We are planning to propose the integration of Employee Self-Rating into our appraisal process, where the employee's average rating will have a 20% to 30% weightage, and the rest will be from reviewers. Is this something a progressive company can implement? Are there any organizations practicing this already?
Main Reason for This Implementation:
- Encourages employee engagement
- Improves the accuracy of performance conversations
- Reduces bias through a dual perspective
- Builds a feedback-driven culture
Regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
Main Reason for This Implementation:
- Encourages employee engagement
- Improves the accuracy of performance conversations
- Reduces bias through a dual perspective
- Builds a feedback-driven culture
Regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Implementing Employee Self-Rating in the appraisal process can indeed be a progressive step for organizations. It can enhance employee engagement, improve the accuracy of performance evaluations, reduce bias through multiple perspectives, and foster a feedback-driven culture. To successfully integrate Employee Self-Rating, consider the following steps:
1. Clearly communicate the purpose and process of self-rating to employees.
2. Provide training or guidelines on how to effectively self-assess performance.
3. Ensure confidentiality and non-punitive measures for honest self-assessments.
4. Align self-ratings with objective performance metrics for a balanced evaluation.
5. Incorporate self-ratings as a part of a holistic appraisal process, combining them with feedback from managers and peers.
By following these steps, organizations can leverage Employee Self-Rating to enhance performance evaluations and foster a culture of continuous feedback and improvement.
From India, Gurugram
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
511. Clearly communicate the purpose and process of self-rating to employees.
2. Provide training or guidelines on how to effectively self-assess performance.
3. Ensure confidentiality and non-punitive measures for honest self-assessments.
4. Align self-ratings with objective performance metrics for a balanced evaluation.
5. Incorporate self-ratings as a part of a holistic appraisal process, combining them with feedback from managers and peers.
By following these steps, organizations can leverage Employee Self-Rating to enhance performance evaluations and foster a culture of continuous feedback and improvement.
From India, Gurugram
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Vishal Gaurav,
You wish to include self-rating by the employee in the appraisal process. In your post, you have written about the merits of the decision. However, for the time being, let us do the appraisal of the decision itself.
The dictionary meaning of appraisal is: an expert estimation of the quality, quantity, and other characteristics of someone or something. The meaning clearly says that to appraise someone or something, one requires an expert. This begs a question: who can be called an 'expert'? The dictionary meaning of the expert is: a person with special knowledge or ability who performs skillfully.
If you wish to empower the subordinate to do the self-appraisal, then we need to check how many subordinates have special knowledge or ability.
Since the managers appraise their juniors, this does not mean that the sooner a person acquires the designation of the manager, he or she by default becomes competent to appraise his or her juniors. The managers also require systematic training on how to conduct a performance appraisal.
There is a risk associated with the self-rating. What if the junior suffers due to confirmation bias or self-serving bias? Can we allow such a person to do a self-rating?
Let us keep the factor of bias aside. Why will the junior not grab the opportunity to give a cent per cent score on all the attributes, and when the manager questions, he or she defends the score? Will it not lead to conflict? What if on a particular attribute, an individual rates highly but a manager rates lowly? How will you see this huge gap in perceptions?
The best method of performance appraisal is to identify the costs and ratios associated with the business or the department and assign those to the individual. The junior employee must provide proof of the score. The proof-based score is indubitable. It will keep managers' and juniors' biases away from the process of performance appraisal. Since I provide consulting services to establish a comprehensive performance management system, I say this with experience. To know more about it, you may click here to refer to my post on LinkedIn.
Thanks,
Regards,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You wish to include self-rating by the employee in the appraisal process. In your post, you have written about the merits of the decision. However, for the time being, let us do the appraisal of the decision itself.
The dictionary meaning of appraisal is: an expert estimation of the quality, quantity, and other characteristics of someone or something. The meaning clearly says that to appraise someone or something, one requires an expert. This begs a question: who can be called an 'expert'? The dictionary meaning of the expert is: a person with special knowledge or ability who performs skillfully.
If you wish to empower the subordinate to do the self-appraisal, then we need to check how many subordinates have special knowledge or ability.
Since the managers appraise their juniors, this does not mean that the sooner a person acquires the designation of the manager, he or she by default becomes competent to appraise his or her juniors. The managers also require systematic training on how to conduct a performance appraisal.
There is a risk associated with the self-rating. What if the junior suffers due to confirmation bias or self-serving bias? Can we allow such a person to do a self-rating?
Let us keep the factor of bias aside. Why will the junior not grab the opportunity to give a cent per cent score on all the attributes, and when the manager questions, he or she defends the score? Will it not lead to conflict? What if on a particular attribute, an individual rates highly but a manager rates lowly? How will you see this huge gap in perceptions?
The best method of performance appraisal is to identify the costs and ratios associated with the business or the department and assign those to the individual. The junior employee must provide proof of the score. The proof-based score is indubitable. It will keep managers' and juniors' biases away from the process of performance appraisal. Since I provide consulting services to establish a comprehensive performance management system, I say this with experience. To know more about it, you may click here to refer to my post on LinkedIn.
Thanks,
Regards,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Your plan to adopt the Employee Self-Rating appraisal process is a welcome decision. The Employee's Self-Rating appraisal is very scientific and transparent. Employees should speak out about their contributions made or attributed in different segments against their roles and responsibilities. They should rate themselves with weightage against their contributions in percentage for different segments. The rating percentage should always be one hundred.
The other part of the process involves the reviewer doing the assessment between the target set for the employee, whether achieved as claimed by the employee or falls short. For example, if a target set for an employee was 100, and they produced 100, but 60 pieces meet the quality, 20 pieces have 90% quality points, and 20 pieces are below the standard quality of 85%, the performance is roughly 50%. However, self-claiming might be around 80% because the reviewer will see where they failed, and it can be discussed.
The appraisal is a process, but the results can satisfy everyone if transparent. The participation of the employee is the key.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
0
0
The other part of the process involves the reviewer doing the assessment between the target set for the employee, whether achieved as claimed by the employee or falls short. For example, if a target set for an employee was 100, and they produced 100, but 60 pieces meet the quality, 20 pieces have 90% quality points, and 20 pieces are below the standard quality of 85%, the performance is roughly 50%. However, self-claiming might be around 80% because the reviewer will see where they failed, and it can be discussed.
The appraisal is a process, but the results can satisfy everyone if transparent. The participation of the employee is the key.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Checked)-Your understanding of the Employee Self-Rating appraisal process is spot on. It indeed encourages transparency and active participation. Keep sharing such insightful thoughts! (1 Acknowledge point)
0
0
CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
Performance Appraisal evaluation.doc
Improving Employee Performance Through Appraisal And Coaching.pdf
CiteHR.AI
(Fact Checked)-Your points about the potential risks of self-rating in appraisals are valid. However, many organizations do use self-assessments effectively, often alongside manager evaluations. It's about balance and training. (1 Acknowledge point)