived usefulness of the 360 degrees appraisal tool and the extent of its usage in performance in Municipal Council of Nakuru, Kenya. A survey research design was applied because it was an intensive descriptive and holistic analysis of Municipal Council of Nakuru as a single entity. The study targeted employees from 8 departments with a total population of 1062 employees but it targeted 282 respondents which was 26.6% of the total population. Stratified sampling technique was used in arriving at strata on the basis of departments for employees. To arrive at specific respondents among employees, purposive sampling technique was used. The data obtained was coded and analysis was done using central tendency, bar graphs, percentages and Chi-square. It was revealed that 360 degrees as an appraisal tool is adopted by the Council and it has improved its performance. The Chi-square tests carried out revealed that there is a significant relationship between use of 360 degrees and organization performance and perceived usefulness. The study recommended the need to educate employees more on the importance of 360 degrees appraisal tool and encourage them to participate fully in development and implementation process. The findings and recommendations of the study are also important to the management when planning for performance appraisal sessions as well as in reviewing individual performance.Keywords: perceived usefulness, 360-degrees appraisal tool, usage, performance, nakuru, KenyaINTRODUCTIONThe 360°review, also referred to as 360°performance assessments or multi-rater feedback, is a method and a tool that provides employees feedback from their peers, co-workers, clients, those who are direct reports, and direct supervisors, thereby offering multiple perspectives of the employee's overall job performance. Most 360°feedback tools include the employee's self-review; hence the "full-circle" meaning behind the name. The results are tabulated and shared with the employee. Ideally, this type of assessment helps the employee gain a better understanding of her/his skills and behaviours as they relate to the organization's mission, values, goals and vision. Additionally, this feedback is geared towards assisting each employee understand her or his strengths and weaknesses, and can contribute insights into areas of work that may need professional development. The feedback is viewed as useful in defining the skills and behaviours needed to exceed client/customer expectations. The results from 360°review are often used by the person receiving the feedback to plan their training and development. The results are also used by some organizations when making promotional or pay decisions. The 360- degree feedback process offers a unique opportunity for employees at all levels to discover how their work colleagues perceive and are impacted by their behaviour. As one commentator describes the 360- degree feedback, "It is like having a full length portrait, a profile, a close up shot in the face and a view from the back all in one!" (Heather, 2012).IMPORTANCE OF 360-DEGREES PERFORMANCE TOOLWhereas there might be some negative feelings associated with traditional top-down performance appraisal, there can be numerous benefits stemming from a 360-degree performance appraisal system. "The 360-degree feedback serves as a key relationship building tool that organizations can use to enhance team processes and work interrelationships" (Tornow et al., 1998, p. 85). When co-workers are open with each other and hold each other accountable for performance and productivity then the working relationships improve and the productivity will thus improve. Not only will the relationships between the workers and managers improve but as they improve and get stronger, but the employees morale will also improve. "When implemented properly, subordinate appraisal systems enhance worker job satisfaction and morale" (Benardin, 1986, p. 421).The 360-degree appraisal also can help the employee or manager discovers their own strengths and weaknesses. Through feedback employees are able to see where a co-worker excels. They can also see where the person needs to improve. "The 360 degreefeedback can have enormous power perhaps more than any other technique to bring an individual's shortcomings to his attentions and confirm that areas of perceived strengths are actual and recognized strengths" (Grote, 1996, p. 292). The depth of the 360-degree process gives it greater validity and reliability. The objectivity and the anonymity of the raters will help to defend the organization. "Numerous advantages of using multiple raters have been cited ... improved defensibility of the performance appraisal program from a legal standpoint" (Harris &Schaubroek, 1988, p. 43).Another benefit of 360-degree appraisal is the relative low cost of implementation. Compared to bringing in an appraisal company from the outside or developing an assessment centre approach, the cost is really quite minimum. "The costs of installing, maintaining, and monitoring a subordinate appraisal system for managers is minimal relative to the costs incurred in with developing an in house assessment centre or contracting out for the service" (Bernardin, 1986, p. 433). So there are numerous reasons an organization should think about employing a 360-degree appraisal programme. In addition to having an effect on employee performance and productivity, the process can improve managerial performance as well.The 360-degree performance appraisal system has the potential to positively effect on the performance and productivity of managers and supervisors. Managers need sources of appraisal additional to their superiors. "The 360-degree approach recognizes that little change can be expected without feedback and that different constituencies are a source of rich and useful information to help managers guide behaviour" (London &Beatty, 1993, p. 354). With this type of appraisal, the managers will have better morale themselves and will develop better communication skills with their subordinates as well as with their superiors. Just like the development of the employees, managers can also take advantage of the differing sources of feedback about their productivity and make positive changes. The 360-degree appraisal can help assess the strengths and weakness of the manager. If a manger has been made aware of some of his own managerial shortcomings ... his ability to communicate should be improved and his faith in his own managerial abilities should be strengthened (Rowland, 1970, p. 303).The employees can also benefit when a manager has undergone a 360-degree appraisal. Organizational commitment and productivity may increase when the employees feel the 360-degree appraisal taken is seriously. Ideally, subordinates will start noticing the manager's behaviour more as a result of the 360- degree appraisal. "Upward feedback leads to subordinates perceiving positive changes in the boss's subsequentbehaviour" (Reilly et al., 1996, p. 600). A possible result of the manager's changed behaviour is a stronger working relationship between the manager and the subordinates. Just as the validity of 360- degree appraisals is higher than traditional top-down appraisal concerning subordinates, the validity is higher with managers as well. "Subordinate appraisals have shown a higher validity for predicting managerial success than assessment centre performance" (Schultz &Schultz, 1994, p. 170). Atwater et al. (1995, p.36) have found that "input from subordinates was effective in eliciting modest changes in managerial behaviour."London and Beatty (1993), while agreeing that mixing development and appraisal purposes is problematic, conclude "using feedback for development only can impede the effective use of the results unless there is a requirement for the manager to be responsible to the feedback" (p. 367). Despite the relatively simple technology in using the 360- degree, its costs for the company are potentially much higher than expected. First, there seems to be some agreement that 360s are not a one-shot deal, but must be used consistently over several years (DeNisi &Kluger,2000; Snader, 1997). Second, using the simpler structured instruments that Centre for Creative Leadership puts out ($195 per assessee) can defeat the developmental purposes because the feedback and interpretation is too difficult (i.e., comparative results are complicated by a variety of situation-specific factors (Ghorpade, 2000). On the other hand, constructing a custom instrument that is specific to the performance requirements for the company demands significantly more time and money to develop. Finally, the best way to overcome the interpretation of results problem is to invest in consultants or at least invest time from support people to deliver and consult with target managers.Purposes of 360-Degrees Performance ToolThe tool is expected to serve a number of purposes simultaneously. Noe et al. (1997, p. 198-199) and Swanepoel (2003, p. 372-373) and Schofield (1996) agree on the following purposes of the 360-degrees appraisal tool:Strategic PurposesNoe et al. (1997, p. 198) and De Cenzo et al. (1996, p. 322) concur that a performance appraisal system should link employee activities with the organization's goals. This calls for flexibility in the system in order for it to be adjusted to the changing goals and strategies of an organization. Many companies do not use performanceappraisal to communicate its objectives. This is supported by Noe et al. (1997, p. 198-199) regarding the purposes of performance appraisal where nothing was included about the extent to which it is tied to the company's strategic objectives. This is also in support of what Schofield (1996) lists establishing and monitoring objectives and targets, maintaining equity in treatment of staff, facilitating succession planning and monitoring the effectiveness of personnel policies as strategic.Administrative PurposesAdministrative purposes, according to Swanepoel (2003, p. 372), and supported by Noe et al. (1997, p. 199), concern the use of performance data to make reward decisions, placement decisions, promotion and retrenchment and for validating selection procedures. Schofield (1996) lists examples of this as providing feedback on individual performance, reviewing salary, conditions of service and other rewards, providing a basis for promotion, dismissal, probation, and avoiding trouble through meeting legal or political needs.Developmental PurposesThis third purpose is utilized to develop employees who are both effective and ineffective at their jobs. It provides individual employees feedback on their strengths and weaknesses and how to improve future performance (Noe et al., 1997, p. 199; Swanepoel, 2003, p. 373). Swanepoel (ibid.) adds that it can focus on the organizational level as well by: "facilitating organizational diagnosis and development by specifying performance levels and suggesting overall training needs; providing essential information for affirmative action programmes; promoting effective communication within the organization through ongoing interaction between superiors and subordinates." This is supported by Schofield (1996) who lists the purposes as: providing a basis for self-evaluation; diagnosing of training and career development needs, and discovering individual and department potential as some of the developmental purposes of performance appraisal.Documentary PurposesDe Cenzo et al. (1996, p. 322) suggest that the final purpose of performance appraisal is the issue of documentation. They also suggest that the evaluation system support the legal needs of the organization. It is important to have documentation to support that any personnel action taken was appropriate.Critical Issues on the Usefulness of the 360- Degrees AppraisalMany organizations are faced with various challenges as they endeavour to achieve their mission and vision. Human Resource provides the much needed skills and expertise to accomplish various tasks. It is important for management to ensure that they have motivated workforce who enjoy job satisfaction thus gain maximum quality productivity. The human inclination to judge the appraisal process can create serious motivational, ethical and legal problems in the workplace. Without a structured appraisal system, there is little chance of ensuring that the judgments made will be lawful, fair, defensible and accurate. There is a basic human tendency to make judgments about colleagues at work as well as about an appraisal, which seems, is inevitable and universal. In the absence of a carefully structured system of appraisal, people tend to judge the work performance of others, including subordinates, naturally, normally and arbitrarily. The Human Resource department designs a performance appraisal method in order to check what the competencies are and how they are displayed by the employee during his/her job. Then a comparison is made between the competencies that the direct boss of the employee was looking for and the competencies being displayed by the employee in his/her job. This provides the gaps and missing links which should be addressed by training. The degrees to which these competencies are required in performing a job also matter a lot.译文360度绩效评价工具的感知有用性，及其在肯尼亚的纳库鲁地区绩效考核方面的应用摘要这项研究调查了360度评价工具的感知有用性，及其在纳库鲁的市政委员会绩效考核方面的使用程度。

