Introduction
Organizations can ensure the improvement of their performance through so many ways. One such way is through performance appraisal systems with appropriate tools depending on the sections targeted for improvement. This paper aims at evaluating a performance appraisal tool based on the following; the model, the advantages and disadvantages of the models, and effectiveness of the tool in employee performance improvements. Improvement suggestions are then made based on the given information. The performance appraisal tool selected belongs to Cabell Huntington Hospital. The hospital’s management team decided on the Halogen e-appraisal tool after finding out that the hospital could no longer use the paper-based appraisal forms used before, due to the inability of most managers to complete the appraisal forms in time. Halogen software provides an easier way of evaluating employee performance for its managers but has models similar to paper-based formats (HSI a, 2009).
Cabell Huntington Hospital’s Employee Performance Appraisal Tool
Cabell Huntington hospital implemented a halogen e-appraisal healthcare system which provided them with an annual employee performance appraisal form as a performance appraisal tool. Cabell Huntington hospital’s employee performance appraisal form has used more than two models of performance appraisals. The tool has used trait scales, the narrative and critical incident models of performance appraisal as described by the Texas Association of Counties (2009).
In the trait scales model, job-related characteristics are rated against a customary scale. Cabell Huntington hospital has defined specific job-related characteristics as the pre-established scale. The characteristics include;
- Needs improvement: Employees grouped under this definition are those with performance levels below the defined standards of the hospital.
- Below expectations: An employee is rated under this definition if he or she does not meet the desired results. The employee in this case meets the required standards but has either declined performance when compared to previous performance or has reduced significantly.
- Meets expectations: This definition is similar to definition two except that the employee, in this case, lacks the appropriate skills due to inexperience. The employee meets all other performance standards but does not perform as expected according to the defined results or goals of the hospital.
- Exceeds expectations: Under this definition, an employee goes beyond the required performance standards and even shows flexibility and inventiveness. Other characteristics of the employee are; strong technical skills, interpersonal skills, and collaborative working with a major improvement in all the characteristics.
- The employee is exceptional: When an employee is highly innovative, highly productive, constantly scores high marks in relevant performance standards, promotes teamwork, produces high-quality work, and offers good leadership, then the employee is defined as exceptional. The employee also shows characteristics of active participation in community and industry-related professional groups (HSI b, 2009).
From the above ratings, it is clear that when an employee of the hospital is rated 5, then he/she is the best performing employee.
The narrative model requires writing a narrative about the employee at the end of an appraisal period (TAC, 2009). In the annual appraisal form implemented by Cabell Huntington hospital, supervisors are required to describe the contributions made by employees to specified performance categories. The supervisors must provide narrative comments that justify the ratings they offer the employees under each category (HSI b, 2009).
The other model of employee performance appraisal is the critical incident model which rates employees based on their performance after a specific period. Rating is done based on the characteristics recorded after some time. Critical incident model rates using characteristics as defined by other models of performance appraisal (TAC, 2009). In Cabell Huntington hospital, for example, the performance of employees is measured against already established characteristics as described. The critical incident model uses such kind of information collected for some time. Cabell Huntington hospital’s performance appraisal form is an annual report which means employee characteristics are observed for one year then rated (HSI b, 2009).
Advantages of the Current Models
The trait scale model is easy to prepare, it provides illustrated ratings and addresses characteristics related to a specific job. The narrative model has very minimal guidelines on the structure of the report allowing the appraiser to include a variety of performance aspects. This allows the identification of unusual or unique features of the job. The model also allows the supervisors or managers to give much thought to genuine employee performance without much dependence on ratings on a scale (TAC, 2009).
The critical incident model is more legally defensible since the actual characteristics of the employees are recorded over a specified period. Recording employee performance over some time reveals employee characteristics under different situations and provides the actual characteristics. The critical incident model provides a performance rating after a full appraisal period and is not based on a few weeks of work. Because it provides ratings of performance after a full appraisal period and the fact that it provides factual information, it makes it easy for employers or managers to justify the appraisal to the employees (TAC, 2009).
Disadvantages of the Current Models
Using a trait scale model can lead to errors hence inaccurate evaluation due to employees being rated on characteristics that are not related to their jobs, inflated ratings, and unclear definitions of levels of performances and standards required.
The narrative model is time-consuming since it required appraisers to write down comments about employees on each defined rating. It can also be influenced by personal feelings about an employee and therefore may not give accurate information about an employee’s performance. Some appraisers also have difficulty in expressing themselves (TAC, 2009).
The critical incident model encourages too close supervision of employees hence making some employees fear. When employees develop fear, the performance of the organization may be affected since the performance of an organization depends on the performance of the employees. Employees need motivation and not fear. Additionally, the critical incident model does not support daily feedback, therefore, increases the occurrence of the NIGYYSOB situation when appraisal interviews are conducted. This model is also influenced by personal feelings and appraisers can choose to record negative incidents more than positive incidents for an employee. The appraisal period required is also long and has a negative inclination towards recording representative performance (TAC, 2009).
