Appraisal outcomes are used to recognize the shoddier performers who may require some form of counseling, or in extreme cases, relegation, discharge or reduction in pay.
Performance appraisal engages an assessment of real against preferred performance. It also assists in assessing different factors which manipulate performance. Managers need to plan performance growth approaches in a planned way for each employee. Managers should keep the objectives of the organization in mind and plan at best possible exploitation of all accessible resources, including financial. Performance appraisal is a multistage procedure in which communication plays a significant part.
(i) Essay appraisal method: The evaluator writes a short essay providing an evaluation of the strengths, weaknesses and potentials of the employee. In order to do so impartially, it is essential that the evaluator knows the employee well and should have interrelated with the employee. The time taken and contents of the essay differ between evaluators, essay ratings are complicated to evaluate.
(ii) Graphic rating scale: A graphic scale evaluates a person on the eminence of his or her work (average; above average; outstanding; or unsatisfactory). Graphic scales seem basic in creation; they have a function in an extensive assortment of job responsibilities and are more reliable and reliable in comparison with essay appraisal.
(iii) Field review method: To overcome the evaluator linked unfairness, essay and graphic rating techniques can be joined in an orderly evaluation procedure. In the field review method, 'an associate of the HRM staff convenes with a small group of evaluators from the supervisory units to talk about each rating, thoroughly recognizing areas of inter evaluator difference.' Field review evaluation is considered applicable and dependable, it is time consuming.
(iv) Forced choice rating method: The forced-choice rating method does not engage conversation with managers unlike the field review method. This method has numerous differences; the most common is to compel the evaluator to choose the good and bad fit statement from a group of statements. These statements are subjective or attained in advance to evaluate the worker. The score or weights allocated to the individual statements are not exposed to the evaluator so that she or he cannot support any employee. In this way, the evaluator favoritism is mostly abolished and related standards of performance develop for an objective. This method is of little worth wherever performance appraisal interviews are carried out.
(v) Critical incident appraisal method: In this technique, a manager explains significant confrontations, giving particulars of both constructive and unconstructive performance of the employee. These are then talked about with the employee. The conversation focuses on authentic behavior rather than on personality. This technique is well suitable for performance evaluation