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。

政府绩效评估英文文献 3

Performance evaluation usually also known as performance appraisal or "performance" is the enterprise borne by each worker in the work of the application of science and qualitative and quantitative methods, workers and the actual results of the enterprise value of the contribution or assessment and evaluation. It is an important corporate personnel management, strong corporate governance is one of the means. The purpose of performance evaluations by each individual assessment improve the efficiency, and eventually realize the goal of enterprise. In the enterprise for performance evaluation work, we need to do a lot of related work. First, the need for performance evaluation of the meaning of scientific explanation, the entire organization of a unified understanding.绩效估计常常又称为绩效评估，业绩评价也称为绩效考核或者绩效。

绩效考核中英文对照外文翻译文献

绩效考核中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)绩效考核与员工满意摘要：绩效考核通常也称为业绩考评或“考绩”，是针对企业中每个职工所承担的工作，应用各种科学的定性定量的方法，对职工行为的实际效果及其对企业的贡献或价值进行考评。

绩效考核作为一种有效的企业管理手段，在企业管理中发挥着非常重要的作用，是企业人力资源管理的核心。

本文对当前我国绩效考核中存在的问题做了详细的分析。

针对问题，文章提出从绩效考核的各个角度进行控制，从而确保绩效考核高效到位，最终发挥人力资源管理的作用。

关键词：绩效考核问题分析建议21世纪是知识经济时代，随着经济竞争的加剧，人们越来越认识到人力资源是当今时代经济发展的第一资源。

随着人力资源管理在中国企业的发展的日趋成熟,绩效管理作为人力资源管理的重要组成部分在企业内部的地位也越发重要。

绩效考核是人力资源管理的核心问题之一，是保障并促进企业内部管理机制有序运转，实现企业各项经营管理目标所必须进行的一种管理行为。

美国组织行为学家约翰·伊凡斯维其认为，绩效考核可以达到以下八个方面的目的：为员工的晋升、降职、调职和离职进行评估；组织对员工的绩效考评的反馈；对员工和团队对组织的贡献进行评估；为员工的薪酬决策提供依据；对招聘选择和工作分配的决策进行评估；了解员工和团队的培训和教育的需要；了解员工和团队的培训和教育的需要；对工作计划、预算评估和人力资源规划提供信息。

