评语大全之绩效考核英文评语

绩效考核英文评语

【篇一：绩效考核外文文献及其译文】

the dilemma of performance appraisal

peter prowse and julie prowse

measuring business excellence,vol.13 iss:4,pp.69 - 77

abstract

this paper deals with the dilemma of managing performance using performance appraisal. the authors will evaluate the historical development of appraisals and argue that the critical area of line management development that was been identified as a critical success factor in appraisals has been ignored in the later literature evaluating the effectiveness of performance through appraisals.

this paper willevaluatethe aims and methodsof appraisal, thedifficulties encountered in the appraisalprocess. it also re-evaluates the lack of theoretical development in appraisaland move from he psychological approachesof analysistoamorecritical realisation ofapproaches before re-evaluating the challenge to remove subjectivity and bias in judgement of appraisal.

13.1introduction

this paper will define and outline performance management and appraisal. it will start by evaluating what form of performance is evaluated, then develop links to the development of different performance traditions (psychological tradition, management by objectives, motivation and development).it will outline the historical development of performance management then evaluate high performance strategies using performance appraisal. it will evaluate the continuing issue of subjectivity and ethical dilemmas regarding measurement and assessment of performance. the paper will then examine how organisations measure performance before evaluation of research on some recent trends in performance appraisal.

this chapter will evaluate the historical development of performance appraisal from management by objectives (mbo) literature before evaluating the debates between linkages between performance management and appraisal. it will

outline the development of individual performance before linking to performance management in organizations. the outcomes of techniques to increase organizational commitment, increase job satisfaction will be critically evaluated. it will further examine the transatlantic debates between literature on efficiency and effectiveness in the north american and the united kingdom) evidence to evaluate the hrm development and contribution of performance appraisal to individual and organizational performance.

13.2 what is performance management?

the first is sue to discuss is the difficulty of definition of performance management. armstrong and barron(1998:8) define performance management as: a strategic and integrated approach to delivering sustained success to organisations by improving performance of people who work in them by developing the capabilities of teams and individual performance.

13.2.1 performance appraisal

appraisal potentially is a key tool in making the most of an organisation’s human resources. the use of appraisal is widespread estimated that 80–90%of organizations in the usa and uk were using appraisal and an increase from 69 to 87% of organisations between 1998 and 2004 reported a formal performance management system (armstrong and baron, 1998:200).there has been little evidence of the evaluation of the effectiveness of appraisal but more on the development in its use. between 1998 and 2004 a sample from the chartered institute of personnel and development (cipd, 2007) of 562 firms found 506 were using performance appraisal in uk.

what is also vital to emphasise is the rising use of performance appraisal feedback beyond performance for professionals and managers to nearly 95% of workplaces in the 2004 wers survey (seetable 13.1).clearly the use of appraisals has been the development and extension of appraisals to cover a large proportion of the uk workforce and the coverage of non managerial occupations and the extended use in private and public sectors.

13.2.2 the purpose of appraisals

the critical issue is what is the purpose of appraisals and how effective is it ？researched and used in practice throughout

organizations? the purpose of appraisals needs to be clearly identified. firstly their purpose. randell (1994) states they are a systematic evaluation of individual performance linked to workplace behaviour and/or specific criteria. appraisals often take the form of an appraisal interview,usually

annual,supported by standardised forms/paperwork.the key objective of appraisal is to provide feedback for performance

is provided by the linemanager.the three key questions for quality of feedback:

1. what and how are observations on performance made?

2. why and how are they discussed?

3. what determines the level of performance in the job?

it has been argued by one school of thought that these process cannot be performed effectively unless the line manager of person providing feedback has the interpersonal interviewing skills to providethat feedback to people being appraised. this has been defined as the “bradford approach” which places a high priority on appraisal skills development (randell, 1994). this approach is outlined in fig. 13.1 whichidentifies the linkages betweeninvolving,developing, rewarding and valuing people at work..

