绩效考核外文翻译参考文献

合集下载

绩效评估中英文资料外文翻译文献

绩效评估中英文资料外文翻译文献绩效评估在组织管理中起着重要的作用，它帮助机构确定员工的工作绩效，以便提供具体的反馈和制定相应的奖励和激励措施。

为了进一步深入了解绩效评估的相关内容，本文提供了一些中英文资料的外文翻译文献。

1. 文献标题：《绩效评估：理论与实践》英文标题："Performance Evaluation: Theory and Practice"摘要：该文献探讨了绩效评估的理论基础和实际应用，介绍了不同的绩效评估方法和工具，并探讨了评估结果对员工激励和组织发展的影响。

2. 文献标题：《绩效评估的关键成功因素》英文标题："Key Success Factors in Performance Evaluation"摘要：该文献分析了绩效评估的关键成功因素，包括目标设定、反馈机制、评估标准和评估者的素质等。

研究结果可以帮助机构提高绩效评估的有效性和准确性。

3. 文献标题：《绩效评估的最佳实践》英文标题："Best Practices in Performance Evaluation"摘要：该文献介绍了绩效评估的最佳实践，包括定期评估、360度评估、绩效目标的设定和沟通等方面。

这些实践可以帮助机构建立有效的绩效评估制度，以实现组织发展的目标。

4. 文献标题：《绩效评估的技术支持》英文标题："Technological Support for Performance Evaluation"摘要：该文献介绍了利用技术手段支持绩效评估的方法和工具，包括绩效管理软件、在线评估平台和数据分析工具等。

