团队个人绩效管理(共4页).docx

精选优质文档-倾情为你奉上Employers contemplating individual appraisal systems vs. team appraisal systems weigh the pros and cons of developing and implementing a performance management system that works in the best interest of the company and its employees. Team appraisal systems have their benefits as they attempt to evaluate every team member on an equal basis, while individual appraisal systems are subject to bias based on a supervisor's subjective assessment of one employee that cannot be justified for an entire team of employees being evaluated. Collaboration· It may be easier to determine employees' abilities related to collaboration in team-based appraisals because team success depends on collaborative working relationships. However, as supervisors assign individual employees to teams, collaboration is an obvious expectation and may, therefore, appear to be forced upon employees. Individual appraisals that evaluate an employee's ability to collaborate with coworkers measures collaboration on an organic level, instead of the expectations associated with teamwork. When supervisors appraise individual employees' abilities to work collaboratively with others, the appraisal also includes an employee's ability to determine when or if collaboration is necessary.Functional Knowledge· Team members with greater job knowledge or higher levels of functional expertise often pick up the slack for team members who lack their cohorts' experience in the field. Using team appraisals, evaluating job knowledge is difficult at best. Individual appraisals often focus specifically on an employee's ability to demonstrate proficiency in certain job-specific duties, and therefore, provide more accurate assessments of employee strengths and weaknesses.Outcomes· The difference between measuring outcomes for teams vs. individuals is minimal where appraisals are concerned. The same time management skills necessary to complete assigned projects in a team-based situation are virtually the same requirements for individual accomplishments. On the other hand, when the team misses deadlines and is unable to fulfill a supervisor's expectations, team members' working relationships tend to suffer. Evaluating the ability to develop productive working relationships then becomes an additional factor upon which a supervisor has to assess team performance. Resolving time management issues in a team-oriented situation is much more challenging than addressing time management problems an individual employee may have.Compensation and Rewards· Many employers' compensation structures are tied to employee performance, meaning salary increases, bonuses and incentives reflect how well employees perform their job duties. Compensation rewards for team-based appraisals aren't impossible, but some team members might consider them unfair because there are likely to be inequities in the distribution of rewards for team achievements. The disadvantage of team rewards is that they cannot reasonably acknowledge individual employee contributions. Using individual appraisals in performance management to justify compensation and employee rewards is easily accomplished.Differences Between Individual & Team Performance Evaluationsby Diana Wicks, Demand MediaPerformance evaluations are useful in giving employers information on the performance of their workers and recognize gaps for training. They are also an important tool for giving employees feedback on areas of growth, and communicate what the employer expects of them. As companies embrace working in teams, evaluation has expanded to include team performance evaluation, which differs with individual performance evaluation in several waysParametersAn individuals job description forms the basis of individual evaluation. At the onset of employment, you receive a job description of the position that you will fill. These are the parameters used to assess your competence and suitability in that position. For team evaluation, a supervisor uses the goals set for the team to conduct an evaluation. The general performance of the team is an indicator of the performance of the team members. The good or poor performance of a team has a direct bearing on the scores of team members.OutcomesHow well the members of a team are able to relate has a direct impact on the team's output. A dysfunctional team can have a negative impact on the input of otherwise competent individuals. Uncooperative team members can slow down competent employees or incompetent employees may benefit from the cover of more competent members in the team and therefore end up taking advantage of a teams good performance. On individual evaluation, you take full responsibility of your performance. There is a direct link to any successes or failures to you as an individual.GoalsTraditionally, people were used to working and getting appraisals as individuals. Over time, organizations are recognizing the need of teams to accomplish tasks. Where a company is transiting to a more team-oriented setup, team evaluation is an important tool of giving the management information on the kind of training needed for its employees to make the transition. Team evaluation can include peer evaluation of each team member. If peer evaluation is misused, complaints among members and strife may arise, defeating the purpose of working in teams. As an individual, you get evaluation on your contribution to the teams output.CompensationIndividual evaluation has a direct link to compensation, including bonuses, salary increase and promotion. While it is not impossible to reward workers based on team evaluation, the process can be tedious and result in demoralization and grumblings. If you base compensation on team performance, members may end up blaming peers for not accomplishing tasks or may feel that others who put in more effort should get more recognition. It is worth mentioning though that your performance as an individual and your relation with peers can be a pointer to your suitability for a leadership positionCompared to American firms, Japanese firms will have little writtendocumentation for appraisals.Compared to American firms, appraisal criteria in Japanese firms will be lesswidely known by employeesCompared to American firms, appraisals in Japanese firms will focus on longtermrather than short-term projects.Compared to their American counterparts, Japanese firms have been describedas having a broader scope, focusing on a relatively wide set of goals and activities.For example, Japanese employee bonuses are tied to the broader performance of theorganization and bonuses frequently comprise a significant portion of take homepay (Abegglen & Stalk, 1985). This broad focus is also seen in the practices of jobrotation and training activities where generalists rather than specialists aredeveloped (Rohlen, 1974; Ouchi, 1981; Clark, 1979). Additionally, appraisals arefrequently based on business unit or group performance, rather than on employeespecificskills or abilities (Itoh, 1994).Compared to American firms, appraisals in Japanese firms will focus to a largerextent on the employee's performance within the context of the broader businessunit.Compared to American firms, appraisals in Japanese firms will be based on howwell employees perform compared to their peers within the firm rather than someexternal standard.Compared to American firms, performance appraisal in Japanese firms willreflect the performance of other employees rather than just the individual appraiseehim/herself.专心-专注-专业