13.2.3 historical development of appraisal

the historical development of performance feedback has developed from a range of approaches.formal observation of individual work performance was reported in robert owens’s scottish factory innew lanarkin the early 1800s (cole, 1925). owen hung over machines a piece of coloured wood over machines to indicate the super intendent’s assessment of the previous day’s conduct (white forexcellent, yellow, blue and then black for poor performance).the twentieth centuryled to f.w. taylor and his measured performance and the scientific management movement (taylor, 1964). the 1930straits approaches identified personality and performance and used feedback using graphic rating scales, a mixed standard of performance scales noting behaviour in likert scale ratings.this was used to recruit and identify management potential in the field of selection. later developments to prevent a middle scale from 5 scales then developed into a forced-choice scale which forced the judgement to avoid central ratings.the evaluation

also included narrative statements and comments to support the ratings (mair, 1958).

in the 1940s behavioural methods were developed. these included behavioural anchored rating scales (bars); behavioural observation scales (bos); behavioural evaluation scales (bes); critical incident;job simulation. all these judgements were used to determine the specific levels of performance criteria to specific issues such as customer service and rated in factors such asexcellent,average or

needs to improve or poor.these ratings are assigned numerical values and added to a statement or narrative comment by the assessor. it would also lead to identify any potential need for training and more importantly to identify talent for careers in linemanagement supervision and future managerial potential. post1945 developed into the results-oriented approaches and led to the development of management by objectives (mbo). this provided aims and specific targets to be achievedand with in time frames such as pecific sales, profitability,and deadlines with feedback on previous performance (wherry, 1957).

the deadlines may have required alteration and led to specific performance rankings of staff. it also provided a forced distributionof rankingsof comparative performance and paired comparison ranking of performance and setting and achieving objectives.

in the 1960s the developmentof self-appraisal by discussion led to specific time and opportunity for the appraisee to reflectively evaluate their performance in the discussion and the interview developed into a conversation on a range of topics that the appraise needed to discuss in the interview. until this period the success of the appraisal was dependent on skill of interviewer.

in the 1990s the development of 360-degree appraisal developed where information was sought from a wider range of sources and the feedback was no longer dependent on the manager-subordinate power relationship but included groups appraising the performance of line managers and peer feedback from peer groups on individual performance (redman and snape, 1992). the final development of appraisal interviews developed in the 1990s with the emphasis on the linking

performance with financial reward which will be discussed later in the paper.

13.2.4 measures of performance

the dilemma of appraisal has always to develop performance measures and the use of appraisal is the key part of this process. quantitative measure of performance communicated as standards in the business and industry level standards translated to individual performance. the introduction of techniques such as the balanced score card developed by kaplan and norton (1992).

performance measures and evaluation included financial, customer evaluation, feedback on internal processes and learning and growth. performance standards also included qualitative measures which argue that there is an over emphasis on metrics of quantitative approach above the definitions of quality services and total quality management.in terms of performance measures there has been a transformation in literature and a move in the 1990s to the financial rewards linked to the level of performance.the debates will be discussed later in the paper.

13.3 criticism of appraisals

critiques of appraisal have continued as appraisal shave increased in use and scope across sectors and occupations. the dominant critique is the management framework using appraisal as an orthodox technique that seeks to remedy the weakness and propose of appraisals as a system to develop performance.

this “orthodox” approach argues there are conflicting purposes of appraisal (strebler et al, 2001). appraisal can motivate staff by clarifying objectives and setting clear future objectives with provision for training and development needs to establish the performance objective. these conflicts with assessing past performance and distribution of rewards based on past performance (bach, 2005:301).

employees are reluctant to confide any limitations and concerns on their current performance as this could impact on their merit related reward or promotion opportunities(newton and findley, 1996:43).this conflicts with performance as a continuum as appraisers are challenged with differing roles as both monitors and judges of performance but an

understanding counsell or which randell(1994)argues few manager shave not received the raining to perform.appraisal manager’s reluctance to criticise also stems from classic evidence frommcgregor that managers are reluctant to make

an egative judgement on an individual’s performance a sit could be demotivating,leadto accusationsoftheirown supportand contributiontoindividual poor performance and to also avoid interpersonal conflict (mcgregor, 1957).

