Institutionalization and Evaluation

Author(s):  
Thomas Packard

When all changes have been approved and implemented, steps must be taken to create mechanisms that will institutionalize the changes, to ensure that they become part of the normal culture and operating systems of the organization. This will involve changes to policies and procedures and perhaps staff training. Job descriptions and performance appraisal systems may need to be modified to support the new systems. These processes should not be seen as static, but should be monitored and assessed for adjustments and continuous improvement. A good evaluation of a change process can be useful to show improvements to stakeholders, such as boards, policymakers, community members, funding organizations, and others. Having staff see vivid examples of the success of something that was probably very demanding of their time and maybe their psyches should give them some satisfaction as well as more optimism about their future in the organization.

2003 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 45-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Devi Akella

This paper examines whether the concept of learning organizations is a myth and if it is possible to intertwine workplace democracy with profitability. Theoretically, learning organizations have the capacity to achieve the goals of socialists, i.e., worker participa- tion, employee empowerment, and full profit sharing amongst members at all levels of the organization. This paper draws upon various power discourses present in manage- ment and social sciences literature and empirical data gathered from two case studies of professional accounting firms to examine whether the notion of democratic knowledge generating environments is realistic. According to Lukes' and Gramsci (1971), it is possible to shape the cognitions, perceptions, and preferences of individuals to shape and control the interests of one group over the others. Foucault (1977) discusses the various mechanisms through which such form of power can be implemented. He also develops Bentham's panopticon, the examination process, and the system of time-tables followed in schools as modern surveillance techniques like meetings, training programmes, induction schemes, culture programmes, and performance appraisal systems. This paper uses a critical methodology with its elements of “critical perspective” and “deconstruction” to analyse the interview data gathered from two professional accounting firms. The analysis reveals the following: The learning organizations adopt the concepts of learning environments and workplace democracies and egalitarian and cooperatively minded firms to seek the cooperation and support of their employees so that the firms are able to innovate and create learning continuously to survive and meet the demands of today's business environments. The organizations believe that by linking the fulfilment of the self-actualized needs of the organizational employees with the objectives of the management, a common unified direction could be achieved. The management in these contemporary knowledge companies focus on creating such conditions which enable organizations to achieve their own objectives. The control is exercised through various surveillance techniques like meetings, training schemes, hierarchical structure, etc., under the external pretence of employee democracy and empowerment. However, the manage- ment fails to successfully mould the subjectivity of its employees. Even though the employees are aware of the management's corporate regime and its unfairness, they do not overtly resist or attack the management because they realize that their long-term career growth is linked to the survival of the management's regime. Therefore, they overtly support the management's policies, goals, and objectives and consciously uphold the banner of “socialistic models” and “employees' paradises.” In other words, it is a sort of compromise between management and its workers relegating knowledge creating companies as pseudo democracies.


Author(s):  
Tanya Du Plessis ◽  
Annelize Van Niekerk

Orientation: Managers often have negative attitudes towards performance appraisal because of its problematic nature, which is influenced by political and social contextual factors. These negative attitudes lead to reduced employee support, inaccurate performance appraisal ratings and, consequently, negative employee perceptions of the performance appraisal process. This state of affairs necessitates a deeper understanding of the factors influencing managers’ attitudes towards performance appraisal.Research purpose: The purpose of this research was to gain a deeper understanding of the factors that influence managers’ attitudes towards performance appraisal.Motivation for the study: Previous research has confirmed the importance of performance appraisals in organisations. However, managers’ dislike of and aversion to performance appraisal impact negatively on the effectiveness of performance appraisal systems and ultimately the development and performance of employees.Research design, approach and method: An interpretivist qualitative study was adopted, utilising naïve sketches and in-depth interviews to collect data from eight managers, purposively selected. The data were analysed by using Tesch’s descriptive data analysis technique.Main findings: This study revealed that performance appraisal is fundamentally an uncomfortable and emotional process for managers, which results in their adopting defensive attitudes. Because of many uncertainties, managers do not always display the ability or readiness to conduct performance appraisals. The organisational context might place the individual manager in a position to distort employee ratings, which in turn negatively influences that manager’s attitude.Practical and managerial implications: This study provides insight into the present-day experience of managers in respect of performance appraisal and highlights the factors that influence their attitudes.Contribution: The insight gained from this research into the factors impacting on the attitude of managers towards performance appraisals can assist organisations to better support and empower such managers to be more effective in their approach when conducting performance appraisals.