绩效考核是企业管理员工的有效手段,也是主要途径,在企业管理中具有不可替代的核心地位。

但是,现在有很多企业的绩效考核与企业的发展策略相脱节,企业绩效考核体系也只是一个空壳而已,根本达不到对员工进行考核的目的,甚至还适得其反,导致人才流失。

因此，对企业的绩效考核工作进行分析，找出存在的问题，并解决这些问题成为企业势在必行的工作。

1当前绩效考核中存在问题及原因分析1.1对绩效考核的认识不充分（1）认为绩效考核只是人力资源部的事。

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。

外文翻译--政府绩效：教训和挑战-精品

中文4350字外文文献翻译原文：Government Performance: Lesson and Challenges This article concentrates on attempts by OECD countries to introduce performance-based or results-based budgeting and management. The need to enhance public sector performance has become more urgent as governments face mounting demands on public expenditure, calls for higher quality services and, in some countries, a public increasingly unwilling to pay higher taxes. Performance budgeting and performance management seek to move the focus of budgeting, management and accountability away from inputs towards results, i.e. better value for money. Drawing on data from the OECD/World Bank Budget Practices and Procedures Database, the article explores the trends and country approaches (different phases, various objectives), discusses accountability to the public (including external performance auditing), and recognises the importance of context and a whole-of-government approach, in particular for changing the behaviour of key actors and motivating politicians to use performance information. The limitations and tensions of performance budgeting and performance management are also discussed, as well as problems of measurement and the efficient use of performance information.A great deal of rhetoric has surrounded the introduction of performance management and budgeting.Supporters claim that it has the capacity to transform governments. However, it is important that this reform should not be seen as a panacea and that governments have realistic expectations about what it can achieve and the time needed to reach these objectives.Even countries that have been using this approach for over 15 years continue to struggle with issues of measurement; this is especially the case for outcomes. A key challenge for all countries is obtaining good quality information which is valid, reliable, and timely.Numerous challenges can be encountered including setting clearobjectives, finding accurate measures of performance and having good systems of data collection.Setting objectives:For some agencies or programmes,even setting clear objectives can be a problem when there is no agreement on what the mission is,or there are diverse missions, overlapping and fragmented programmes, and stakeholders with different interests.Finding accurate measures of performance:The design of measures is made difficult by finding measures for specific activities,and by relating what an agency or programme actually contributes towards achieving specific outcomes.Output and outcome measures each present a different set of challenges (OECD, 2002b). Outcomes are technically more difficult to measure; they are complex and involve the interaction of many factors, planned and unplanned. Also, there are problems with time lag issues and in some cases the results are not within the control of the government. Outcomes, however, have a strong appeal for the public and politicians. Most countries appear to have adopted a combination of outputs and outcomes.Establishing and maintaining systems of data collection:To ensure quality there needs to be a process by which data collected are verified and validated.However, setting up and maintaining these systems can be both complex and costly.As discussed in Section 6, the auditing of performance information can help to improve standards and provide some legitimacy for the reported results. It is especially challenging to assure the quality of the data when agencies are dependent on third parties to provide the information.This is particularly a problem in federalist systems (Curristine, 2002).Performance targets help to clarify performance expectations for an organisation for a given time period.Countries, however, continue to struggle with the issues of target level and numbers. There are problems with setting targets too low and/or too high.Setting targets too low means that agencies are not challenged to improve performance. Setting them too high, while it can motivate organisations, also creates unrealistic expectations and situations in which agencies will fail (Perrin, 2002). It takes time to get the right level and to get the comparative data to realise that targetsare set at too high or too low a level.Too many targets: There is also an issue about how many targets to have.Too many targets create information overload and make it difficult to select priorities; too few targets create distortion effects.Again it takes time to get a realistic balance. Several countries have started out with a large number of targets and subsequently reduced them. For example, in the United Kingdom when performance agreements for departments were first introduced as part of the comprehensive spending review in 1998, there were in total 600 targets across government.By the time of the revised spending review in 2002, that number had been reduced to 130 targets (H.M. Treasury, 2004).Avoiding distorting behaviour:This is a challenge for all governments.Possible perverse effects include goal distortion – that is, organisations and managers focusing on a few specif ic indicators and targets, usually the most achievable or “saleable”,at the expense of the overall objectives or programme.In extreme cases of goal distortion, agencies or staff, under pressure to meet targets, may deliberately present misleading information.In many OECD countries, the objective of introducing performance into the budget process is to improve budgetary decision making and to act as an incentive for agencies to improve performance. Most countries, however, continue to struggle with this approach. As discussed above, one of the key issues is obtaining good quality and reliable performance data. Briefly, other challenges include establishing some link between financial information and performance information.This is particularly challenging for outcome measures. In many countries there are also problems with the structure of the budget and accounting issues.Budgets tend to be structured in accordance with institutional and functional boundaries and not according to results categories.Also if there is no system of cost recording, it is difficult to relate true costs to results.Getting the right mix of incentives:This is particularly important when countries use performance information in resource allocation. A fundamental question is whether financial rewards should be given for good performance and badperformance should be punished and, if so, how.Punishing failure by removing resources creates a clear signal to other agencies that performance is considered important. However, it does not help address the underlying causes of poor performance. Indeed in some cases failure to meet targets can be the result of lack of funding or other resources.While rewarding good performance is intuitively appealing,it does not take into account cost issues and government priorities.In a climate of budgetary saving,a question is whether to give additional funding to an agency, especially one that is not a government priority.In either case,there is always the danger that linking results to financial resources can create incentives to distort and cheat in presenting information.One of the most difficult challenges is to create a results-based culture within organisations and throughout government. To achieve change in behaviour and culture across government requires a whole-of-government approach and the creation of the right mix of incentives that takes account