one consequence of this avoidance of conflict is to rate all criterion as central and avoid any conflict known as the central tendency.in a study of senior managers by long

neckeretal.(1987),they found organisational politics influenced ratings of 60 senior executives.the findings were that politics involved deliberate attempts by individuals to enhance or protect self-interests when conflicting courses of action are possible and that ratings and decisions were affected by potential sources of bias or inaccuracy in their appraisal ratings (longeneckeret al., 1987).

there are methods of further bias beyond longenecker’s evidence. the political judgements and they have been distorted further by overrating some clear competencies in performance rather than being critical across all rated competencies known as the halo effect and if some competencies arelower they may prejudice the judgment acrossthe positive reviews known as the horns effect (acas, 1996).

some ratings may only cinclude recent events and these are known as the recency effects. in this case only recent events are noted compared to managers gathering and using data throughout the appraisal period .a particular concern is the equity of appraisal for ratings which may be distorted by gender ,ethnicity and the ratings of appraisers themselves .a range of studies in both the us and uk have highlighted subjectivity in terms of gender (alimo-metcalf, 1991;white, 1999) and ethnicity of the appraise and appraiser(geddes and koad, 2003). suggestions and solutions on resolving bias will be reviewed later.

the second analysis is the radical critique of appraisal. this is the more critical management literature that argues that appraisal and performance management are about

management control(newton and findley, 1996;townley, 1993). it argues that tighter management control over employee behaviour can be achieved by the extension of appraisal to manual workers, professional as means to control. this develops the literature of foucault using power and surveillance. this literature uses cases in examples of public service control on professionals such a teachers (healy, 1997) and university professionals(townley, 1990).

this evidence argues the increased control of public services using appraisal as a method of control and that the outcome of managerial objectives ignores the developmental role of appraisal and ratings are awarded for people who accept and embrace the culture and organizational values . however, this literature ignores the employee resistance and the use of professional unions to challenge the attempts to exert control over professionals and staff in the appraisal process (bach, 2005:306). one of the different issues of removing bias was the use of the test metaphor (folgeretal.,1992).this was based on the assumption that appraisal ratings were a technical question of assessing “true” performance and there nee ded to be increased reliability and validity of appraisal as an instrument to develop motivation and performance. the sources of rater bias and errors can be resolved

by improved organisational justice and increasing reliability of appraiser’s judgement.

however there were problems such as an assumption that you can state job requirements clearly and the organization is “rational” with objectives that reflect values and that the judgment by appraisers’ are value free from political agendas and personal objectives. secondly there is the second issue of subjectivity if appraisal ratings where decisions on appraisal are rated by a “political metaphor”(hartle, 1995).

this “political view” argues that a appraisal is often done badly because there is a lack of training for appraisers and appraisers may see the appraisal as a waste of time. this becomes a process which managers have to perform and not as a potential to improve employee

performance .organisations in this context are “political” and the appraisers seek to maintain performance from subordinates and view appraises as internal customers to

satisfy. this means managers use appraisal to avoid interpersonal conflict and develop strategies for their own personal advancement and seek a quiet life by avoiding censure from higher managers.

this perception means managers also see appraisee seeks good rating and genuine feedback and career development by seeking evidence of combining employee promotion and pay rise.this means appraisal ratings become political judgements and seek to avoid interpersonal conflicts. the approaches of the “test” and “political” metaphors of appraisal are inaccurate and lack objectivity and judgement of employee performance is inaccurate and accuracy is avoided.the issue is how can organisations resolve this lack of objectivity?

13.3.1 solutions to lack of objectivity of appraisal

grint(1993)argues that the solutions to objectivity lies in part with mcgregor’s (1957) classic critique by retraining and removal of “top down” ratings by managers and replacement with multiple rater evaluation which removes bias and the objectivity by upward performance appraisal. the validity of upward appraisal means there moval of subjective appraisal ratings.this approach is also suggested to remove gender bias in appraisal ratings against women in appraisals (fletcher, 1999). the solution of multiple reporting(internal colleagues, customers and recipients of services) will reduce subjectivity and inequity of appraisal ratings. this argument develops further by the rise in the need to evaluate project teams and increasing levels of teamwork to include peer assessment. the solutions also in theory mean increased closer contact with individual manager and appraises and increasing services linked to customer facing evaluations.

