Research Paper on:
Employee Appraisal Methodologies

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
has done well, or hasnt met expectations, will or wont be getting a raise, will or wont be keeping their job, and so on. These evaluations are dreaded by  everyone, managers and employees alike, yet there is really no other way to measure employee performance, and a company must know how its people are doing so that it can  reward good performers, counsel those who are lagging a bit, and perhaps (unfortunately) let "problem children" go. In this paper, well take a look at several aspects of performance appraisals,  including how theyre conducted, what traditional methods are, what newer methodologies are being devised, and how such interviews should be conducted. Performance Appraisals - A Necessary Evil? Are  performance appraisals necessary? Most people say so, but some critics argue theyve outlived their usefulness (Bhote, 1994). No less an authority than Edwards Deming, the "guru" of Total  Quality Management, says they dont work: "While a majority of organizations today still use it as a one-way feedback mechanism ... and as a metric for the [employees] merit  pay and promotion, performance appraisals have ... proven unsatisfactory in either capacity" (Bhote, 1994). Even worse, they carry with them a great many negative effects, including demoralization, "increased competition  instead of teamwork and encouragement of short-term performance at the expense of long-term commitment" (Bhote, 1994). Instead of the one-on-one ordeal of the performance evaluation as currently practiced, Deming  believes companies would be better off by gradually implementing other methods, including the 360-degree appraisal and team evaluation (Bhote, 1994). Deming was fierce in his condemnation of traditional  evaluation methods, calling them "management by fear" and saying they "discourage risk taking, build fear, undermine teamwork, and pit people against each other for the same rewards" (Bhote, 1994).