Performance appraisal has been one of the most-debated management practices for several decades. It has generated a wide variety of viewpoints. There are those who see performance appraisal as making an important contribution to human resource management, in that organizations require systematic information on how well employees are performing in their jobs as a key element in ensuring that human resources are used as effectively as possible. Employees at all levels experience a need to know clearly what they should be doing and what is expected of them in terms of quantity and quality of output. In addition most people want to be in a position where they can perform better next time around.
A number of writers, especially during the 1970s, expressed pessimistic views about the future of performance appraisal schemes, and the assumptions on which they are based. Some have tended to write off conventional versions of performance appraisal as backward, simplistic and even counterproductive, arguing that conventional appraisal processes often lead both the manager and employee to approach the performance review with dysfunctional role stereotypes.
The employee expects to hear what is wrong with his or her performance, while the manger expects to have to well the evaluation to a reluctant and possibly hostile member of staff. (Gordon Anderson 1996)
In this case study, it present the issues that caused Xerox Company emerged as a result of their research. In a word, it is all about change. It is talking about the linked issues of visibility and growth, and the compelling need for a process or model to deal with the problems of increasing effectiveness in the midst of all the change. I discuss changing attitudes and HRD political relevance, and present evidence of concern for HRD effectiveness.
In Xerox appraisal new system they use "Mulit-appraisal"...