这些技术支持可以提高绩效评估的效率和准确性。

这些外文文献提供了关于绩效评估的理论基础、实践经验和最佳实践，可以为机构设计和实施绩效评估方案提供有益的参考。

绩效管理外文翻译外文文献中英翻译

Performance management-how to appraise employee performance AbstractPerformance appraisal is an important content of human resource management in modern enterprises. According to the problems existing at the present stage Chinese enterprise performance evaluation, put forward the improvement measures to improve the performance appraisal. Performance management is the responsibility between managers and employees and improve the communication performance of the ongoing. The partners should understand why they become partners, thereby supporting the work. Performance evaluation is a part of performance management, do not confuse the twoIntroductionChallenges of performance managementReasons to avoid performance management: Manager: reports and program has no meaning; no time; afraid of conflict; feedback and observation. (performance management, prevent problems in investment in time, ensure the managers have the time to do the thing you should do staff: bad experience; what was about to happen no bottom; do not understand the significance of performance management; don't like received criticism. Criterion two, performance management, organizational success: 1 Factors: coordination among units means, towards a common goal; problem, find the problems, find problems or prevent problems; obey the law, be protected by the law; make major decisions, a way of getting information; improve the quality of staff, to make the organization more competitive., performance management of organization,must be useful to managers, the only reason of performance management is to help employees to success. to understand better how to design and what made him act. , the performance management challenge is how to find practical,meaningful ways to finish it, which need thought and wisdom.Performance management is a systemThe performance plan -- starting point of performance management:employees and managers to work together, as employees do what, do what degree of problem identification, understanding.Continuous performance communication: both trackingprogress, find the obstacles that affect performance and process so that the two sides success required information. Communication methods: (1) around were observed;(2)employees; (3) allow employees to work review;Performance diagnosis: to identify individuals, departments and organizational performance by the real reason for the problem of communication and problem solving process.Performance management is a small system in the large system. If you want to get the maximum profit, must complete the performance management process,and not a part of.Performance management and strategic planning, budget, staff ,employee salary incentive system, improve the quality of plans are related. Do the performance management process to do the preparation of 1, there are two key points: with the staff to collect meaningful, to establish the information needed to measurable goals; to do some basic work, so that in the whole process of performance management and employee can fully cooperation. In part, access to information and data of performance management effect is it can help organizations, units and employees towards a direction some "target"information each employee's job description; (2) employee last performance review data and related documents.The performance plan three steps: preparation, meeting, finalize plans. your job, you should do what, how to measure your success, sets threat mosphere and seize the key; to review the relevant information, ask more,talk less; the job duties and specific goal; determine the success criteria; discuss what are the difficulties and need what help; discuss the importance level and authorized to ask problem; 4, note: in the performance management process, should pay attention to communication with staff thought is the action guide, to carry out effective performance communication, we must pay attention to in the thought. All aspects of the performance communication throughout the performance cycle, plays an important role in any one link in the chain, leaving the performance communication, any unilateral decisions managers will affect the enthusiasm of the staff, performance management. No performance communication there is no performance management. In order to make the performance management on the right track, truly play its role,enterprises mustput the supervisor and employee performance communication as a priority among priorities to research and development, through the system specification, performance management become competent habit, the habit of employees, to solve the performance problem employees work for dialogue and exchanges, the performance management into effect.Three methods of performance evaluation: Predicament 1, individual performance evaluation --: the best opera actor and amateur orchestra concert.The opera actors play the extreme, but the effect is very bad. No one is isolated,only focus on the individual, can not solve the problem. We call on an individual basis on employee performance evaluation, but if we emphasize individual performance but not the antecedents and consequences and conditions of performance, we do not progress, because we did not find the real reason -- may be because employees can not control things and punish employees, may