however, negative feedback still demotivates and plenty of feedback and explanation by manager who collates feedback rather than judges performance andfail to summarise evaluations.there are however still problems with accuracy of appraisal objectivity aswalker and smither (1999)5year studyof 252 managers over 5 year period still identified issues with subjective ratings in 360 degree appraisals.there are still issues on the subjectivity of appraisals beyond the areas of lack of training.

the contribution of appraisal is strongly related to employee attitudes and strong relationships with job satisfaction(fletcher and williams, 1996). the evidence on appraisal still remains positive in terms of reinvigo rating social relationships at work (townley,1993)and the widespread adoption in large public services in the uk such as the national health service (nhs)is

the valuable contribution to line managers discussion with

staff on their past performance, discussing personal development plans and training and development as positive issues.one further concern is the openness of appraisal

related to employee reward which we now discuss.

13.3.2 linking appraisals with reward management

【篇二：绩效考核评价四种方法】

1.平衡计分卡

平衡计分卡(balanced score card)(简称 bsc)，是 20 世纪 90 年代

美国哈佛商学院的教授卡普兰(robert s . kaplan)与复兴全球战略集

团总裁诺顿(david norton)对 12 家公司进行了为期 1 年的考证研究

后提出的一种绩效考核方法。它主要从四个方面对企业的绩效进行

考核：顾客、内部运作、财务、学习与发展。平衡计分卡四个纬度

是互相支撑的。从财务方面看，它关注的目标是解决“股东如何看待

我们？”和“企业的运作达到什么样的标准才能使我们的股东满意？”。从顾客角度来看，它关注的目标是解决“客户如何看待我们？”和“要

达到我们的财务目标，我们必须满足怎样的客户需求？”。从内部运

作来看，它关注的目标是解决“我们的优势是什么?”和“要使我们的

股东和顾客满意，我们必须在哪些业务流程和内部运作上超越他人?”。从员工成长与学习角度来看，它目标是解决“我们如何提高自

己的能力?”和“为了实现财务目标和客户需求，内部运作需要我们应

具什么样的技能和知识?”，企业需要根据战略要求和企业重点，随

时打造符合公司战略要求的员工队伍，通常来讲，一旦公司的战略

重点发生调整，公司的运作模式、组织流程就会随之而发生调整，

相应地，也就对员工的知识结构、技能水平提出了更高的要求[16]。

为了获得最终的财务绩效，必须要有良好的市场表现，关注顾客；

为了获取市场，必须在内部运营上做改善；为了有效的内部运营，

企业员工必须能够不断地学习与发展。平衡计分卡的四个维度虽然

各自有特定的评价对象和指标，但彼此之间存在着密切的联系，是

相互支持的。所有这些指标构成了一个完整的评价体系，能够一方

面追踪财务结果，一方面密切关注能使企业提高能力并获得未来增

长潜力的无形资产等方面的进展。平衡记分卡法综合考虑了各个关

键因素，使用滞后和超前指标，协调了长期和短期目标，平衡了财

务和非财务指标，满足了内部和外部的多方需要，从而使得管理者

能整体把握和控制企业，最终实现企业的战略目标。

所以，平衡计分卡其核心思想是通过四个指标之间相互驱动的因果

关系展现组织是战略轨迹，实现绩效考核——绩效改进——战略实施——战略修正的目标。平衡计分卡，一方面考核企业产出(上期结果)；另一方面，考核企业未来成长的潜力(下期预测)。再从顾客角