of how the actions of key actors influence each other.Most countries continue to struggle with achieving change in the behaviour of public servants and politicians; this is a long-term process.Obtaining and maintaining the support of managers and employees within government organisations is crucial.This reform has the potential to improve the focus on organisational goals, to provide managers with better information for decision making on programmes, budgets and policies, and to improve internal reporting and controls.Gaining these benefits is challenging because it requires technical as well as cultural change.In technical terms it can be difficult to measure what an agency does and to link organisational objectives to individual goals.It is important to obtain the buy-in of front line employees;this can be facilitated by the right mix of formal and informal incentives and controls. Obtaining the strong support of the organisational leadership and managers can be facilitated by giving them the necessary flexibility to achieve goals. Without this flexibility,managers will have the responsibility for achieving targets without the ability to deliver, and no one wants to be held accountable for targets that are not within his/her control.Within the context of a government-wide approach, if and how the performanceinformation is used by politicians and the Ministry of Finance can create incentives which impact on how managers behave.If performance information is required but not used by leaders or managers in decision making, there is a danger of it becoming a burden on organisations in terms of cost of information systems and staff time. The provision of this information, in addition to the requirements of the traditional control mechanisms, can interfere with getting the job done. If this happens, then performance management and budgeting can become a distraction, a distortion or an expensive paper exercise rather than a means to transform organisations and an essential part of good management.Obtaining and maintaining the support of politicians:As discussed in Section 7, this is a key challenge facing reformers. The support of politicians in the legislature and the executive helps to reinforce the need for change and to push reform,although it is particularly difficult to obtain the support of politicians in the legislature.Issues of horizontal and vertical co-ordination:Many goals and outcomes cut across government organisations and involve the work of many agencies.While some OECD countries have established cross-governmental horizontal goals and targets, it is proving difficult to achieve co-ordination across departments and to hold them accountable for results.At a vertical level there is an issue with different actors wanting the same information for diverse purposes; their informational needs are not the same.Managing expectations:Realistic expectations are needed both about what can be achieved by this reform and how long it will take. A long-term approach and persistence are needed:it takes time to overcome the technical issues and to change the behaviour of public servants and politicians.The performance of government can be improved through a focus on results in policy advice, central and departmental management processes, and parliamentary and public accountability. It is important to first identify the relative priority of these areas in a particular country. What a government should do is different in each case.The majority of OECD countries are implementing performance management and performance budgeting, although the extent and the approaches vary widelyacross countries.The introduction of performance management and budgeting appears to be an important and enduring innovation in public management.It is clearly a strong device for horizontal priority setting, policy alignment and cost analysis. These reforms have improved transparency through the provision of more information on government performance to the public.However, some initial hopes have been too ambitious.Most countries continue to struggle with changing the behaviour of public servants and politicians.This is a long-term process. To achieve change in behaviour and culture across government requires a whole-of-government approach and the creation of the right mix of incentives and controls (formal and informal) and an understanding of the systems and how the actions of key actors influence each other.There is no clear pattern of input controls being lightened as performance indicators are strengthened. This raises issues about balancing accountability and flexibility. Whatever the accountability systems in place, they need to be balanced against the freedom required by managers to do their jobs.Critics of the traditional system of accountability argue that rules had become ends in themselves,that accountability stressed compliance, and that hierarchical structures hindered efficiency and performance. Thus, the critics emphasised the needs to relax input controls.There are obvious dangers in relaxing input controls too soon after the introduction of output and outcome measures. However, there are also dangers in failing to relax these controls sufficiently, with the possible effect that output and outcome measures become an expensive paper exercise,with little impact on managers’ ability to improve performance. If the system has too many restrictions and managers do not have enough freedom to improve performance, then failure to relax input controls can result in inefficiency.The common assumption that the performance information that is useful for the executive would also serve the legislature remains unproven. With a few exceptions, performance reporting has been neither welcomed nor used by OECD member country legislatures in their oversight and decision making. Performance measuresand targets are only one source of information about performance, and they are no substitute for the independent, in-depth qualitative examination of the impact of policies that evaluations can provide.The combined experiences of OECD countries highlight the importance of taking a long-term approach and having realistic expectations about the capacity of performance management and budgeting to improve performance and accountability.A long-term approach and persistence are needed to achieve the necessary technical and behavioural changes that this lever requires.Finally, from a wider perspective, the design of cross-government performance interventions needs careful analysis and consideration of options.Broadly, these interventions are: leadership; strategic planning; performance management; the inclusion of targets and measures in the formal budgeting, management and oversight processes;and policy evaluation.Each has different strengths and limitations.There is a danger of governments becoming fixated on a particular formal solution to the problem of improving performance.The performance orientation of public management is here to stay. It is essential for successful government. Societies are now too complex to be managed only by rules for input and process and a public-spirited culture.The performance movement has increased formalised planning, reporting and control across many governments. This has improved the information available to managers and policy makers.But experience shows that this can risk leading to a new form of bureaucratic sclerosis. More attention needs to be given to keeping performance transaction costs in check, and to making optimal use of social and internalised motivators and controls.Source：Teresa Curristine. Government Performance：Lessons and Challenges[J]. OECD Journal on budgeting，2005，5(1)：127-151.译文：政府绩效：教训和挑战本文将集中介绍经济合作与发展组织国家引入的，以绩效结果为基础的预算编制和绩效管理。