also be because of the wrong reason 2, regardless of the what way to assess performance, avoid two traps are important: 1) don't do performance problems or"always the fault of employees" this hypothesis; 2) without any assessment can give the "why" and "what is happening in the picture". Evaluation is just the beginning, is a further discussion as well as the starting point of diagnosis. Three methods of performance evaluation: 3, 1) rating method:: features, to and behavior project; identify each project performance level gauge and other ways. Advantages: easy to finish the work of assessment. Disadvantages:forget why do this work; too vague, in the performance plan, prevention,protection and development staff and so did not what role in improving methods:with employees regularly write brief conversation; evaluation; interpretation and evaluation project meaning; together with the staff rating 2) ranking method:forcing staff to compete with each other, have stimulation can be short term, long term may cause internal malicious competition. 3) target and standard evaluation method: Standard: according to the prior and employees a series of established criteria to measure the performance of employees. Advantages: the personal goals and work together to reduce the possibility of target; both sides disagree;defect: need more time; text work more; more energy.Communication method and communication technologyWay of thinking: the process of performance management is the process of communication.Relationship with the staff is not only reflected in the behavior on performance management, but also should reflect the daily and how successful way of thinking: A, the process of performance management is a complete process together with the staff, not a for staff B, except for some unilateral disciplinary action, performance plan, communication and assessment should adopt a cooperative mode; C, most of the staff, once you understand what they are asked to do things, will try the method can meet the requirements D,performance management is not the purpose of staring past mistakes, clear posibility, but in the problem solving problems and possible e, performance deficit to be clear, the cause of the deficit, whether for personal reasons or the system reason; F, in most cases, if the manager will support staff as their work,so that each employee 2, must set some skills communication skills: Manager here guide employees to participate in the discussion process and understand the process of responsibility. Purpose: don't most probably it did not actually happen. Be prepared to establish a common responsibility and each stage all contribute to the relationship, the target. Clear the common responsibility: to improve the performance is not only the responsibility of the staff. Clear procedures: prevent conflict resolution skills: clear individual responsibility, invites employees to take advice. For the people of the criticism and comments: avoid if you don't listen, you don't know what you talking about,could you be quiet for a while, you read the report in the past did not remarks:avoid such as how many years, you always can't finish the job on time, we have ried that, there is no with the need need making guide guilty intent: to avoid if you really care about the team, you should work harder; I guess you don't care about this project not appropriate advice and sure: avoid as I know the project is late, but I'm sure you'll catch up; you will do well. You will understand the need,need to unsolicited advice and sure: avoid you must do it; this is the only way; to finish this today, and put it on my desk. A provocative question: Why did you say those who avoid. What you think; is the need to need; what is you get this conclusion? Don't trust to avoid language: are you sure you can finish on time?I've heard you need to exaggerate these need: avoid you never finish the work on time; you always try to reject my proposal. The cooling technique of fierce debate.The performance of a, discuss the process of dispute, we should pay attention to two goals: must make suggestions on conflict; avoid damage relations, cause new problems in the future performance. B, give employees a vent frustration and anger for feeling, not very fast counter attack. C, remember the people when they do appear conflict. D, the way of handling conflicts: conflicts through persuasion, won the right to try to understand the means; staff positions, find a solution. E, conflict is the most effective treatment technology is active listening.F, and be confused in mind or angry employees dealing, the basic principle is the first concern of his emotional. G, disputes arise, request the dispute settle ment measures, but never from the subject. H, too excited, communication should be suspended.The performance of communication is the core of performance management, is refers to between the employers and employees performance evaluation reflects the problems and evaluation mechanism itself to conduct substantive interviews,and tries to seek countermeasures, a management method for service in the later stage of enterprise and employee performance, improve and enhance the.A process of performance management is on the lower level on the performance target setting and implementation and ongoing two-way communication.绩效管理——如何考评员工表现摘要绩效考核是现代企业人力资源管理的重要内容。

绩效评价绩效考核工具外文文献翻译(节选)

