Performance Appraisal & Strategic Goals

This first section of this research examines the performance appraisal and reward systems at Mervyn's Department Stores. The contributions of these systems to the attainment of the company's strategic objectives is considered in the second section of the research.

Formal personnel performance appraisal is a fact of life in most North American organizations of any size (Longenecker, Liverpool, and Wilson, 1988, pp. 311320). As entrenched as the practice is, however, personnel performance appraisal continues to controversial (Heneman, 1987, pp. 431448).

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, and Wilson, 1988, pp. 311320).

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 factorsrecommendations of organizational superiors, educational background, past performance, and so forth. One factor which is found in most selection procedures, how

. . .
itions and the quality of work" (Gortner, 1992, p. 286). Most certainly, effective and meaningful communication between organizational superiors and subordinates is essential for effective organizational performance, as well as for the minimization of the potential for the development of organizational conflict. Further, the performance of organizational subordinates will not likely improve, unless organizational superiors and subordinates discuss the quality of work performed by subordinates. Simply talking to one another about the quality of work, however, will not likely yield positive results. To assure positive outcomes, a sound criterionbased framework for such discussions must be developed, implemented, and adhered to in evaluation (Kinlaw, 1988, pp. 3842). Gortner (1992, p. 287) pointed out that one troubling aspect of performance appraisal to employees is that, in all too many instances, employees are rated more on "their ability to get along with the supervisor" than they are on actual performance. He also pointed to another common problem in the performance evaluation of employees: "it is relatively common for a supervisor to rate every employee as superior, because the supervisor either refuses to be put on th
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Department Stores, Liverpool Wilson, North American, Kimberly Rottman, Noe Kirsch, Lenz Engledow, Schilit Paine, North America, Management Studies, performance evaluation, performance appraisal, instrument process, Francisco JosseyBass, department stores, mervyn's department stores, evaluation instrument, mervyn's department, evaluation instrument process, personnel performance, performance evaluation instrument, gortner 1992, decisionmaking process, appraisal process, performance appraisal process, personnel performance evaluation,
Approximate Word count = 2969
Approximate Pages = 12 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Performance Appraisal & Strategic Goals