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。

绩效管理外文翻译外文文献中英翻译

(完整word版)绩效考核外文文献及翻译

绩效考核外文文献及翻译外文文献1.Performance appraisals - purpose and how to make it easier Performance 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 lot more productive too. 2.Appraisals, social responsibility and whole-person development There 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 so cial 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 thennaturally 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 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 V AK 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 appropriate It 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's a fundamental process (16)the list goes on People 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 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 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 appraisals Aside 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。

政府绩效评估英文文献-3

绩效考核英文版论文

1 What is the Performance Evaluation?Performance evaluation is a formal staff appraisal system, which is through systematic methods and principles to evaluate and survey the staff’s working in the office on the behavior and the achievement. Performance evaluation is a management communication activity between managers and employees .Performance evaluation results can directly affect the pay adjustments, bonuses, duties of staff movements and many other vital interests.2 Purposes of Performance EvaluationPerformance evaluation serves a number of purposes in organization:(1) To provide the basis for the promotion, demotion, transfer and separation of the staff;(2) To receive feedback of the staff’s performance evaluation from organization;(3) To evaluate the contribution of the staff and team to the organization;(4) To provide basis for the employee’s salary decisions;(5) To evaluate the decision of the recruitment selection and the assignment;(6) To understand the needs of the team or staff’s trainin g and education;(7) To evaluate the effect of the train and staff’s career planning assessment;(8) To provide information of the work plan, budget and human resources planning.3 Role of Performance EvaluationThere is a series of roles of performance evaluation.(1) It can provide an important reference for the decision.(2) It can provide the important support for organizational development.(3) It ca n provide staff with a side of “good mirror”.(4) It can determine the work of paid staff.(5) It can provide the basis for the evaluation of potential employees and related personnel provide a basis for adjustment.4 Methods of Performance Evaluation1) Written essaysWritten essays method is the staff write a report to reflect the completion of their work, knowledge and skills.2) Critical incidentsIt was a method to make the performance evaluation which through the work of the best or the worst case analysis, to identify the work behavior for this event3) Graphic rating scalesIn this method, a set of performance factors, such as quantity and quality of work, depth of knowledge, cooperation, loyalty, attendance, honesty and initiative, are listed the evaluator then goes down the list and rates each on incremental scales through they don't provide the depth of information that essays or critical incidents do, they are less time-consuming to develop and administer.4) Behavior of anchorBehavioral anchored rating method is specific and measurable focus on work behavior, the numerical assessment of the project to the rate, will work to assess the behavior and target contrast.5) Multiperson comparisonMultiperson comparison evaluate one individual's performance against one or more others .It is a relative rather than an absolute measuring device. There are three most popular comparisons: group order ranking, individual ranking and paired comparisons.5 Potential ProblemsThere are all kinds of potential crises and problems in the performance evaluation process. In particular, people often make the following errors:(1) Generous error, as a supervisor or manager's assessment of people, some may unconsciously exaggerate the assessment, usually make high scores to their own subordinate, which appeared positive generous error. Others can be unconsciously underestimate the performance, which appear negative generous error.(2) Halo effect, the evaluator assess the characteristics of people for an impact assessment over the assessment of other characteristics, so there is halo effect.(3) Similarity of the error, some evaluator unconsciously assess the nature and characteristics of those similar to themselves are more favorable, so it will make the differ for the assessment results(4) Political orientation, a number of evaluators to assess the process as a political opportunity, according to their preferences so openly to reward or punish employees.6 Overcoming the ProblemA mistake for the above, although it can not guarantee that will come to accurate performance evaluation, but the following suggestions will help make the process more objective and fair.(1) Emphasis on behavior rather than the characteristics. Many good characteristics often considered relevant to the performance. But in fact, it has little or nothing to do. Such as loyalty, initiative, courage, reliability, self-expression and other characteristics, has the intuitive appeal. But the question is, are the people receive high qualities on the evaluation of individuals, their performance must be better than those who are low? Think of th e loyalty, people’s views may be totally different. This also led to the characteristics of evaluation, assessment’s internal consistency were very low.(2) Through the act of the diary recording, diary can help people to evaluate the information in organizational memory better. The diary method can reduce the evaluation error and halo error generous, because the assessment methods reward evaluator to focus on the behavior and performance, rather than the characteristics of the staff.(3) Using multiple evaluators, the more evaluators increased, the possibility of receive the more accurate information will be increased. If there are 10 executives, 9 of them think that he is well, only one think he is bad, then we can make a discount for the bad evaluation. Therefore, the staff the often act within organization to get the number of evaluators’ a variety of evaluations, will more likely to receive valid and reliable evaluation.(4) Selective evaluation, the evaluators make evaluations only in their own area.If the evaluator evaluates those familiar dimensions in the right position to, it will improve the consistency between assessments, and improve the effectiveness of the evaluation process.(5) Training evaluation, if you can not find good evaluator, then one option is to bring them to you, through the training to improve the effect of the evaluator.(6) Provides exemption procedures to employees, using the exemption procedures in assessing, the concept of fair treatment of employees can be improved. But when the exemption procedures as a part of evaluation system, employees will have a more positive response to the assessment process to obtain a more accurate assessment of the results, employees also left a higher expression of intent in the organization.7 My viewFor my opinion, performance evaluation is the process of dialogue between manager and staff, intended to help employees to improve their performance capabilities, so that the staff's efforts is consistent with the company's vision and goals, so that employees and enterprises will be in parallel.Nowadays, the performance evaluation program is not perfect, there is this or that problem, we need to explore continuously in practice and make more perfect, with the company and staff needs’ evaluation program, and thus obtain more accurate evaluation result.。