度和从内部业务角度两方面考核企业的运行状况参数，充分把公司

的长期战略与公司的短期行动联系起来，把远景目标转化为

一套系统的绩效考核指标。

平衡计分卡是一种很好的绩效考核工具，但它不是万能的，它不适

合所有企业,它也并不一定能保证战略和愿景的成功，但是，在制定

平衡计分卡的过程中，管理人员可以深入地思考公司的战略和愿景，将其用一种可以描述及量化的方式表达出来，在整个公司内部建立

起一套通用的“语言系统”，让员工可以对战略、愿景进行讨论，在

此基础上用更加积极的态度去面对绩效管理。平衡计分卡的运用还

需要企业有明确的战略目标、高素质的员工、扁平的组织结构以及

以效率为导向的企业文化的企业等[17]。

平衡计分卡的优点是：从四项指标进行综合衡量，组织得以明确和

严谨的手法来诠释其策略，它一方面保留传统上衡量过去绩效的财

务指标，并且兼顾了促成财务目标的绩效因素之衡量；在支持组织

追求业绩之余，也监督组织的行为应兼顾学习与成长的面向，并且

透过一连串的互动因果关系，组织得以把产出（outcome）和绩效

驱动因素（performance driver）串联起来，以衡量指标与其量度

做为语言，把组织的使命和策略转变为一套前后连贯的系统绩效评

核量度，把复杂而笼统的概念转化为精确的目标，藉以寻求财务与

非财务的衡量之间、短期与长期的目标之间、落后的与领先的指标

之间，以及外部与内部绩效之间的平衡。

但是，在具体应用过程中，平衡记分卡法也有一定的缺点。如平衡

计分卡的难执行性，一份典型的平衡计分卡需要 5-6 个月去执行，

另外再需几个月去调整结构，使其规则化。同时衡量指标有可能很

难量化，而衡量方法却又会产生太多的绩效衡量指标。运用平衡计

分卡的难点在于试图使其“自动化”。平衡计分卡中有一些条目是很

难解释清楚或者是衡量出来的。当组织战略或结构变更的时候，平

衡计分卡也应当随之重新调整。而负面影响也随之而来，因为保持

平衡计分卡随时更新与有效需要耗费大量的时间和资源。

国内外实践结果表明，要想成功建立和实施平衡计分卡，企业一定

要从多方面考察和发现问题，做好充分的准备，可以从以下几个方

面入手，一是使组织结职位分工标准化、明晰化；二是鼓励和创建

积极的沟通渠道；三是加强绩效信息的收集和处理；四是提高认识。

2.关键绩效指标法

kpi(key performance indicators)是衡量企业战略实施效果的关键

指标，其目的是建立一种机制，将企业战略转化为内部过程和活动，以不断增强企业的核心竞争力和持续地取得高效益。kpi 可以使部门

主管明确部门的主要特征，并以此为基础，明确部门人员的业绩衡

量标准。建立 kpi 指标的要点在于流程性、计划性和系统性。要建

立企业的kpi 体系，必须首先明确所建立的 kpi 体系的导向是什么，即我们必须首先回答下列问题：企业的战略是什么?成功的关键因素

是什么?什么是关键绩效?怎样处理好绩效考核的基本矛盾?如何协调

扩张与控制，收益增长与潜力增长，突出重点与均衡发展，定量考

核与定性评价之间的关系?是考核结果还是考核过程?应当建立一种

什么样的运行机制?回答以上问题后，就要开始 kpi 的分解。通常有

两种方式来建立企业的 kpi 体系[18]。第一，依据部门承担责任的不

同建立 kpi 体系。依据部门承担的责任不同建立 kpi体系的方式，主要强调部门从本身承担责任的角度，对企业的目标进行分解，进而

形成评价指标。这种方式的优势是突出了部门的参与，但可能导致

战略稀释的现象的发生，指标可能更多对于部门管理责任的体现，

而忽略了对流程责任的体现。

第二，依据职类职种工作性质的不同建立 kpi 体系。基于职类职种

工作性质的不同建立kpi 体系，突出了对组织具体策略目标的响应。各专业职种按照组织制定的每一项目标，提出专业的响应措施。但是，这种设置指标的方式增加了部门的管理难度，有可能出现忽视

部门管理责任的现象。而且依据职类职种工作性质的不同建立 kpi

体系更多的是结果性指标，缺乏驱动性指标对过程的描述[19]。

3.目标管理法

mbo导向的绩效管理通过对实现企业目标的关键性指标的选择，将

考评过程与管理过程相统一，在对关键环节实施管理和控制的基础

上，利用绩效管理机制充分调动营销人员的积极性和创造力，激发

营销组织的经营活力，从而实现营销组织内管理和经营的统一。

计划、指导、考评和激励是 mbo 导向绩效管理的彼此紧密联系的四个阶段，分别与目标管理的计划、执行、检查和反馈四个阶段相结合，不断地激励营销队伍在实现企业目标的方向上努力，促进个人