2001 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 226-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aharon Tziner ◽  
Kevin R. Murphy ◽  
Jeanette N. Cleveland ◽  
Geoff P. Roberts‐Thompson

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 270-275
Author(s):  
Thomas A. Stetz ◽  
Todd L. Chmielewski

As industrial–organizational (I-O) psychologists and longtime employees, we have developed and implemented appraisal systems and have been subjected to and have subjected others to appraisals. We have thus viewed performance appraisals from all angles, seeing the good, the bad, and the downright ugly. We believe that all of the points discussed by Adler et al. (2016) about retaining or eliminating performance ratings have merit and address the realities of the current state of affairs in performance appraisal practice and research. However, as Wiese and Buckley (1998) point out, organizations survived quite well for centuries without formal appraisal systems, which raises the question, “Why do formal performance appraisal systems exist?” One inescapable yet surprisingly undiscussed reason is that it is a legal and/or regulatory mandate for 4,185,000 U.S. federal government employees (Office of Personnel Management, 2015a). Eliminating performance ratings for these workers would literally require an act of Congress.


2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 69-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dagmar Špalková ◽  
David Špaček ◽  
Juraj Nemec

Abstract Managing and measuring performance became an important part of administrative reforms motivated by the New Public Management ideology. However, a badly implemented system designed for measuring and managing performance may distort the behaviours of actors. The goal of this paper is to outline the preliminary picture of the current situation of performance management generally and particularly of performance appraisal at the level of the Czech local and regional self-governments. The presented data, despite the fact that our field research covers only a non-representative samples of the “best” self-government bodies, show first that performance and quality management is not a neglected area in the Czech Republic. Its practice is rather decentralized, and the central government focuses on methodical support and coordination rather than on being strict and requiring certain tools to be implemented. The core problems revealed by the interviews are that the implementation of new instruments is usually based on a trial-and-error approach in its beginnings and that the implementation is award- and project-driven. Our preliminary data clearly indicate that the performance-appraisal situation is even more problematic - they indicate that performance-appraisal systems are introduced in only a limited number of self-government authorities. The set of criteria used in the evaluation is problematic, and the objectives of the performance appraisal are unclear for managers. As a general rule, a performance-appraisal system is not directly linked with implemented performance management and especially not with a payment system.


2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 173-180
Author(s):  
Taskina Ali

This present paper focuses on the performance appraisal practices of local private organizations in Bangladesh. Here, the researchers found that, almost all the organizations have formal performance evaluation systems. Though there is variation in their methods, frequency of occurrence and parties involved in evaluation system. In terms of method majority (16%) of the organizations prefer Management by Objective (MBO) method. Concerning the frequency of performance appraisal 69.23% local organizations evaluate their employees annually. It is also observed that majority of the employees are satisfied with present performance appraisal systems. The researchers also recommend a comparative analysis between the performance appraisal practice of local private business enterprises of Bangladesh and performance appraisal practice of multinational business enterprises.


2019 ◽  
Vol 164 (4) ◽  
pp. 701-713
Author(s):  
Kostas Amiridis ◽  
Bogdan Costea

AbstractThis article examines how new types of performance appraisal reconfigure everyday personal relationships at work. These systems deploy smartphone technologies to be used continuously by individuals to rate each other. Our aim is to show, in concrete terms, how these practices claim to configure a democratic space where individuals are liberated to express their views about each other’s work. On the contrary, we argue that by being placed in continuous confrontation with each other’s ratings, the genuine space for democratic contestation, for the establishment of a genuine community, as well as for critique and dissent is—paradoxically—narrowed down. The first section of this article explores the context in which managerialism has become consolidated at the centre of neo-liberal politics in a dialogue with some of Mouffe’s and Rancière’s arguments. We use Rancière’s concept of “policing” to understand how managerial techniques subvert genuine democratic spaces, modes of participation and expression. Using performance appraisal systems as an example, the second part of the article provides a critical investigation which shows how managerialism intervenes at the very roots of possible democratic engagement and undermines dissent in subtle ways.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document