中文3100字，2000单词，1.1万英文字符出处：Kipchumba T B, Yano K L. Perceived Usefulness of the 360-Degrees Appraisal Tool and Its Usage in Performance in Nakuru, Kenya[J]. Journal of Emerging Trends in Economics & Management Sciences, 2014, 5.原文Perceived Usefulness of the 360-Degrees Appraisal Tool and Its Usage in Performance in Nakuru, KenyaKipchumba, Tarus Benjamin; Yano, Kuto LukaAbstractThe study examined the perceived usefulness of the 360 degrees appraisal tool and the extent of its usage in performance in Municipal Council of Nakuru, Kenya. A survey research design was applied because it was an intensive descriptive and holistic analysis of Municipal Council of Nakuru as a single entity. The study targeted employees from 8 departments with a total population of 1062 employees but it targeted 282 respondents which was 26.6% of the total population. Stratified sampling technique was used in arriving at strata on the basis of departments for employees. To arrive at specific respondents among employees, purposive sampling technique was used. The data obtained was coded and analysis was done using central tendency, bar graphs, percentages and Chi-square. It was revealed that 360 degrees as an appraisal tool is adopted by the Council and it has improved its performance. The Chi-square tests carried out revealed that there is a significant relationship between use of 360 degrees and organization performance and perceived usefulness. The study recommended the need to educate employees more on the importance of 360 degrees appraisal tool and encourage them to participate fully in development and implementation process. The findings and recommendations of the study are also important to the management when planning for performance appraisal sessions as well as in reviewing individual performance.Keywords: perceived usefulness, 360-degrees appraisal tool, usage, performance, nakuru, KenyaINTRODUCTIONThe 360°review, also referred to as 360°performance assessments or multi-rater feedback, is a method and a tool that provides employees feedback from their peers, co-workers, clients, those who are direct reports, and direct supervisors, thereby offering multiple perspectives of the employee's overall job performance. Most 360°feedback tools include the employee's self-review; hence the "full-circle" meaning behind the name. The results are tabulated and shared with the employee. Ideally, this type of assessment helps the employee gain a better understanding of her/his skills and behaviours as they relate to the organization's mission, values, goals and vision. Additionally, this feedback is geared towards assisting each employee understand her or his strengths and weaknesses, and can contribute insights into areas of work that may need professional development. The feedback is viewed as useful in defining the skills and behaviours needed to exceed client/customer expectations. The results from 360°review are often used by the person receiving the feedback to plan their training and development. The results are also used by some organizations when making promotional or pay decisions. The 360- degree feedback process offers a unique opportunity for employees at all levels to discover how their work colleagues perceive and are impacted by their behaviour. As one commentator describes the 360- degree feedback, "It is like having a full length portrait, a profile, a close up shot in the face and a view from the back all in one!" (Heather, 2012).IMPORTANCE OF 360-DEGREES PERFORMANCE TOOLWhereas there might be some negative feelings associated with traditional top-down performance appraisal, there can be numerous benefits stemming from a 360-degree performance appraisal system. "The 360-degree feedback serves as a key relationship building tool that organizations can use to enhance team processes and work interrelationships" (Tornow et al., 1998, p. 85). When co-workers are open with each other and hold each other accountable for performance and productivity then the working relationships improve and the productivity will thus improve. Not only will the relationships between the workers and managers improve but as they improve and get stronger, but the employees morale will also improve. "When implemented properly, subordinate appraisal systems enhance worker job satisfaction and morale" (Benardin, 1986, p. 421).The 360-degree appraisal also can help the employee or manager discovers their own strengths and weaknesses. Through feedback employees are able to see where a co-worker excels. They can also see where the person needs to improve. "The 360 degreefeedback can have enormous power perhaps more than any other technique to bring an individual's shortcomings to his attentions and confirm that areas of perceived strengths are actual and recognized strengths" (Grote, 1996, p. 292). The depth of the 360-degree process gives it greater validity and reliability. The objectivity and the anonymity of the raters will help to defend the organization. "Numerous advantages of using multiple raters have been cited ... improved defensibility of the performance appraisal program from a legal standpoint" (Harris &Schaubroek, 1988, p. 43).Another benefit of 360-degree appraisal is the relative low cost of implementation. Compared to bringing in an appraisal company from the outside or developing an assessment centre approach, the cost is really quite minimum. "The costs of installing, maintaining, and monitoring a subordinate appraisal system for managers is minimal relative to the costs incurred in with developing an in house assessment centre or contracting out for the service" (Bernardin, 1986, p. 433). So there are numerous reasons an organization should think about employing a 360-degree appraisal programme. In addition to having an effect on employee performance and productivity, the process can improve managerial performance as well.The 360-degree performance appraisal system has the potential to positively effect on the performance and productivity of managers and supervisors. Managers need sources of appraisal additional to their superiors. "The 360-degree approach recognizes that little change can be expected without feedback and that different constituencies are a source of rich and useful information to help managers guide behaviour" (London &Beatty, 1993, p. 354). With this type of appraisal, the managers will have better morale themselves and will develop better communication skills with their subordinates as well as with their superiors. Just like the development of the employees, managers can also take advantage of the differing sources of feedback about their productivity and make positive changes. The 360-degree appraisal can help assess the strengths and weakness of the manager. If a manger has been made aware of some of his own managerial shortcomings ... his ability to communicate should be improved and his faith in