“Abolishing Performance Appraisals" Book Review
"Abolishing Performance Appraisals" by Tom Coens and Mary Jenkins is both a challenging and thought-provoking book focusing on one of the premises of Human Resources Management. The effectiveness of performance appraisals is brought into question with the authors terming it as a “tool of patriarchy” at the workplace. The book shows why performance appraisal, as a practice in management, should be done away with and provide the steps on what can be done instead. It also cites several detailed case studies of firms or corporations that have effectively abolished the employee performance appraisal in their operations. The book is tailored for all organizational stakeholders impacted by the performance appraisal process. The book addresses queries and issues that many Human Resource professionals face daily: why is our appraisal system ineffective? Should promotions be based on performance appraisals? And are there other options for managing employee performance?
Tom Coens and Mary Jenkins define performance appraisal as a mode through which an employee’s performance at the workplace is evaluated. The book queries the underlying assumptions behind the use of performance appraisals as management procedure or process. The flaws and functions of performance appraisal are discussed in length. The areas where employers, supervisors or management in general go wrong in carrying out employee job evaluations are highlighted. The authors specifically state that assumptions bore the flaws that impede the effective implementation of performance appraisal in an organization. The flaws bring with them unintended and destructive effects that can spill over to the general operations of an organization (Coens & Jenkins, 2002, p.24). It further offers practical guidance on how to eliminate appraisal process altogether and create alternate ways centering on progressive and healthy assumptions by the work force. The two authors dismiss the widely accepted myths and wrong assumptions that define common management practices and strategies surrounding the key functions of appraisal. The functions are namely: coaching, feedback, development, compensation, and legal documentation. The authors also give detailed explanation of how the non-appraisal strategies will be able to deliver the objectives of each of the five functions.
The second chapter talks of the real goal of performance appraisal and how it impacts the performance of the organization positively. The performance appraisals origin in the organizational world is discussed. The industrialization in the early 1800s was incorporated by Robert Owen in the cotton mills of New Lanark in Scotland. The majority of the cotton firm workers were people of color, consequently merit was pegged on the race of individuals. The appraisals are also said to have been used in the Federal Civil Service and US military. The origins of the practice in Federal Civil Service system are dated back to 1842 and the implementation of the merit rating system was put in place by 1887. In this chapter, the authors dwell on the mechanistic organizations where personnel are described as parts of the “machine” that need to be controlled and managed to enable the “machine’ operate in a proper manner. The Fredrick Taylor’s scientific management and Henry Ford’s assembly line are said to have revolutionized the industry and created a platform for the creation of innovative managerial practices that focus on employee job evaluation (Coens & Jenkins, 2002, p.34).
The book focuses on Management-By-Objective philosophy as a variation of machine model. The MBO philosophy is more or less similar to performance appraisal as it dwells on numerical targets of employees that match the overriding objectives or standards set by a firm (Coens & Jenkins, 2002, p.36). The authors term this model as effective if employees are involved in the goal-setting process of any firm. The MBO model was faulted for compromising quality and real improvement by setting numerical targets. Many organizations are cited to have used MBO in conjunction with appraisals but later dropped the MBO model in favor of appraisals as the sole mode of employee evaluation. This evolved to competency-based variations to 360-degree appraisals (which rated everyone – subordinates, customers, workers). The emergence of the new models of thinking is also discussed with redesigning systems as humanistic development tools. The new models were counterproductive, insidious, and had destructive effects. Whether accurate or not, the performance appraisal ratings were biased psychologically (Coens & Jenkins, 2002, p.36). The conventional assumption that supervisors who were charged with the responsibility of rating employees will not attempt to manipulate performance ratings to get the desired outcomes is misleading. The supervisors are human and prone to influence the outcome of the evaluations. The other assumption cited in the “Abolishing Performance Appraisals” is that raters can clearly distinguish an individual’s performance from the system or organizational constraints. This assumption is not true as the working environment influences the employee individual performance considerably.