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。

绩效审计与公共管理改革外文翻译

外文文献翻译译文原文Performance Audit and Public Management Reform Audit is one of the oldest and most venerable state functions. The French Cour des Comptes traces its origins back to 1318; the UK National Audit Office cites 1314 as the date of its first manifestation; the Dutch Algemene Rekenkamer finds ancestors as running back to 1386.State audit thus long preceded the emergence of modern forms of democratic government. However state audit offices have made many adaptations in the course of their long history and during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries they fashioned a crucial role for themselves within the machinery of democratic accountability.On this kind of historical scale, performance audit is a very recent activity. Although more or less plausible claims can be made for the existence of performance audit-like activities back to the 1960s—or even considerably earlier—performance audit as a large-scale, self-considerably distinct practice dates mainly since the late 1970s.Performance audit represents a modern variant of audit—not the only one but, as well shall demonstrate, a challenging and fascinating one. It is distinctive to state audit and does not have a close counterpart in private-sector, commercial audit.Over almost exactly the same period as performance audit has emerged as a distinct form of audit, the government of Western Europe, North America, and Australasia have embarked upon extensive programs of public management reform. These have aimed at modernizing, streamlining, and in some cases minimizing the whole of the state apparatus. Although the details of these reform programs have varied considerably between one country and another, most of them have given a central place to the themes of decentralization and performance management. This has entailed a widespread rethinking of the balance between the autonomy and the control of public organizations. It has generated a search for mechanism and incentives will help realize these new management ideas in practice.Prima facie, it appears highly probable that there is a connection between thesetwo phenomena: on the hand the growth of performance audit and on the other the search for a new solution to the ancient governmental problem of giving autonomy yet retaining control. Y et there seems to have been little systematic investigation of what the nature of this interaction might be. One of our ambitions is to fill this gap. We begin, in the next chapter, by looking at the boundaries and definitions of performance audit, and they move directly to describe the patterns of management reform in the five countries that form the basis for our comparisons: France, Finland, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the UK. This provides the context against which later chapters and tease out the connections between the development of performance audit and the forces of management change.If the official descriptions are anything to go by, performance audit is not just a technical tool. It does not at all correspond to the traditional image of auditing as a process cent ered on ‘checking the books’ in order to see that they have been accurately and properly kept. Performance audit has a more ambitious manifesto. Its practitioners declare that they are seeking to establish whether public policies or programs or projects or organizations have been conducted with due regard to economy, efficiency, effectiveness, and good management practice. It thus brings together, in a potent new combination, the older tradition of’’ audit’ with a much more recent focus on ‘performance ‘. T he exact terms within which audit bodies undertake this activity vary from country to country and over time. So we should not rush to say exactly what ‘it’ is or isn’t, but rather should problematize and explore the concept.In that chapter we will also take a brief look at some of the many other uses to which the term ‘audit’ has recently been put, a diversification of meaning and practice that recently led one academic to write an ambitious text entitled The Audit Society. For the moment, however, it will suffice to say that sets of practices termed ‘performance audit’ or value-for-money studies’ have become central activities for an increasingly powerful group of organizations-Supreme Audit Institutions. In most democratic countries, the SAI is located near the heart of the apparatus of the state. Potentially, therefore, performance audit should be of considerable political and democratic significance. It is practiced by powerful, independent institutions and ispresented as a mode of investigation aimed at establishing whether, at what cost, and to what degree the policies, programs, and projects of government are working.Given these general characteristics, one might expect that the considerable community of scholars working in subjects such as political science, public administration, public management, and public finance and accountancy would have generated a large literature about performance audit. Surprisingly, this is not the case. One may speculate on the reasons why SAIs and, within them, performance audit have suffered relative neglect as compared with, say, various aspects of public management reform.Several reasons for the apparent disparity of interest in performance audit and public management reform suggest themselves. To begin with, public management reform has been led—or at least fronted—by politicians, for whom it is natural to make public claims that what they are doing is innovative, valuable, and successful. Furthermore, such change has generated its own supporting ‘industry’, includi ng various kinds of consultant who have taken every opportunity to propel such reform even higher up political and administrative agendas. By contrast, SAIs are single institutions—and generally rather sober ones. The bulk of their work appears to be technical and detailed and they take some pains to stand clear of party political controversy. Typically, supreme audit institutions are mentioned briefly in general textbooks which describe the institutions of government in a given country, but few books or articles have been written specifically about them. The USA, though not part of the present study, was perhaps something of an exception to this general neglect, with a certain amount of analytical literature focusing upon the General Accounting Office. Only in the last few years has the trickle of journal articles and booklets begun to gather some momentum. In the past, SAIs seldom went out of their way to publicize themselves—it is only in the last decade that most of them have begun to produce booklets and brochures for popular consumption, or to deal proactively with the mass media. Some are still cautious in these respects.Finally, there is, of course, a difference of scale. Public management reform has swept across entire public sectors, affecting ministries, executive agencies, quangos,local authorities, and other kinds of public body. SAIs, by contrast, are single organizations, seldom employing more than a few hundred staff. Thus, changes in what auditors do simply do not appear to be as important or newsworthy as changes that affect the work of tens or hundreds of thousands of public officials, and which may impact directly on citizens’ use of public services.Even if the above considerations go some way towards explaining the relative lack of media and scholarly attention given to the development of performance audit, that does not mean that such activities are insignificant. On the contrary—and as we shall show--performance audit has become the largest single activity for some SAIs and an important part of the work of all the SAIs in this study. This is a relatively recent development. Although the definition of performance audit is less than straightforward, it is probably accurate to say that, allowing for some earlier, partial precedents, its emergence as a distinct and mainstream activity dates mainly from the late 1970s and 1980s. Thus, over the last two decades, a number of SAIs have invested a considerable proportion of their resources in developing a relatively new area of activity, one that is directly focused on those issues of performance that have themselves become such a central focus of concern for modern governments.While governments have declared themselves to be intensely concerned with the ‘three Es’ (economy, efficiency, and effec tiveness) at the same time as SAIs have been developing performance audit as a way of investigating those same three Es, the connection between these two lines of activity has not been as straightforward as might at first appear. Of course, some impacts are fairly obvious. For example, a recent UK National Audit Office handbook acknowledges that performance audit has had to respond to the fact that: ‘Two thirds of government business is now carried out by agencies, outputs and delivery are more important than inputs, and there is much greater involvement of the private sector in the delivery of publicly funded programs’. This is an example of a direct influence, running from public management reform to performance audit. However, the whole picture is considerably more complicated, with direct and indirect influences running in both directions.Our aim has therefore been to study the practice of performance audit and relateit to contemporary developments in public management. We have investigated the ‘state of the art’ of performance audit and explored its links wi th the processes of management reform. In empirical terms, we have had twin foci. First, we have gathered material about public management reform in each country—this describes the context in which SAIs have developed performance audit. Much of this has necessarily been secondary data, though some of it derives from other recent work by members of our team. Second, in relation to the performance audit side of the relationship, we have conducted extensive primary research. Our main focus has been on the performance audit report and on the process that leads up to that report. Some other recent work, though conceptually sophisticated, has been limited by its reliance on a more general type of evidence. We would contend that the acid test of what performance audit ’is’ ,or is capable of, may lie more in the bedrock of individual audits than in the superstructure of what SAIs say about performance audit in general, although both types of evidence are, of course, useful in their own right.We have therefore counted, categorized, and read a large number of audit reports. In practical terms, these seemed the least unsatisfactory unit for comparative analysis. They had the advantage of being concrete, discrete, and the basis for a number of recording systems within SAIs themselves. Unfortunately, however, they also carried some disadvantages. First, not all SAIs distinguish between performance audit reports and other types of report. Second, not all performance audit reports are in the public domain. Third, there are other important performance audit ‘products’ apart from individual reports. For example, some performance audit work by the NAO takes the form of unpublished reports to departments rather than reports to the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee. The bulk of the Cour’s work on bonne gestion takes place in the form of unpublished communications with the audited bodies and the ministries, often at ministerial level. Fourth, there is very considerable variation both between and within performance audit reports. They come in different shapes and sizes in different countries, and even within the corpus of a single SAI such reports may be long or short, expensive or cheap, very broad or quite narrow in scope, etc. Indeed, these variations are one of the features we describe and comment upon.Finally, it should be pointed out that choosing a different unit of analysis would likely have yielded different insights, but at the same time, and by the same token, would probably have concealed or obscured some of the features that our focus on reports has illuminated. For example, we have encountered some difficulty in analyzing the methods used in performance audit, partly because some reports use a variety of methods within a single study while others say virtually nothing about which methods may have been adopted.In conclusion, we should say that, although this work is certainly not intended to be prescriptive, we have nevertheless thought it appropriate in the final chapter, to set out an agenda for discussion. Drawing from our descriptions and analyses, we have identified a number of issues likely to shape the future development of performance audit. In effect, these constitute a set of strategic choices, with significant implications for the roles of SAIs. Some of these issues could be clarified by further research. All of them could benefit from wider and deeper debate. Just as politics is too important to be left to the politicians, the activities of our Supreme Audit Institutions are too important to be left exclusively to auditors.Source: Christopher Pollott, Hikka Summa. Performance Audit and Public Management Reform[M], Performance or Compliance, 2009.译文绩效审计与公共管理改革审计是最古老且最庄严的国家职责之一，法国审计院的历史可以追溯到1318年。