his own managerial abilities should be strengthened (Rowland, 1970, p. 303).The employees can also benefit when a manager has undergone a 360-degree appraisal. Organizational commitment and productivity may increase when the employees feel the 360-degree appraisal taken is seriously. Ideally, subordinates will start noticing the manager's behaviour more as a result of the 360- degree appraisal. "Upward feedback leads to subordinates perceiving positive changes in the boss's subsequentbehaviour" (Reilly et al., 1996, p. 600). A possible result of the manager's changed behaviour is a stronger working relationship between the manager and the subordinates. Just as the validity of 360- degree appraisals is higher than traditional top-down appraisal concerning subordinates, the validity is higher with managers as well. "Subordinate appraisals have shown a higher validity for predicting managerial success than assessment centre performance" (Schultz &Schultz, 1994, p. 170). Atwater et al. (1995, p.36) have found that "input from subordinates was effective in eliciting modest changes in managerial behaviour."London and Beatty (1993), while agreeing that mixing development and appraisal purposes is problematic, conclude "using feedback for development only can impede the effective use of the results unless there is a requirement for the manager to be responsible to the feedback" (p. 367). Despite the relatively simple technology in using the 360- degree, its costs for the company are potentially much higher than expected. First, there seems to be some agreement that 360s are not a one-shot deal, but must be used consistently over several years (DeNisi &Kluger,2000; Snader, 1997). Second, using the simpler structured instruments that Centre for Creative Leadership puts out ($195 per assessee) can defeat the developmental purposes because the feedback and interpretation is too difficult (i.e., comparative results are complicated by a variety of situation-specific factors (Ghorpade, 2000). On the other hand, constructing a custom instrument that is specific to the performance requirements for the company demands significantly more time and money to develop. Finally, the best way to overcome the interpretation of results problem is to invest in consultants or at least invest time from support people to deliver and consult with target managers.Purposes of 360-Degrees Performance ToolThe tool is expected to serve a number of purposes simultaneously. Noe et al. (1997, p. 198-199) and Swanepoel (2003, p. 372-373) and Schofield (1996) agree on the following purposes of the 360-degrees appraisal tool:Strategic PurposesNoe et al. (1997, p. 198) and De Cenzo et al. (1996, p. 322) concur that a performance appraisal system should link employee activities with the organization's goals. This calls for flexibility in the system in order for it to be adjusted to the changing goals and strategies of an organization. Many companies do not use performanceappraisal to communicate its objectives. This is supported by Noe et al. (1997, p. 198-199) regarding the purposes of performance appraisal where nothing was included about the extent to which it is tied to the company's strategic objectives. This is also in support of what Schofield (1996) lists establishing and monitoring objectives and targets, maintaining equity in treatment of staff, facilitating succession planning and monitoring the effectiveness of personnel policies as strategic.Administrative PurposesAdministrative purposes, according to Swanepoel (2003, p. 372), and supported by Noe et al. (1997, p. 199), concern the use of performance data to make reward decisions, placement decisions, promotion and retrenchment and for validating selection procedures. Schofield (1996) lists examples of this as providing feedback on individual performance, reviewing salary, conditions of service and other rewards, providing a basis for promotion, dismissal, probation, and avoiding trouble through meeting legal or political needs.Developmental PurposesThis third purpose is utilized to develop employees who are both effective and ineffective at their jobs. It provides individual employees feedback on their strengths and weaknesses and how to improve future performance (Noe et al., 1997, p. 199; Swanepoel, 2003, p. 373). Swanepoel (ibid.) adds that it can focus on the organizational level as well by: "facilitating organizational diagnosis and development by specifying performance levels and suggesting overall training needs; providing essential information for affirmative action programmes; promoting effective communication within the organization through ongoing interaction between superiors and subordinates." This is supported by Schofield (1996) who lists the purposes as: providing a basis for self-evaluation; diagnosing of training and career development needs, and discovering individual and department potential as some of the developmental purposes of performance appraisal.Documentary PurposesDe Cenzo et al. (1996, p. 322) suggest that the final purpose of performance appraisal is the issue of documentation. They also suggest that the evaluation system support the legal needs of the organization. It is important to have documentation to support that any personnel action taken was appropriate.Critical Issues on the Usefulness of the 360- Degrees AppraisalMany organizations are faced with various challenges as they endeavour to achieve their mission and vision. Human Resource provides the much needed skills and expertise to accomplish various tasks. It is important for management to ensure that they have motivated workforce who enjoy job satisfaction thus gain maximum quality productivity. The human inclination to judge the appraisal process can create serious motivational, ethical and legal problems in the workplace. Without a structured appraisal system, there is little chance of ensuring that the judgments made will be lawful, fair, defensible and accurate. There is a basic human tendency to make judgments about colleagues at work as well as about an appraisal, which seems, is inevitable and universal. In the absence of a carefully structured system of appraisal, people tend to judge the work performance of others, including subordinates, naturally, normally and arbitrarily. The Human Resource department designs a performance appraisal method in order to check what the competencies are and how they are displayed by the employee during his/her job. Then a comparison is made between the competencies that the direct boss of the employee was looking for and the competencies being displayed by the employee in his/her job. This provides the gaps and missing links which should be addressed by training. The degrees to which these competencies are required in performing a job also matter a lot.译文360度绩效评价工具的感知有用性，及其在肯尼亚的纳库鲁地区绩效考核方面的应用摘要这项研究调查了360度评价工具的感知有用性，及其在纳库鲁的市政委员会绩效考核方面的使用程度。

