Fluent Essays

Attached are the instructions, outline, and references needed for this assignment. I also included my annotated bibliography as a guide. Let me know if there is anything additional you need. There's more uploads coming. I could only upload so many at a time. factors_influencing_managers____.pdf final_project.docx managing_employee_performance_shrm.pdf performance_appraisal_system.pdf research_outline.pdf Unformatted Attachment Preview SA Journal of Human Resource Management ISSN: (Online) 2071-078X, (Print) 1683-7584 Page 1 of 10 Original Research Factors influencing managers’ attitudes towards performance appraisal Authors: Tanya du Plessis1 Annelize van Niekerk1 Affiliations: 1 Department of Industrial and Organisational Psychology, University of South Africa, South Africa Corresponding author: Annelize van Niekerk, vnieka2@unisa.ac.za Dates: Received: 24 Oct. 2016 Accepted: 31 Mar. 2017 Published: 29 May 2017 How to cite this article: Du Plessis, T., & Van Niekerk, A. (2017). Factors influencing managers’ attitudes towards performance appraisal. SA Journal of Human Resource Management/SA Tydskrif vir Menslikehulpbronbestuur, 15(0), a880. https://doi.org/​ 10.4102/sajhrm.v15i0.880 Copyright: © 2017. The Authors. Licensee: AOSIS. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License. Orientation: Managers often have negative attitudes towards performance appraisal because of its problematic nature, which is influenced by political and social contextual factors. These negative attitudes lead to reduced employee support, inaccurate performance appraisal ratings and, consequently, negative employee perceptions of the performance appraisal process. This state of affairs necessitates a deeper understanding of the factors influencing managers’ attitudes towards performance appraisal. Research purpose: The purpose of this research was to gain a deeper understanding of the factors that influence managers’ attitudes towards performance appraisal. Motivation for the study: Previous research has confirmed the importance of performance appraisals in organisations. However, managers’ dislike of and aversion to performance appraisal impact negatively on the effectiveness of performance appraisal systems and ultimately the development and performance of employees. Research design, approach and method: An interpretivist qualitative study was adopted, utilising naïve sketches and in-depth interviews to collect data from eight managers, purposively selected. The data were analysed by using Tesch’s descriptive data analysis technique. Main findings: This study revealed that performance appraisal is fundamentally an uncomfortable and emotional process for managers, which results in their adopting defensive attitudes. Because of many uncertainties, managers do not always display the ability or readiness to conduct performance appraisals. The organisational context might place the individual manager in a position to distort employee ratings, which in turn negatively influences that manager’s attitude. Practical and managerial implications: This study provides insight into the present-day experience of managers in respect of performance appraisal and highlights the factors that influence their attitudes. Contribution: The insight gained from this research into the factors impacting on the attitude of managers towards performance appraisals can assist organisations to better support and empower such managers to be more effective in their approach when conducting performance appraisals. Introduction Performance appraisal has, for many years, been regarded as a critical process aimed at improving employee performance and, ultimately, organisational effectiveness (Cascio & Aguinis, 2011; Swanepoel, Botha & Mangonyane, 2014). Frustration with performance appraisal is more evident than ever, and voices opposing the use thereof are increasing and growing louder (Adler et al., 2016; Kondrasuk, 2012; MacDonald & Sulsky, 2009). Read online: Scan this QR code with your smart phone or mobile device to read online. Performance appraisal is known to be a critical but complex component within performance management, and it holds many advantages (Cascio & Aguinis, 2011; Grote, 2011). Performance appraisal has been utilised by organisations as a tool through which strengths and developmental areas of employees can be described and to facilitate the relationship between the employee and the manager (Pichler, 2012). Performance appraisal is also used as a mechanism through which decisions relating to salary increases and succession planning are informed (Grote, 2011). However, performance appraisal is also associated with negativity and dissatisfaction among managers Note: This article is partially based on the author’s thesis for the degree of Masters in Commerce in Industrial and Organisational Psychology at the University of South Africa, South Africa, with supervisor Mrs Annelize van Niekerk, received February 2015, available here: http://uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10500/19158/dissertation_du%20plessis_esct.pdf?isAllowed=y&sequence=1 