(i) Confidential Report:
This method is mostly used in government organrzations. It is a descriptive report prepared generally at the end of every year by the employees' immediate boss. The report highlights the strengths and weaknesses of the subordinate.
(ii) Essay Evaluation:
Under this method, the rater is asked to express the strong as well as the weak points of employees' behaviour. This technique is normally used with a combination of the graphic rating scale. While preparing the essay on the employee, the rater considers: -Job knowledge and potential of the employee, Employee's understanding of the company's programs, policies etc.. This is a non-quantitative technique.
(iii) Critical Incident Technique:
Under this method, the manager prepares lists of statements of very effective and ineffective behaviour of an employee. These critical incidents or events represent the outstanding or poor behaviour of employees on the job.
(iv) Check-lists and Weighted Check-lists:
This is a simple type of individual evaluation method. A check-list represents a set of objectives or descriptive statements about the employee and his behaviour. If the appraiser believes strongly that the employee possesses a particular listed trait, he checks the item; otherwise, he leaves the item blank. A more recent variation of this method is the weighted check-list.
(v) Graphic Rating Scale:
This method is perhaps the most commonly used method of Performance Appraisal. Under this method, a printed form is used. This is used to evaluate the performance of an employee. A variety of traits may be used in these types of rating devices. The most common being the quantity and quality of work.
(vi) Behaviourly Anchored Rating Scales:
This method represents the latest innovation in Performance appraisal. It is a combination of the Rating Scale and Critical Incident techniques of employee performance evaluation. The Critical Incidents serve as anchor statements on a scale and the Rating form usually contains 6 to 8 specifically defined performance dimensions.
(vii)Forced Choice Method:
This method was developed to eliminate bias and the preponderance of high ratings that might occur in some organizations. The primary purpose of this method is to correct the tendency of a rater to give consistently high or low ratings to all the employees. This method makes use of several sets of pair phrases, two of which may be positive and two negative and the rater is asked to indicate which of the four phrases is the most and least descriptive of a particular worker.
(viii)Group Appraisal:
In this method, an employee is appraised by a group of appraisers.
This group consists of the immediate supervisors of the employee, other supervisors, who have a close contact with the employee's work, manager or head of the department and consultants. This group may use any one of the multiple techniques as discussed above.
(ix) Management by Objectives (MBO):
MBO represents a modem method. It is a form of results-oriented appraisal. It is commonly used for supervisors but could be used for other employees as well. It requires that both the Appraiser and the Appraisee agree upon specific objectives in the form of measurable results.
(x) Ranking Method:
This is a relatively easy method of performance evaluation. Under this method, the ranking of an employee in a work group is done against that of another employee. The relative position of each employee is tested in terms of his numerical rank. It may also be done by ranking a person on his job performance against another member of the competitive group. It is relatively easier to rank the best and the worst employees, it is very difficult to rank the average employees.
(xi) Paired Comparison Method:
Ranking becomes more reliable and easier under the paired comparison method. Each worker is compared with all other employees in the group; for every trait the worker is compared with all other employees. For Instance, when there are five employees to be compared, then A’s performance is compared with that of B’s and decision is arrived at as to whose is the better or worse. Next, B is also compared with all others. When there are five employees, fifteen decisions are made (comparisons). The number of decisions to be made can be determined with the help of the formulae n (n-2). For several individual traits, paired comparisons are made, tabulated and then rank is assigned to each worker. Though this method seems to be logical, it is not applicable when a group is large.
(xii) Forced Distribution Method:
Under this system, the rater is asked to appraise the employee according to a predetermined distribution scale. The rater’s bias is sought to be eliminated here because workers are not placed at a higher or lower end of the scale. Normally, the two criteria used here for rating are the job performance and promotability. The limitation of using this method in salary administration however is that it may result in low morale, low productivity and high absenteeism.
(xiii) Field Review Method:
Where subjective performance measures are used, there is scope for rater’s biases influencing the evaluation process. To avoid this, some employees use this method. In this method a trained, skilled representative of the HR department goes into the ‘field’ and assists line supervisors with their ratings of their respective subordinates. The HR specialist requests from the immediate supervisor specific information about the employees performance. Based on this information, the expert prepares a report which is sent to the supervisor for review, changes, approval and discussion with the employee who is being rated. This approach is costly and impractical for many organizations.
(xiv) Performance Tests:
Employee performance testing, including a skills assessment and cognitive abilities test, helps human resource managers evaluate candidates and employees quickly and consistently. It reduces the risk of a bad hire. It builds consistency and efficiency into your employee performance processes. And evaluate employee performance.