人力资源管理绩效管理外文翻译文献

人力资源管理绩效管理外文翻译文献人力资源管理绩效管理外文翻译文献(文档含中英文对照即英文原文和中文翻译)原文：Performance Management: Reconciling Competing PrioritiesIan ZiskinFour HR thought leaders from academia— John Boudreau of the USC Center for Effective Organizations, Chris Collins of the Cornell Center for Advanced HR Studies, Pat Wright of the Moore College of Business at the University of South Carolina, and Dave Ulrich of University of Michigan and the RBL Group — engaged in discussions on Performance Management with Ian Ziskin, President, EXec EXcel Group LLC and Board member, HR People & Strategy. Ian asked John, Chris,Pat, and Dave to share their perspectives on topics including:• What Performance Management is?• What makes the biggest difference to effective vs. ineffective Performance Management?• What the biggest sources of debate and disagreement have been regarding Performance Management over the years, and whether we have made any progress in resolving these issues？• If they were going to fix or kill anything about Performance Management, w hat it would be and why？• What big implications there are for future required changes to Performance Management in light of future work, workforce and workplace trends？Ziskin: There is a lot of talk in organizations about whether Performance Management is working effectively or ever has. What do you think Performance Management is?Collins: This may be the question of the year. Performance Management has become everything and therefore nothing. It serves so many purposes —compensation, feedback, talent development, succession, etc. — that it may not serve any purpose very well.Boudreau: It's an ongoing relationship to balance the need to evaluate people with the need to develop them. It's not about bromides, forms, scores, tools orsystems.Wright: Performance Management is about aligning behavior in a way that increases organizational effectiveness.Ulrich: I think we need to look at Performance Management from three levels: cultural, systems and personal. At the cultural level, it's about whether the organization judges people based on meritocracy (results), hierarchy (power) or relationships (connections). At the systems level, it's about determining whether people meet or miss objectives. At the personal level, it's about assessing the individual's dedication to deliver both financial and social results.Ziskin: Given your point of view about Performance Management, what makes the biggest difference to whether it is effective vs. ineffective?Collins: It starts with having a culture of openness, honesty and real feedback —and then holding people accountable. This process begins and ends with good leaders, and all of our money should be invested in developing leaders to lead, rather than spending money on new Performance Management systems and tools.Boudreau: Effectiveness rests in the skills and motivations of the people involved, not in the Performance Management system itself. It is particularly important to create a shared framework and priorities between managers and their employees.Ulrich: The four generic steps of Performance Management have remained relatively stable over time: set standards, assess against those standards, allocate consequences and provide feedback. Improvements in the effectiveness of Performance Management have come from enabling external stakeholders to provide input on standards and performance, making the performance discussion more about the future than the past, using technology to simplify the process, tailoring the consequences to better reflect individual employee contributions and value, and accommodating both team as well as individual feedback.Wright: Bad tools, bad evaluations, bad feedback and bad links to reward systems lead to bad Performance Management.Ziskin: If you look back over the years of debate about Performance Management, what one or two things stand out in your mind as the biggest sources ofdebate and disagreement?Boudreau: The biggest debate has been about what are we trying to achieve? It's always been about development of people vs. evaluation of their performance, and whether these two different priorities can be reconciled.Collins: Do you separate performance feedback from compensation, and how do you do both? We also need to learn to separate the discussion about current performance from the future — future roles and future performance requirements.Wright: The debate continues over simplifying tools vs. customizing unique tools to specific jobs, roles, situations and individuals.Ulrich: There are a number of old debates and some new debates. The old debates include Performance Management should be used for discussing financial results or development potential (yes to both), whether we should measure results as well as behavior (yes to both), whether managers should be accountable to do performance reviews (yes), and who should own Performance Management— the line or HR (the line owns it, HR is the architect).Ziskin: Have we made any progress in resolving the debate over these issues?Boudreau: We have made progress in something, such as the growing recognition that effective Performance Management is much less about forms and much more about relationships.Collins: I am gravely disappointed in the progress we've made in the past 20 years, especially in accommodating new ways of working such as more distributed, virtual work. We also have not made enough progress in accounting for team performance instead of just individual performance.Wright: We are making progress in linking results, behaviors and rewards. I'd say we are beginning to achieve best principles in Performance Management, but we have not yet achieved best practices.Ulrich: The following new debates are more interesting to me than the old debates I mentioned above, and even though we are beginning to make some progress, we need much more: how we simplify the process, how we have meaningful personal conversations between leaders and employees and how we build a performanceculture where meritocracy is expected.Ziskin: In light of the Performance Management debates and related mixed progress we have discussed, if you were going to fix or kill one thing related to Performance Management, what it would it by and why?Collins: I would fix Performance Management by investing in better leaders giving better feedback, rather than trying to fix Performance Management by investing in better tools.Boudreau: I would kill the debate about Performance Management forms, tools and technology enhancements, and instead put more than 80 percent of our resources into teaching and developing leaders and employees to get the most out of the performance feedback discussion.Ulrich: I would kill Performance Management complexity, and simplify the process. Sometimes, the process becomes the end itself, and there is means/end inversion.Wright: I would kill the parochialism that comes from my way, my tool and my process. There is a lot to be learned from how others are doing Performance Management.Ziskin: When you consider the future of work, the workplace and the workforce —and how all these things are changing and affecting business performance — what one or two big implications are there for required changes to Performance Management in the future?Ulrich: The biggest implications for the future I see are simplification of the Performance Management process and more outside/in perspective whereby Performance Management is more connected to input from external stakeholders.Wright: We will see a greater emphasis on evaluating results, the end product, rather than behavior, because global dispersion of work will make it much more difficult to directly observe behavior.Boudreau: As a result of increasingly virtual, remote, temporary and independent work, performance assessment can no longer only be done by leaders — it will also be done by others including peers and employees themselves. PerformanceManagement will no longer be the province of leaders.Collins: Performance Management is going in the direction of more frequent, more transparent, more virtual, more raters and more team-based.Ziskin: Based on insights from our academic experts, as well as from my own experience, if you are working to reconcile the competing priorities associated with Performance Management, think about the following guidelines:• Simplify and de-emphasize forms and process in favor of improving the quality of relationships and conversation between leaders and employees• Accommodate trends toward more virtual and flexible work and changing demographics thorough Performance Management approaches that emphasize transparency, frequency and input from a broader range of internal and external constituents• Move from a relatively narrow focus on Performance Management to a broader emphasis on Performance CulturePeople & Strategy. 2013, Vol. 36 Issue 2, p24-25. 2p.译文：绩效管理：协调竞争的优先事项Ian Ziskin来自学术界的四位HR思想领袖：在南加州大学中心所研究有效组织的John Boudreau、在康奈尔大学高级人力资源研究中心工作的Chris Collins、在南卡罗来纳大学摩尔商学院的Pat Wright以及在密歇根大学和RBL集团工作的Dave Ulrich，与Ian总裁（掌管Excel集团有限责任公司、董事会成员、HR人员和策略）从事绩效管理事务。