http://www.sajhrm.co.za Open Access Page 2 of 10 (Cascio & Aguinis, 2011; Gordon & Stewart, 2009). Different views exist on this issue, but it seems that the challenges with performance appraisal emanate from the accuracy of employee performance ratings (Botha & Bussin, 2010; Shore & Strauss, 2008). Reasons for inaccurate performance ratings include among others: • Distorted performance ratings as a result of managers’ personal motives (Longenecker & Gioia, 2003). • Managers’ lack of commitment to performance appraisals (Tziner, Murphy & Cleveland, 2002). • Managers fear performance appraisal as they experience it to be a challenge (Torrington, Hall, Taylor & Atkinson, 2009). • Managers dread the possibility of damaging relationships with employees (Pulakos, 2011). • Political motives embedded in longstanding relationships with employees (Shore & Strauss, 2008; Swanepoel et al., 2014). • The organisational culture, norms, goals and manager attitude (Botha & Bussin, 2010). • The presence of emotional uneasiness, conflict and failure to provide constructive feedback (Marreli, 2011). • The fact that some managers perceive inaccuracies in performance ratings not as errors, but as enablers, which motivate and retain staff (Cascio & Aguinis, 2011). Original Research persists (Gordon & Stewart, 2009; Swanepoel et al., 2014). In order to influence managers’ attitudes towards performance appraisal more positively, this study was aimed at gaining a deeper understanding of the factors that influence managers’ existing attitudes towards performance appraisal. The study proposes that by gaining a better understanding of the present-day factors that influence manager attitudes towards performance appraisal, more effective interventions can be developed that will result in not only a more positive experience on the part of managers, but that will also enhance employee development and performance. Literature review Performance appraisal It is therefore proposed that, by gaining a better understanding of the factors that influence the managers’ experiences and attitudes – both positively and negatively – towards performance appraisal, organisations and managers may be enabled to conduct more effective and accurate performance appraisals and thereby enhance employee performance and development. Performance management is an ongoing process where the performance of individuals and teams is identified, measured and developed through the process of performance appraisal (Aguinis, 2009; Cascio & Aguinis, 2011; Shore & Strauss, 2008). Performance appraisal can be defined as the collection of employee performance information based on observation and the evaluation of the employee’s performance through an act of judgement (Cascio & Aguinis, 2011). Once an employee’s current performance is measured, performance developmental areas are identified, strengths are reinforced and overall feedback is given to the employee (Aguinis, 2009; Swanepoel et al., 2014). As a manager’s attitude can negatively or positively influence a performance appraisal, many researchers have, over the years, found this to be an interesting topic to study (Curtis, Harvey & Ravden, 2005; Jawahar, 2001; Longenecker, Sims & Gioia, 1987; Shore & Strauss, 2008; Thomas & Bretz, 1994). However, because of the attitude of the manager who conducts them, performance appraisals seem to remain a challenge to organisations. Research purpose Attitude Several studies previously explored factors that influence the attitude of managers towards performance appraisal (Botha & Bussin, 2010; Cascio & Aguinis, 2011). However, the work environment and context continuously change – as do the factors influencing managers’ attitudes – resulting in managers approaching performance appraisal with a certain level of trepidation. Most recent studies have focused on employees’ perceptions of the fairness of performance appraisal, consequently leaving a knowledge gap as to the factors impacting on managers’ attitudes towards performance appraisal (Dusterhoff, Cunningham & MacGregor, 2014; Jacobs, Belschak & Den Hartog, 2014). What, then, is an attitude? Thurstone (1931) proposed that an attitude was something that relates to an individual’s preferences towards an object. According to Allport (1935), an attitude points to a psychological type of readiness that is formed by applying a judgement towards an object through experience. Taking it one step further, Eagly and Chaiken (1993) define an attitude as a psychological tendency (an internal state) that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favour or disfavour. Attitudes therefore serve as functions to evaluate objects of thought, to process information, to adjust behaviour accordingly, to use as a protection mechanism and with which to display individual values (Fazio & Petty, 2008; Katz, 1960; Pratkanis, 2014). The prevailing attitudes of managers have a severe impact on the entire performance appraisal, including the accuracy of performance