An Effective Performance Appraisal Tool
When developing a performance appraisal tool for any program, it is important to identify a clear aim of the tool selected. In some cases, human resource managers or supervisors may want to achieve strong development in employees they work with. To do this, these managers and supervisors need a performance appraisal tool. An example of a performance appraisal tool is a program.
Managers in need of performance appraisal systems or programs must ensure that performance appraisal requirements are met. It does not necessarily mean that whenever a performance appraisal program or tool is implemented the organization will achieve success. It requires the identification of the right elements to ensure success in achieving the objective of improved performance.
According to McConnell, performance appraisal tools or systems have certain requirements that a manager should be aware of when implementing one in an organization (2004). These requirements are essential since they determine the success of the performance target.
Below is a description of the requirements of a performance appraisal system as suggested by McConnell (2004). The system must have a framework or a tool that serves the true objectives of the performance appraisal. If for example, a human resource manager decides to focus on competency appraisal, the performance tool selected should focus on the objectives that aim at measuring the ability of workers to perform their duties according to defined standards. The system should also not focus on personality but the performance of an individual employee.
Health care organizations have varied jobs and so require different approaches in performance appraisal evaluation. This requires the selection of an appropriate criterion that ensures that the characteristics of the employees being evaluated are related to the kind of work being evaluated.
Ratings used in any performance appraisal tool should be verbally justified. This means that any rating use should be justified with a written rationale. For a performance appraisal tool to be effective, the criteria used for evaluation must be related to the employee’s current job description. The employees must also be informed in advance and know the criteria that will be used in the evaluation (McConnell, 2004).
Managers also require training and knowledge about what tools and models they use for performance appraisals. Without the necessary knowledge on how to use a specific performance appraisal system, the success of such a system may not be achieved. Managers, therefore, need to be oriented in the use of performance appraisal systems and thoroughly trained on the evaluation criteria (McConnell, 2004).
An effective performance appraisal tool should be able to serve as a reference tool for the future especially when monitoring an organization’s performance progress. The tool should also have a real appraisal interview and an appropriate system’s administration (McConnell, 2004).
Effectiveness of the Performance Appraisal Tool Improving Employee Performance
Cabell Huntington hospital’s annual appraisal form serves as an appropriate tool for achieving the objectives of the hospital. It focuses on the performances and has no definition of ratings that require personal characteristics not related to performance. From the above-described models used by Cabell Huntington hospital, it is evident that the hospital’s trait scale model links characteristics of the employees being evaluated to the kind of work hence is effective in evaluating employee performance.
According to McConnell any rating used in a performance appraisal tool has to be justified (2004). Cabell Huntington hospital has defined specific ratings for the evaluation of employee performance. These ratings have to be justified by narrative comments from the supervisors and managers as indicated in the annual performance appraisal form instructions (HSI b, 2009).
Effectiveness is also measured by the amount of knowledge the employers have on the performance appraisal tool. According to Halogen Software Incorporation, Cabell Huntington hospital’s annual appraisal form provided by the company’s Halogen e-appraisal was adopted after a long time search for an appropriate tool due to a previous ineffective tool. The managers of the organization needed an evaluation tool that could accommodate job descriptions in a large and diverse organization and a system that could allow the completion of all the appraisal forms. Halogen e-appraisal provided the system that streamlined the process while the framework of the form provided the link between an evaluation tool and diverse job descriptions (HSI b, 2009). This shows that the managers of Cabell Huntington hospital knew the tool. Additionally, their current use of the performance appraisal tool shows they have what is required to use the tool for evaluation (HSI b, 2009).
Suggestions for Improvement
To avoid the case of employees being evaluated on characteristics not related to their jobs, appraisers should ensure that employees are evaluated on characteristics related to their jobs. Appraisal interviews should be conducted irrespective of the model to avoid NIGYYSOB situations. Conducting appraisal interviews consistently contributes to the identification of important characteristics that the appraisers may need to record for the final evaluation. The influence of personal feelings by the evaluation process is however not easy to eliminate since the employees have different appraisers. The appraisers can only be encouraged to be honest. Ethical standards could also be developed to guide appraisers in the evaluation process.
Conclusion
From the above-given information, it is evident that Cabell Huntington hospital’s performance appraisal tool is an effective one. The hospital’s management considered the fact that it has several job descriptions in a diverse and large organization. It, therefore, decided on implementing a tool that could link the diverse job descriptions with an appropriate evaluation tool. The performance appraisal tool, therefore, provides the organization with an effective method of evaluating employees. The organization’s performance appraisal tool also satisfies the requirements of an effective performance effective tool as described by McConnell.
Reference List
Halogen Software Inc. (HIS) (a). (2009). Modernization of Employee Performance Management System Saves Hospital Over $50,000 in the First Year. Web.
Halogen Software Inc. (HIS) (b). (2009). Sample Form -Annual Performance Appraisal. Web.
McConnell, R. C. (2004). Managing the Health Care Professional Boston, Massachusetts: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
Texas Association of Counties (TAC). (2009). Performance Appraisals. Web.