Performance ManagementEssay Preview: Performance ManagementReport this essay1. Introduction2. Definition of concepts2.1 Performance appraisal2.2 Work engagement2.3 Job satisfaction3. Elements or characteristics of an effective performance appraisal system3.1 Description of the five elements or characteristics of an effective appraisal system and the practical measures linked to them4. Evaluation of the “effective performance appraisal systems” questionnaire4.1 Elements revealed on the questionnaire4.2 Elements not revealed on the questionnaire5. Evaluating the companies we work for with the “effective performance appraisal systems questionnaire”6. The link between the effectiveness of a performance appraisal system, work engagement, job satisfaction and intention to quit – A literature review6.1 Link between the effectiveness of a performance appraisal system and work engagement6.2 Link between the effectiveness of an appraisal system and job satisfaction6.3 Link between the effectiveness of a performance appraisal system and intention to quit7. The link between the effectiveness of a performance appraisal system, work engagement, job satisfaction and intention to quit – An empirical glance8. Executive Summary9. ReferencesAnnexure A: Performance appraisal system questionnaire1. IntroductionThe main aim of this assignment is to discuss performance appraisal system and its correlation with the attitudinal outcomes, viz: work engagement, job satisfaction and intention to quit. The focus of the initial part of the assignment is on the definitions of these four concepts and characteristics of an effective performance appraisal system. Furthermore, the “effective performance appraisal systems questionnaire” that has been completed by individual members of the study group is analysed based on the salient themes, pointing out problems with performance appraisal systems as well as the level of compliance in our environment.
Secondly, a literature review is conducted in order to find the link between the effectiveness of a performance appraisal, work engagement, job satisfaction and intention to quit. Here reference is made on our own groups levels of work engagement, job satisfaction and intention to quit in relation to the effectiveness of the performance appraisal system that the group is exposed to. Three charts drawn from the average scores obtained from every individual member of the group are plotted on the Y-axis (performance appraisal system) and X-axis (work engagement, job satisfaction and intention to quit). The individual performance appraisal systems scores on the Y-axis are then correlated with the corresponding outcomes on the X-axis. The trends depicted on each of the three charts are analysed in order to reveal the relationship between the Y-axis and the X-axis. The assignment is concluded with an executive summary which briefly outlines how the entire project was executed.
The summary of the assessment was then combined in a new evaluation for the second study which was initiated and validated as part of a cross-sectional, cross-sectional study in which two groups of individuals had completed a 2–3 hour performance survey to gather data on their performance, their intentions and their job satisfaction. The outcome was a question like, “To what extent are you satisfied with your work experience?”, followed by the answer to a question like “How likely are you to become independent when paid, employed or working?” The results are considered after analysis of both scores on the X-axis and on the Y-axis.
In our analysis we found that in order to compare the effectiveness of the performance appraisal system with the effectiveness of work engagement, work engagement, job satisfaction and intention to quit, the individual’s performance was weighted to reflect their level of work engagement, job satisfaction and intentions to quit. Overall, the overall results of a 2–3 hour performance evaluation indicated a positive relationship between the work engagement index with a job satisfaction and job satisfaction. However, the results of a cross-sectional and cross-sectional study in which two groups of individuals completed 2–3 hour working and working tasks to assess their work engagement and work satisfaction indicated a negative relationship. The results demonstrated more negative effects when work engagement was more negatively related to activity and intention to quit. The results were similar even when a person has received a more positive evaluation of their work performance.
On the basis of our data and qualitative analysis (Mentor et al. 2013) there were no differences in the use of work engagement, job satisfaction and intent to quit as compared to a group of individuals who had achieved a low score for any of the 3 tasks. However, by excluding individual performance scores or performance measures as part of the performance appraisal system, we were able to detect an overall difference between people who scored higher for work engagement, job satisfaction and intention to quit as compared to the people only receiving a low score for any particular performance measure or with the more positive effects of participation in an organization, working within the context of the activities. Thus, in conclusion, both measures were positively correlated with work engagement.
One of the main finding of our research is the general consistency of results. Many studies of individuals and groups have also shown that the individual’s performance is evaluated differently in order to predict their results. For instance, an assessment of how well a person performs as a group is usually an analysis of whether their results for that same individual differ from the performance of all members of the same group (i.e., who are equal in performance and what percentage of the population is equally or separately capable of performing in similar tasks). This may help to differentiate between groups and individuals. This has resulted in an identification of which performance indicators are more important than others (Farrell et al. 2002; Hernández et al. 2012). The results shown here do however help to distinguish between individuals and groups.
The results also suggest that we may be able to measure individual performance differently based on some factors such as the work engagement and goal setting (in particular, the work engagement index vs. the objective measurement). This may, in turn, help to increase the understanding of the individual in order to evaluate the individual more effectively in practice.
There are many other factors that influence whether results are a predictor of performance. Specifically, individual performance appraisal is a performance indicator that can predict a person’s career outcome and will influence her/his work performance. Moreover, the more significant the individual’s score on the first three performance measures of an individual’s work performance, the higher the likelihood they are likely to achieve the same outcome as their team leader in the workplace environment (McDermott et al. 2010). For instance, individuals who are generally more satisfied but who work in a more structured group often have higher performance on job satisfaction and/or intentions to quit. Conversely, group members perform more well on many of the indicators
2. Definition of conceptsThis section provides three definitions of each of the following four concepts based on the available literature: performance appraisal, work engagement, job satisfaction and intention to quit. A comprehensive definition of each of the concepts is provided at the end of the three definitions of each concept.
2.1 Performance appraisal2.1.1 Performance appraisal: First definition/descriptionPerformance appraisal is defined as a “method by which the job performance of an employee is evaluated, generally in terms of quality, quantity, cost and time” (Ahmed, Hussain, Ahmed & Akbar, 2010: 62).
2.1.2 Performance appraisal: Second definition/descriptionOther authors (Swanepoel, Erasmus & Schenk, 2008: 369) defines performance appraisal “as a formal and systematic process by means of which job relevant strengths and weaknesses are identified, observed, measured, recorded and developed”, the primary purpose being to improve the individual performance of an employee.
2.1.3 Performance appraisal: Third definition/descriptionAccording to Gerber, Nel & Van Dyk (1998:169), “Performance appraisal system is defined as the process of identifying, measuring and developing human performance. Performance appraisal systems must not only accurately measure how well an employee is performing a job, but they must also contain mechanism for reinforcing strengths, identifying deficiencies and feeding such information back to employees so can improve such performance.”
2.1.4 A comprehensive definition of performance appraisalPerformance appraisal can be defined as a process of evaluating an employees job performance (Ahmed, et al., 2010) with the purpose of identifying, measuring and improving areas of employees performance (Swanepoel, et al., 2008) that are linked to the attainment of organisational objectives. The evaluation is done in accordance with agreed standards. The results of the performance appraisal will provide a feedback related to where performance improvements are needed.
2.2 Work engagement2.2.1 Work engagement: First definition/descriptionMichael, Christian, Garza & Slaughter (2011: 89) describe work engagement “as connoting high levels of personal investment in the work tasks performed on a job”.
2.2.2 Work engagement: Second definition/descriptionDe Lange, De Witte, & Notelaers (2008: 202) refers to work engagement as “a positive affective-motivational state of fulfilment that is characterized by vigour, dedication and absorption”
2.2.3 Work engagement: Third definition/descriptionThirdly, Attridge (2009: 383) provided a slightly different and yet succinct definition of work engagement. According to Attridge, work engagement