appraisal ratings (Botha & Bussin, 2010; Marmet, 2015). Managers viewing performance appraisal as positive tend to give more accurate ratings (Jawahar, 2001). Regrettably, there seems to be no consensus on an effective working solution to address manager attitudes and their impact of accurate performance appraisal ratings; consequently, displeasure with performance appraisal http://www.sajhrm.co.za Attitudes can form in various ways (Luthans, 2008; Miserandino, 2007; Vogel & Wänke, 2016; Zhang, Xie, Wee, Thumboo & Li, 2008). Firstly, through situations where a person’s behaviour is not consistent with his or her attitudes towards the specific object. A negative attitude towards an object then forms to balance such inconsistency. Secondly, attitudes can form through learning, for example with Open Access Page 3 of 10 reinforcements such as positive encouragement. Another method requires the pairing of two stimuli until a situation is reached where the first stimulus transforms into a signal for the second stimulus. An attitude can be created where a neutral target stimulus (conditioned stimulus) is repeatedly paired with another stimulus (unconditioned stimulus) with either a positive or negative valence which can then, in turn, change the person’s attitude in line with the direction of the unconditioned stimulus. Lastly, attitudes can form through the expectancy-value framework, a theory that assumes that the attitude towards the object is based on the sum of the values of all of the attributes that the attitude object is thought to have, and which is based on the mental formation of attitudes. This framework is a useful and popular model to explain how a collection of beliefs about objects forms attitudes. The expectancy-value framework attitude formation theory was adopted for this study (Zhang et al., 2008). Attitude and performance appraisal In a study conducted by Longenecker et al. (1987), political motivation, the degree of trust in the relationship between employees and managers, and the need to avoid confrontation with difficult employees are proposed as elements, which impact on how a manager approaches and performs an appraisal and which subsequently influence the performance ratings that such a manager allocates to employees. A few years later, Bretz and Milkovich (1992) conducted a study which aimed to investigate how performance appraisal was practised in the workplace. Their study reported a lack of manager ownership with managers feeling that they were excluded during the decision-making process and implementation of performance appraisal systems. Similar studies exploring the factors impacting on managers’ attitudes towards performance appraisals have examined the following: • Managers’ dislike towards the idea of influencing an employee’s career (Thomas & Bretz, 1994). • The manager’s own level of motivation (Harris, 1994). • The manager’s view of the purpose of performance appraisal (Tziner, Lathan, Price & Haccoun, 1996). • The manager’s attitude towards the organisation (Tziner & Murphy, 1999). • The manager’s own personality preference as well as confidence in the performance appraisal system (Tziner et al., 2002). • The employees’ expectations (Curtis et al., 2005; Yun, Donahue, Dudley & McFarland, 2005). • The manager’s perception of the organisational context as well as affection towards the employee (Shore & Strauss, 2008). • Performance appraisal skills and managers’ motives (MacDonald & Sulsky, 2009). • Conflicting roles, such as playing both a judge and a coach during performance appraisal (Aguinis, 2009). • Terminology in performance appraisal that is confusing (Van De Mieroop & Vrolix, 2014). http://www.sajhrm.co.za Original Research Performance appraisal is a critical process and is viewed as one of the processes that have the greatest effect on the employee’s career and development (Aguinis, 2009; BayoMoriones, Galdon-Sanchez & Martinez-de-Morentin, 2016; Grote, 2011). Therefore, in order to stay current and influence managers’ attitudes positively towards performance appraisal, this study sought to gain a deeper understanding of the contemporary factors that influence managers’ attitudes towards performance appraisal. Research design Research approach This study adopted a qualitative research approach as it aimed at producing rich, nuanced and detailed data (Mason, 2012). Participants could share their personal performance appraisal experiences and, consequently, a complex and detailed understanding of the factors influencing these experiences was gained (Creswell, 2014; De Vos, Strydom, Schulze & Patel, 2012; Henning, Van Rensburg & Smit, 2012). Research strategy In line with the interpretive paradigm, in-depth interviews were used to generate rich data as to participants’ experiences, perceptions and feelings (Mason, 2012; Pietkiewicz & Smith, 2014). The in-depth interviews moved from being general in nature to being specific and were conducted in four phases, namely opening, questioning, probing and closing (Kolb, 2008). Two non-leading