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。

绩效考核外文翻译文献

绩效考核外文翻译文献(文档含中英文对照即英文原文和中文翻译)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 and appropriately 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 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 behaviordevelopment, 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 lot more 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 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 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 theemployment 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 V AK 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 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'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 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 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 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。

1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。

公共部门绩效评论外文翻译文献(文档含中英文对照即英文原文和中文翻译)译文：公共部门中的绩效悖论一、引言现在，国家投入了比以往任何时候都要多的注意力、时间和金钱在公共部门的绩效衡量和评价上（经济合作与发展组织［OECD］，1996；Pollitt & Bouckaert，2000；p.87；Power，1997）。

基于结果的管理是各级公共部门一整天的话题，从地方、区域、国家，甚至前国家。

Power（1994，1997，2000）甚至提到“审计爆炸”或“审计的社会”。

新公共管理领域的信徒将一个高度优先事项归于计量产出和成果。

他们旨在根据这种理想信息基础上的新政策和管理活动，使得政策的执行更有效率和效力。

但是，评价研究表明，很多试图引进基于结果的管理方式最后仍然不成功（例如Leeuw & Van Gils, 1999, 荷兰研究述评）。

不过，衡量产出、成果、和评价活动的需要在政治家和行政人员发表的改善政府工作表现的声明中仍然是一个重要的组成部分。

下面，我们将表明以下观点：公共部门产出计量的增加会导致某些意想不到的后果，不仅可能会废止公共部门绩效的结论，也会消极地影响这个绩效。

我们将通过一些不同的例子表明，公共部门的一些特征在发展和使用绩效指标之后还会适得其反。

最后，我们将就如何处理公共部门中运用绩效评估造成的问题提出一些建议。

我们认为，这个问题非常重要。

因为，尽管存在问题，绩效衡量仍对公共部门的日常运作，特别是公共支出，存在不菲的价值。

二、公共部门中的绩效考核随着行政改革的崛起，公共部门中的绩效考核得到了愈来愈多的关注（cf.power,2000）。

在上世纪80年代，大多数西方国家由于经济衰退和国际竞争加剧，逐渐引发了这种改革。

而这场改革的口号便是“新公共管理”。

它的目标是双重的：削减预算，并提高政府官僚机构的效力和效率。

为了实现后一个目标，市场型的机制，如私有化，和竞争性的招标，都被引进了公共部门。

另外，单位和部门被卖出进入准自治非政府组织。

这种例子比比皆是（对10个OECD 国家的评论，Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000）。