能力的成长，并使过程中的管理更多地成为促进目标实现的手段，

而不仅仅是控制手段。

计划阶段是 mbo 导向绩效管理的第一个环节，是以目标管理的计划阶段为基础的目标分解过程。目标的分解要求在保证企业目标实现

的前提下层层分解，并在分解过程中上下沟通，达成共识。目标的

设置要遵循 smart 原则，即具体的(special)、可衡量的(measurable)、可达到的(attainable)、相关的(relevant)和有时限

的((time-based)。在计划执行过程中，对关键环节加强控制和指导，随时发现问题并加以纠正，以保证目标的实现。关键环节的控制和

指导可以通过每日、每周的例会定期进行，也可以根据对特殊事件

的重点跟踪进行，如在重要客户开发过程中的重点关注。

考评环节不是仅仅对照考核用表进行打分的过程，应结合月度计划

会议、述职会议，对各项考核结果进行讨论，总结经验与不足，并

提出推广和改进措施。考评结果完全公开，以在业务人员之间形成

充分而公开的信息交流。

考评结果可以直接与员工经济激励措施如工资、奖金、福利津贴等

挂钩，也可以直接与非经济激励措施如荣誉、工作条件的改善、提

供发展机会等相联系。

4.360度反馈法

360度绩效考评，也叫全方位绩效考评，是由被考评人的上级、同级、下级、本人或考评专家担任考评者，从各个角度对被考评者进

行全方位评价的一种绩效考核方法。考评的内容涉及到被考评人的

管理绩效、专业绩效、业务绩效、工作态度和能力等方面，考评结

束后，人力资源部门通过预先制定的反馈程序，将整理出的考评结

果反馈给本人，从而达到改变行为，提高被考评人工作绩效的目的。传统的考评方法仅仅是上级对下级员工的考评，因而只有一个方向。与传统的考评方法相比，360度绩效考评的方法可以从多个角度来反映被考评人，因而考评

过程更加透明，考评结果更加客观、全面、公正和可靠。正因为360度绩效考评具有全员参与管理、信息收集对称、能分散管理者日常

管理压力等这些特点，很快成为我国企业重要的绩效考核办法之一。目前，360度绩效考评已经广泛应用与高层领导自我觉察与发展、员工绩效评估，企业高层候选人的评鉴、组织学习与变革等领域。

【篇三：年终绩效考核及自我评价--工作总结】

kpi （keep performance indication）

影响员工绩效表现的关键绩效指标。员工个人kpi的来源是部门年

度工作目标。对部门年度目标进行分解时，可采用计分卡作为分解

工具。从财务，顾客，内部流程层面，学习与成长四个层面对部门

年度目标进行分解。根据各个指标和部门职责的相关性进行提取，

形成部门的绩效指标库。员工个人kpi根据部门kpi拆解得来，尽量可能量化，不便量化之项目可采定性描述。

以电极设计为例，年终kpi量化指标如下：

年度自我评价总结

自评（以电极设计为例）

这一年，在各级主管及同仁的指导与帮助下，我感觉自己成长很快。自身技能不断提高的同时，也自知电极设计需要学习的还很多。

现将年终总结归纳如下：

1. 积极主动完成主管排配的工作任务，并且每天的有效工时达98.8%以上。

2. 本年度工作细致，365天无异常。

3. 参与组内品检工作，帮助本组同仁解决设计中的问题，品检ng

电极比例仅为0.1%。

4. 培训并指导新人工作，帮助新人了解电极设计规范，掌握电极设

计流程，使新人更快投入工作状态。

5. 多次排除重大安全隐患，有效避免异常发生。

6. 积极与现场沟通，优化设计及加工方案，减少不必要的工时，有

效地提高了设计及加工效率。

7. 年度考勤零异常，零迟到，零早退，零请假。

8. 更新/制作电极设计文案教材，便于信息及时共享

9. 制作视频课件便于信息直观传播。

10. 撰写技术通报，服务团队，共同提高。

end