questions laid the foundation for the in-depth interview and were followed by follow-up questions and probes intended to build better, unrestricted understanding (Pietkiewicz & Smith, 2014). The two non-leading questions also provided direction for the naïve sketches. The managers responsible for performance appraisals in an organisation in the financial services sector were selected as the unit of analysis in this study. Research method Research setting This research was conducted in the private sector at a medium-sized financial services organisation. The indepth interviews were conducted with eight managers responsible for conducting performance appraisals on their subordinates and at a venue that was comfortable and private so as to prevent disturbances. Entrée and establishing researcher roles Consent was obtained from the organisation’s Executive Director of Human Capital to conduct the study. Background information and the aims of the study were discussed with potential candidates. Once the candidates agreed to participate, they completed an informed consent form outlining the scope of the study and how ethical and confidentiality issues would be attended to. Open Access Page 4 of 10 Sampling A purposive sample of eight participants was selected based on availability (De Vos et al., 2012; Durrheim & Painter, 2006) and aimed to represent managers from different ethnic groups (African, Indian and white), ages (30–70 years), genders (five female and three male) and the number of years’ experience (from 1 to 35 years) in performance appraisal. Data collection methods In-depth interviews were conducted with the eight managers in order to gain a deeper understanding of their experiences, interpretations and perceptions of performance appraisals (Mason, 2012). Two questions were asked of the participants: ‘Tell me about your overall experience with performance appraisal’ and ‘What are the positive and negative factors that influenced your attitude towards performance appraisal?’ The secondary method of data collection was naïve sketches, which refer to a description of certain phenomena in the form of a short story (Giorgi, 1985). The naïve sketches were obtained through requesting each manager to draw a picture or write a narrative about their experiences with performance appraisal, highlighting the positive and negative factors that they believe have influenced their attitudes towards performance appraisal. Recording of data Eight naïve sketches were collected. The in-depth interviews were recorded using an audio recorder and were transcribed verbatim. Field notes were taken during the interviews to capture the context as well as the researcher’s observations, perceptions and experiences during these interviews (Greef, 2012). The data were stored securely and protected with passwords with only the researcher having access to them. Data analysis The verbatim transcriptions of the recorded in-depth interviews and the naïve sketches were analysed in accordance with Tesch’s descriptive analysis technique (Creswell, 2014). All transcriptions and narratives were read once to get a holistic sense of their content, after which ideas that came to mind were documented. Sub-themes were identified and grouped into major sub-themes, unique subthemes and leftovers. This list of sub-themes was used to code the data. The most descriptive wording for each subtheme was taken, converted into main themes and the data organised so that similar sub-themes were grouped. Interrelationships between the sub-themes were found and codes were generated. All of the data that were related to one main theme were highlighted in a certain colour and assembled together. Afterwards, the data were recorded to ensure that no sub-themes had been ignored. Strategies ensuring quality data and ethics As required by an interpretative study, it was ensured that the researcher was skilled in using the self as an instrument http://www.sajhrm.co.za Original Research to collect and analyse the data (Terre Blanche et al., 2006). The researcher kept field notes of her own personal experiences, biases, prejudices and orientations, which might have influenced the recording and interpretation of the information and regularly referred to and reflected on these notes to reduce possible bias (Creswell, 2014). The researcher assessed the quality of the data and the rigour of the process to ensure that the generated findings would be credible, transferable, dependable and conformable (Schurink, Fouche & De Vos, 2012). Credibility was ensured through member checking (Creswell, 2014; Rossmann & Rallis, 2011). Triangulation was applied in utilising two data collection methods, namely in-depth interviews and naïve sketches, in order to enhance the credibility and trustworthiness of the study (Shah & Corley, 2006). The transferability of the study was ensured through providing detailed descriptions of both the research methodology followed as well as the findings obtained (Babbie, 2010; Shah & Corley, 20 ... Purchase answer to see full attachment