In summarizing results from a comprehensive review of the performance appraisal literature, James Smither concludes that:
Appraisals and feedback should focus on performance (not merely on underlying traits). Performance dimensions and standards should be specific and communicate to employees what is expected of them. Raters are not asked to provide a single rating in a broad area like “planning.” Instead, there should be separate ratings concerning several aspects of planning, such as quality, quantity, timeliness, cost-effectiveness, interpersonal impact, or need for supervision. The expectations of external and internal customers should help determine what is considered timely, cost effective, high quality, and so on.
Smither and many other performance appraisal experts propose comprehensive systems for the collection and analysis of performance outcomes. They also recommend timely feedback of results from these analyses. Our critics of performance appraisal systems, Coens and Jenkins, believe that this focus on performance outcomes may eliminate the need for any other kind of performance appraisal.
Conclusions
Much of the opposition to this seemingly obvious strategy of assessing overall performance in an organization comes from those who believe that performance appraisal should be sensitive to the unique needs of the employee and should be developmental in nature. An exclusive focus on outcomes seems too mechanistic and impersonal. There is another key factor, however, that makes these intention-focused appraisal (IFA) systems seem very humane. An IFA system minimizes the need for position power in an organization, while maximizing the alignment of employee activities with the intentions of the organizational. Employees are not given arbitrary assignments by their supervisors.
Rather, the outcomes that they are to achieve within a specific period of time have been identified through a broad-based, interactive process—such as the one described in Chapter Four (Chartering). IFA programs have been shown to be very effective in serving many of the organizational functions listed at the start of this chapter—notably personnel decisions (Function One), team building (Function Four), equitable treatment (Function Seven), and, of course, broad-based organizational accountability (Functions Three, Six, and Eight).