处于这些变化之下的实践理论是，政治家应该坚持自己的核心业务，即制定新的政策来实现（政治）的目标。

奥斯本和盖布勒（1992）的格言是“指导而不是争吵”。

根据这些新公共管理大师，政策的执行应留给市场，或者，如果这是不可能的，给（半）自治组织运作中的准市场环境（例如，竞争的学校或医院）。

这种分离的政策和管理是通过政府与实施政策的组织之间拟定的合同来提供便利的。

该合同明确什么任务将被执行，哪些代理人将会受到“奖励”。

代理人的业绩表现在绩效指标方面，如产品的数量或提供的服务。

“投入”管理因而也被倾向于注重结果的“产出”管理所取代。

类似的变化同样发生在政府官僚机构，在那里，自我管理和合同管理引入（部分）取代了分层指导。

上述变化导致公共部门采用大量私人机构技术以衡量和改善绩效，如绩效指标。

指标不仅使政治家来衡量和评价公共及私人政策执行组织的业绩，它们也增加了认定业绩的机会——行政改革的另一目标。

显然，所有这些变化都基于一个强有力的信念，即公共部门的绩效是可衡量的。

但是，正如我们下面要讨论的那样，信仰可能过于简单化（cf. Fountain, 2001）。

三、绩效悖论绩效悖论指的是绩效指标和绩效本身之间的薄弱联系（Meyer & Gupta, 1994; Meyer & O'Shaughnessy, 1993）。

这种现象是被绩效指标减少一段运行时间的趋势所引起的。

它们失去了作为绩效衡量的价值，并且不能够区分好和差的业绩。

因此，实际和报告出来的业绩之间的关系便下滑了。

绩效指标的恶化是由四个过程引起的（Meyer & Gupta, 1994, pp. 330-342）。

第一个过程被称为积极的学习，也就是说，业绩的改善时，指标失去了其检测不良业绩的灵敏度。

事实上，当指标过时时，每个人都会做得很好。

第二个进程是所谓的有害学习。

当组织或个人了解到哪些方面的业绩被衡量（哪些不被衡量）的时候，他们可以利用这些信息来操纵他们的评估。

例如，当他们把所有的努力都用到要衡量的方面时，绩效水平就上去了。

但是，总体上可能没有实际的改进，甚至可能是另一方面绩效的恶化（cf. tunnel vision）（Smith, 1995）。

第三个进程，选择，指的是以绩效高的更换绩效低下者，从而降低绩效差异。

第四，当绩效中差异被忽略时，抑制就出现了。

重要的是要认识到，矛盾的是不是业绩本身，而是有关的业绩报告。

与期望相反，指标并没有准确地报告业绩。

这可能意味着绩效比所报告的要差，但也有认为比报告要好的情况。

在后一种情况下，绩效悖论可能被认为没有坏处。

然而，在绩效评估结果是用来评价组织或个人时，出现这些不公正的制裁的情况可能会上升。

破案率下降，表明警方的绩效在不断恶化。

但是，在研究期间内，之前相比，更多的肇事者已被逮捕，起诉和惩罚，这又表明，绩效水平改进了。

Wiebrens 和Essers（1999）表明，在荷兰，犯罪模式走向了废止（国际公认的）指标。

例如，犯罪已经越来越暴力，但是指标却没有区分像重罪和轻罪这类的差别。

此外，更多的犯罪团伙由于一起犯罪被逮捕，比如破坏，这降低了刑事罪行的平均数目。

Wiebrens和Essers得出结论，这不是警方的效果不好，而是指标不好。

因此它应该被取代。

另一个绩效悖论的例子存在于关于超过代表性的事件中，它来自smith （1995）。

在英国国民健康服务中心，与会者一致认为，患者为做手术而等待的时间不得超过2年。

这些项措施似乎取得成功，因为轮候的平均时间减少了。

然而，进一步检查发现，减少是因为等待时间只有在第一次医院协商之后才开始计算，而协商被推迟，以减少等待时间。

事实上，等待时间并没有减少，只是转移了而已。

该指标没有准确地反映业绩；它报告了一个本不存在的改善。

四、公共部门中绩效悖论的发现和预防尽管大多数的读者都承认迄今为止我们已经给的例子，但是在绩效中跟踪绩效悖论仍然不容易。

它不仅可以采取许多不同的形式，也可以无意间导致一些变数，如政府的要求，需要执行的任务的要求，含糊不清或相互矛盾性质的政策目标，以及执行机构的能力。

此外，一个人往往不知道绩效悖论的存在，直到为时已晚。

因为，只要一切顺利，或看似顺利，没有必要进行干预（cf. Leeuw, 1995）。

一个爆竹厂爆炸的例子中发现，调查原因，这场灾难揭示了一系列“小”的问题，这些问题本身并不被视为是灾难性的。

例如，这个事件中明显缺乏地方和中央政府，监察局，消防部门的监督。

缺乏适当的监督，就会阻止对非法活动发生的发现。

因此，在住宅区经营的授权被不公正地无条件延长了。

当火灾在工厂的地面上发生时，社区被摧毁，人丧生。

小问题的积累变成了大问题，但显然没有任何机制或制度，以检测和避免这样的小错误的积累。

当然，当地政客被追究责任，但只能是事后。

这留给我们一个问题，即我们怎样才能检测和预防公共部门中绩效悖论的发生。

一些策略用来跟踪绩效悖论是可行的。

理想的情况下，比较实际的执行情况和报告，是最好的方式。

然而，这种比较一般很难，因为缺乏比较资料。

替代方法是：（1）使用外部来源获得的信息，如国家监察员，基层组织，和客户端小组的工作；（2）从现有的指标制定新的业绩指标，例如，一个百分比评分替代总支出或总产出；或（3）分析的考核体系。

绩效考核体系的分析将不得不把重点放到一些特征上。

首先，指标的数量是重要的，所有需要执行的任务都要求制定相应的指标。

由于很少为总绩效的有限部分制定相应指标，这便促进了绩效悖论的发生。

当指标过时却仍不改变时，这种效果就会加强。

接下来，应注意指标的制定者。

制定自己绩效指标的组织有更多的机会来操纵信息以实现自己的利益，从而引起了绩效悖论（凡泰尔，2001年）。

第三，它需要建立问责制以确定是否所有的要求都得到了满足。

如果没有，就需要知道代理人没报告的业绩及其原因。

绩效报告中的差距可以指向高于或低于绩效方面的表现然后指出绩效方面的矛盾。

最后，应该对行政和组织基础的考核体系进行调查。

公共部门绩效评估不得不将公共服务的性质用记事的方式来表现。

专业服务的方式被生产和消费，并且公共服务的方式被具有影响绩效检测的社会所重视。

在公共部门，消费者参与服务提供过程；影响产出和结果（cf. Fountain, 2001, p.58）。

此外，大部分产品是无形的。

因此，绩效指标应力求反映质量和可靠性，而不是“硬性”的产品属性。

公共服务不仅有关效率和效益，更是关于正义，公平，平等和问责制。

Fountain （2001）警告说，私人部门技术的应用，如绩效指标，不能取代，甚至可能掩盖如公共服务所提供的政治或民主成果。

McGuire（2001）探讨了一个绩效监测框架的例子，似乎考虑到了之前讨论过的一些经验。

这个框架是由生产力委员会为澳大利亚政府理事会制定的，以此为基准，来衡量教育、卫生、住房和社区服务方面的绩效（可以在.au/gsp上查到）。

该框架是澳大利亚所有政府合作制定的，它详细讨论了绩效指标的局限性，以及人类服务提供的复杂性。

它包括程序和业务指标，衡量效率（输出）和有效性（成果）以及一些不同的层面。

定量措施与服务系统的内容分析相结合。

这个COAG绩效信息被政府机构用来评估业绩，并确定需求和资源。

该框架的透明度，改善了业绩和问责制。

然而，这透明度“增加，而不是解决了公共服务分配结果方面的政治冲突”（McGuire, 2001, p. 17）。

因为政治冲突增加了问责制的机会，而这不应视为绩效评估的一种消极后果。

五、结论随着上世纪八十年代和九十年代行政改革的进行，公共部门中绩效评估的增加已经产生了几个意想不到的后果，且威胁到了看不到的绩效和绩效本身。

为了对付这些后果，绩效评估体系应该将公共部门的特殊性质考虑进去。

有争议性的绩效指标需要使用多个指标，即政策执行的不同方面（有形和无形的）和反映各方（政治家，管理人员，供资者，供应商，采购商和消费者）的利益。

此外，必须在太多和没有足够措施的压力两者之间寻求平衡点。

一些新的监督机制的增加，可能有助于打击意想不到的后果，如绩效悖论（cf. also Power, 1997）。

例如，互联网使得公共部门绩效信息可为每个人所知，这增加了作弊的代理人被抓的风险。

第二，公民宪章，开放的政府行为守则的实践和新的申诉程序，增加了不满意的客户投诉处理表现不好的组织的机会。

公共部门绩效评论外文翻译文献