员工对绩效考核系统的感知外文文献翻译最新译文

员工对绩效考核系统的感知外文文献翻译最新译文The ___ can only stay ahead of their rivals by being innovative。

and a key aspect of this is having a valid and accurate performance appraisal system (PAS) in place to rate employee performance (Armstrong。

2003.Bohlander & Snell。

2004)。

However。

it is ___ (___。

2003).2.___Aperformanceappraisalsystem(PAS)___ Dessler (2005)。

___ and potential。

The PAS is a critical tool in the human resource management process that ___ weaknesses。

and to provide feedback on how employees can improve their performance。

It also helps to align employee performance with the overall goals of the n (Dessler。

2005.Armstrong。

2003).3.___This ___ research method that involves the n and analysis of data from a single case or a small number of cases (Yin。

2003)。

A purposive sampling technique was used to select participants for the study。

企业绩效评估外文文献翻译2009年译文3000多字

文献出处：Sellers R, Nicolau J L. Assessing performance in services: the travel agency industry [J]. The Service Industries Journal, 2009, 29(5): 653-667.（声明：本译文归百度文库所有，完整译文请到百度文库。

）原文The Assessing performance of Enterprise: The Case of travel agencyindustrySellers；NicolauAbstractThe aim of this article is to compare different approaches to the evaluation of economic performance in tourism. For the first time in tourism, this article simultaneously applies traditional productivity measures as well as parametric and non-parametric techniques to estimate efficiency and compares the results obtained. The empirical application is carried out on a sample of 567 travel agencies operating in Spain in 2004. The results reveal important differences depending on the methodology employed. Overall, none of the methodologies can be said to be better than the rest. These results highlight the importance of considering different approaches when evaluating performance in tourism.Keywords: firm performance; profitability; productivity; efficiency; travel agenciesIntroductionThe assessment of performance is a critical component of the management process in any type of organisation. Business performance is recognised as a multi-dimensional construct, as it covers diverse purposes and types of organisations/levels (Lewin & Minton, 1986). The single output to input ratios, such as return on investment (ROI) andreturn on sales (ROS) may be used as indices to characterise financial performance. However, conventional referents of performance, whether they are measures of profitability, such as ROI, or productivity, are unsatisfactory discriminants of ‘excellence’(Chakravarthy,1986), as a company's performance is a complex phenomenon requiring more than a single criterion to characterise it (Zhu, 2000).Furthermore, growing competitiveness and the globalisation of markets in recent years have given rise to an economic environment where it is becoming increasingly difficult for companies to survive. In this context, efficiency and productivity have become important issues for managers, both in the manufacturing and service sectors, as the analyses of these can be useful to evaluate firm performance. However, although the service sector's size and importance has grown in the past 20 years, productivity have not grown as fast in the service sector as in the manufacturing sector (Van Biema & Greenwald, 1997).Particularly, this article analyses the tourism sector, given the importance that tourism has in the service industry. In the tourism sector, travel agencies are of course mindful of the need to manage the productivity and the efficiency of their business. However, the larger publicly quoted travel agencies tend to avoid aggregate economic approaches to the measurement of productivity in favor of firm level financial or operating measures that are meaningful to investors and stakeholders. While smaller and unquoted travel agencies have fewer stakeholders to convince, they similarly rely upon a relatively common set of operating and performance ratios (Reynolds, Howard, Dragun, Rosewell, & Ormerod,2005).This article reviews some of the methods proposed to estimate economic performance in tourism. The methodology applied is based on traditional profitability and productivity measures as well as parametricand non-parametric techniques to evaluate efficiency. The empirical application is carried out on a sample of 567 travel agencies operating in the Spanish tourist distribution sector in 2004.The remainder of the article is organised as follows. The second section reviews the previous literature in this field. The third describes the methodology and sample used. In the fourth section, the results obtained are shown. Finally, the conclusions of the study, the limitations of the paper and future research possibilities are presented in the fifth section.Literature reviewTo evaluate performance in tourism, several approaches have been proposed. Among these proposals, productivity and efficiency analyses have become very important in recent years. However, although the terms productivity and efficiency have been used interchangeably, this is unfortunate because they are not exactly the same thing. The most common interpretation in marketing and economics is expressed by Bucklin (1978) and Ingene (1982), who state that: ‘The ratio of total productivity is the quotient of all outputs to all inputs. The ratio of partial productivity is the quotient of all outputs to a single input’. In this sense, productivity indexes are calculated by inserting numbers into predetermined formulas or ratios and do not take into account the performance of other retail outlets. As an alternative, relative efficiency is a new approach to the measurement of retail productivity, which focuses on an outlet relative to the best performers rather than the average performers as with the traditional absolute measures.Studies of tourism efficiency analysis can be classified on the method employed. Most of them, use the data envelopment analysis (DEA) non-parametric method (Anderson, Fok, & Scott, 2000; Anderson, Lewis, & Parker, 1999a; Barros, 2005a, 2005b; Bell & Morey, 1995; Chiang, Tsai,& Wang,2004; Hwang & Chang, 2003; Morey & Dittman, 1995; Reynolds, 2003).A few of them are based on parametric techniques (Anderson et al., 1999a; Anderson, Fish, Xia, & Michello, 1999b; Barros, 2004; Barros & Matías, 2006; Coelli, Perelman, & Romano, 1999; Weng & Wang, 2006). Regarding the function utilised, studies rely on both Translog function (e.g. Anderson et al., 1999b; Weng & Wang, 2006) and Cobb–Douglas function (e.g. Barros, 2004; Barros & Matias, 2006).It is important to note that, in spite of the important role travel agencies play in marketing tourism products, most of efficiency analyses in tourism focus on the hotel industry (in particular, from the USA, Portugal and Taiwan). These studies use microeconomic data and consider lodging establishments of one hotel chain by employing multiple inputs and outputs. Also, they mostly apply a cross-section sample from 1 year, while studies that use samples from several years estimate