The practice of performance appraisal is condemned further for inspiring distrust and hatred amongst employees. Human Resource professionals charged with the responsibility of their companies’ performance appraisal systems are not much satisfied with the systems of implementing job appraisals. The book doubts the essence of performance appraisals as worthy tools of evaluation since many stakeholders in an organization, employees and managers despise it. The authors also cite the misconception on employees’ performance appraisal function. In many cases, performance appraisals have been made in an attempt to motivate employees, despite the fact that the appraisals were never designed to improve performance, but only to measure and rate it.
The functions of performance appraisal, namely; coaching, feedback, development, compensation, and legal documentation are discussed in depth in this book. Coaching is termed as part of supervisors and managers responsibility where employees are made to have a clear view of the goals set by an organization. It is usually done to help employees improve in terms of performance or to initiate a new employee to the operations of an organization. The feedback is the reply or rather the response the employees provide to employers in the process of performance appraisal. The feedback is vital in helping the managers, supervisors and other stakeholders understand the efficiency of the work force and the constraints they face as they go about their duties. The "Abolishing Performance Appraisals" by Tom Coens and Mary Jenkins goes on to explain development as the fifth function. Development as a function centers on growing skills of employees in different areas. Constant evaluation is viewed as a way of ensuring each employee has gotten the right coaching and training in his or her line of duty. On the other hand, compensation is described as the process of rewarding employees with benefits after evaluation and ascertaining the value of their work or efforts at the work place. The compensation helps in appreciating the personnel competency and skills (Coens & Jenkins, 2002, p.74). The authors describe legal documentation as a core function of the performance appraisal. The legal documentation provides for proper filing of individual employees competency and skills. The documentation is necessary as it may act as a basis for an employee to request for a job promotion or remuneration review (Coens & Jenkins, 2002, p.81).
The two co-authors in this book point out the demerits and factors that make performance practice ineffective. The performance appraisal is said to be rather unfair and prone to bias. The supervisors cannot be trusted to carry it out fully in the expected manner. The practice is also said to have adverse consequences on the general employee performance and morale. The performance appraisal does not foster teamwork as they push for individual accountability. The book asserts that there is nothing empowering about employees being forced to participate in an activity and being subjected to humiliation by being given poor ranking. The performance appraisal is said to create a tense and delicate workplace environment where employees work under undue duress. Employees fear making mistakes or errors in operations thus making them inefficient (Coens & Jenkins, 2002, p.93). Many employers are said to use performance appraisal only in reprimanding and are reluctant to deal with employee performance improvement. According to the book, employers should give a clear-cut guidance on how personnel fit into the strategic and annual organizational plans. This will help employees define the direction and magnitude of expectations demanded of them by the organization. “Majority of people believe problems with the appraisal arise due to forms, inadequate training, and supervisors shrinking responsibility or prima donna employees who think they are unfairly criticized” Coens and Jenkins cite. The book further says the key failure of the appraisal is that it holds employees accountable for results despite the presence of factors beyond the powers of employees (Coens & Jenkins, 2002, p.98).
In my organizational situation, I would implement the performance appraisal program by incorporating amendments suggested by the two co- authors. The performance appraisal would not be a standalone tool. Effective communication would be key to explaining to my employees its purpose and effectiveness if implemented. A clear communication will also foster proper feedback where I as a manger would take note of the fears and concerns of the personnel about the performance appraisal. According to Coens and Jenkins, the performance appraisal is only good as the individuals who are using it. My organization would ensure this human resources tool is used correctly and effectively. By cultivating healthy conducive working environment, employees will be able conceptualize the effectiveness of this management tool. The development of employees will be core as improving the competency and proficiency in skills will make the work force efficient in helping the firm achieve its objectives (Coens & Jenkins, 2002, p.91). The legal documentation, a function of performance appraisal will ensure employees’ claims to promotion are legally bound and devoid of any manipulation. My organization would ensure a gentler performance appraisal process that would be increased in breadth and frequency of supervisor feedback to employees. It would also incorporate less subjective methods to evaluate and measure performance. I would deviate from the notion that the boss or organization is the one tasked with the responsibility of improving everyone’s individual performance. I would dispel the idea that employee improvement opportunities should be sparked off by an annual date rather than systemic and processes determining performance.
Reference
Coens, T., & Jenkins, M. (2002).Abolishing performance appraisals: Why they backfire and what to do instead. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
