Response to Kiara P.

Response to Kiara P.

 You have an excellent analysis of the political concern that affect performance appraisal. As a result of these concerns, some employees feel that the process of performance appraisal is not fair. You have noted right that inconsistent rating is one of the most significant political concerns that affect employees during the appraisal process. The managers may vary the ratings of the workers to fit their explanation.  There is also the politics of similarity in the scores occurs where the employees are rated either average in the performance process. There is a politics of performance bias where an employee will be based bot on their actual performance but the perception of the managers.   Employees who are able to convince the managers that they are higher performer are likely to receive a higher rating than employees who do not speak much.  This is the case, especially when there is no clearly defined performance standard.   In this case, the managers are likely to assign the performance rating arbitrary.  You get more in this article

http://ijmbr.srbiau.ac.ir/article_8748_c1864fd1c6da5d4c3cc4ea3984e58011.pdf.

You have a good illustration if politics impact the appraisal process where the managers may determine the ratings to give the employees depending on the performance of the company. It would indeed be illogical to provide the employee with a higher rating, and then the overall performance of the company is low. Therefore, the manager will assign employee lower ratings in such a case so that they can justify the performance of the company. There are a host of other issues why the process of appraisal performance may be marred, and this gives for a room for polices to take centre stage., for example, managers who do to know their employees are likely to provide false ratings to the employees. Furthermore, in performance appraisal, the thin line between the performance and the performance make politics to deep roots.

You have a good analysis of the techniques that can be sued to reduce the influence of politics in the measuring of the performances of the employees. You have correctly stated that supportive leadership has been observed to buffer the relationship.  You stated them correctly when employees and the manager are in a coaching relationship; the manager tends to be less manipulative when significant rating to the employees.  This happens more, especially to older employees. Coaching has been found to encourage employees to take self-development options as well as impacting employees with intrinsic motivation and other job-related attitudes.   This impact positively on the performance of the employees and the manager, who is assigning the ratings to the employees.

Response Chloe H

that is a good post.  You have a strong point in that when it comes to politics in performance appraisal. It becomes hard to differentiate between the perform them and the work. Workers are assigned ratings depending on how the manager perceives them as opposed to their performance. You have put it right that self-promotion is one of the ways that employees use to get recognition form the managers so that they can be rated highly during performance appraisal.  Have you ever worked in a place where an employee is self-promoting himself? I have worked in a place where a worker was promoting himself, and he would assign himself duties that would enable him to receive recognition form the manager. As a result, when performance appraisal was conducted, he was always ranked highly as one of the best performing employees.

furthermore, through the self-promoting behaviour, he because a close friend of the manager and this may also have contributed to his receiving high ratings as compared to the employees. You have a good point that the relationship between the managers and the employee also affects the rating process.  I think it is true that blood relationship with the people assigning the rating is likely to affect the rating process.

The example you have given is an indication of what happens in the workplace where employees are assigned ratings deepening on the relationships they have with the manager.  This kind of appraisal does not only affect the performance of the other employees but also affects the employee who receives ratings that are not genuine.

You have stated it right that flexibility of the employees may be vital in reducing the bias in the rating process. Other measures that can be taken to minimise the impact of politics is having the goals and the expectation of employees written down such that they will be assessed based on whether they have achieved those goals or not.  Furthermore, I think it is good to have the rating of the employees to be determined by the people the employee interacts with as they perform their work. This is the 360-degree feedback that will help to suppress the impact or the perception of the manager on the employee. Some employees present themselves to be god performers to the manager while in the real sense, they are not.  Therefore, embracing 360 n degree feedback will be vital on eliminating the problem of politics in performance appraisal. For more, you can follow the link https://connect.edgetrainingsystems.com/blog/360-degree-feedback-benefits.