Formal personnel performance appraisal

One important contemporary contention with respect to personnel performance appraisal is that the process will be effective only to the extent that managers and subordinates within an organization share perceptions as to (1) the purpose and function of the process, and (2) its effectiveness with respect to meeting the goals of both management and individuals (Longenecker, Liverpool, & Wilson, 1988). With this contention in mind, this research examines the attitudes of individuals within organizations towards personnel performance appraisal.

The selection of individuals within organizations for leadership positions and for other forms of organizational reward is accomplished by a variety of methods, most of which depend upon the composite results of several factors - recommendations of organizational superiors, educational background, past performance, and so forth. One factor which is found in most selection procedures, however, is the performance evaluation or performance appraisal (Lombardo, 1985). Thus, it is apparent that effective performance evaluation is one of the critical factors which contributes to the on-going succes

. . .
es, instruments, and criteria. In a democratic society, however, the concerns of the relevant publics must also be effectively addressed. As important as performance evaluation is, however, it alone will not always accurately predict how individuals will perform in higher level positions within an organization. Therefore, an effective evaluation process must also be able to predict performance levels in increasingly responsible and challenging positions (Bray, 1982). One of the newest and most effective means of predicting future performance levels is the assessment center concept (Moses, 1987). The assessment center provides a means of both training individuals for managerial responsibilities, and for selecting those individuals with the highest probabilities of success in higher organizational positions. Metaanalysis of relevant research indicates that assessment centers are among the best predictors of future managerial success (Schmitt, Gooding, Noe, & Kirsch, 1984). ATTITUDES TOWARD PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL As important to an organization as the task of personnel performance evaluation is, there are indications in the literature that a significant proportion of the individuals charged with such responsibilities are e
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
APPRAISAL CONCEPTS, Replogle Inc, Rumph Shannahan, Liverpool Wilson, performance evaluation, PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL, Nursing Education, performance appraisal, personnel performance, instrument process, Hillegas Valentine, Noe Kirsch, INTRODUCTION Formal, Coast Ouarterly, evaluation instrument, evaluation instrument process, personnel performance appraisal, performance evaluation instrument, personnel performance evaluation, gortner 1987, process instrument, cox kelsey, cottrell cox, kelsey ritchie rumph, kelsey ritchie,
Approximate Word count = 2633
Approximate Pages = 11 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Formal personnel performance appraisal