productivity through Malmquist productivity index based on the non-parametric DEA technique (Barros, 2005a; Barros & Alves, 2004; Hwang & Chang, 2003), or through a parametric frontier that takes into account the possible technical change by introducing a time variable (Barros, 2004; Coelli et al., 1999). Finally, there exists a great variety of variables used in tourism efficiency analysis due to the availability of information on travelagents' inputs and outputs. MethodologyThe methodology employed to reach the goal of this article is divided into three stages.In the first stage, profitability and productivity indexes are estimated. To estimate profitability, traditional indexes such as returns on capital employed (ROCE), returns on assets (ROA) and returns on investment (ROI) are employed. Furthermore, two specific ratios employed to estimate the productivity in travelagencies are computed (i.e. salesper employee and sales per outlet).In the second stage of the methodology, both parametric and non-parametric models are employed to estimate efficiency. The basic difference between them is that the parametric models specify a functional relationship between the inputs employed and the outputs obtained, whereas in the non-parametric models no functional relationship is considered. Gong and Sickles (1992) show that neither technique uniformly dominates the other. First, a stochastic frontier production function is estimated. In this parametric model, a production function is specified, which defines output as a function of a given set of inputs. The stochastic element of this model allows some observations to lie above the production function, and accounts for measurement error and other random factors (Coelli, Prasada, & Battese,1998).ResultsIn this section, profitability and productivity indexes as well as efficiency estimates are computed.As can be seen, for the sample analysed, the mean profitability ratios are: ROA = 4.08%, ROCE = 18.722% and ROI = 11.567%. Regarding the productivity indexes, the results show that the average amount sold per employee in thousands of euros is 248.361; whereas the average amount sold per outlet is 486,827€.It also shows the mean efficiency estimates of the firms analysed using both parametric and non-parametric techniques. The estimated mean efficiency with the stochastic parametric frontier is 0.703, which indicates that there is considerable inefficiency in the Spanish tourist distribution sector. This result implies that, on average, the firms considered could have obtained 29.7% more output using the same resources. With the aim of examining the nature of the existing returns to scale. Additionally, the constant returns to scale (CRS) and VRS output-orientedDEA frontiers are estimated for the same number of retailers and the same output and input variables as for the stochastic production frontier. The mean technical efficiencies obtained for the VRS and CRS DEA frontiers are 0.548 and 0.633, respectively. Thus, the DEA analysis also reveals substantial productive inefficiency in the Spanish retail system. The mean SE for the sample analysed is 0.866. This result suggests that most of the deviation from the efficiency frontier is due to poor use of inputs and, to a lesser extent, to companies not operating at optimum size. Under the VRS model, 44 of the 567 firms analysed are fully efficient, while in terms of the CRS model 31 firms are fully efficient.Conclusions and implications for managementSeveral approaches can be found in the literature for measuring economic performance in the tourism industry. In this article, some of the most relevant approaches proposed are compared and employed to analyze the performance of the Spanish travel agency sector.While some of them allow the inclusion of multi-output performance measures, others are restricted to single outputs. Overall, none of the methodologies can be said to be better than the rest. The most appropriate methodology depends on the characteristics of the production process and the aim and scope of the analysis.In general, the application of these techniques has important implications in tourism. First of all, performance analysis is useful to the management of the retailers themselves (Sinigaglia et al., 1995). At a horizontal level, the measurement of productivity is important in the strategic management of companies in the sector, as it facilitates the realization of strategic benchmarking analysis. Basically, the process of benchmarking requires the measurement of the difference between the current performance level of an organization and the best practically possible level, in order to subsequently identify the underlying causesof each difference, the most important of which are management style, organizational structure and product quality, among others (Camp, 1989).Furthermore, the analysis of the efficiency of travel agencies also favors the management of service producers (Sinigaglia et al., 1995), as it allows them to identify intermediaries that efficiently use their resources to bring their products to the market. In this sense, efficiency becomes an orientation criterion for the choice of vertical relationships in the distribution channel (Holloway & Robinson, 1995). Traditionally, the criteria for the choice of distributors have been economic, in terms of the costs and incomes of each option; and strategic, considering market coverage, flexibility of adaptation to environmental changes or control over the actions of the intermediary. Along with these aspects, we should consider the efficiency with which intermediaries operate (Bultez & Parsons, 1998), given that it determines, to some extent, the capacity of the intermediary to comply with its primary function of serving the market.This article is not without limitations. Given the fact that we only analyze one of the players in the distribution channel, the generalization of the conclusions of the study to the whole sector should be made with caution. Therefore, the scope of the results obtained in this study should only be considered at the level of the retail format analyzed.Finally, future research lines should be directed towards considering other aspects such as the quality of the services provided, customer satisfaction or the interaction with the external environment, which are of great importance when evaluating firm performance.译文企业绩效评估：以旅行社为例塞勒斯；里卡多; 尼古拉摘要本文的研究目的是为了比较旅游社绩效的不同评估方法。

绩效考核外文文献及其译文

The Dilemma of Performance AppraisalPeter Prowse and Julie ProwseMeasuring Business Excellence,V ol.13 Iss:4,pp.69 - 77AbstractThis paper deals with the dilemma of managing performance using performance appraisal. The authors will evaluate the historical development of appraisals and argue that the critical area of line management development that was been identified as a critical success factor in appraisals has been ignored in the later literature evaluating the effectiveness of performance through appraisals.This paper willevaluatethe aims and methodsof appraisal, thedifficulties encountered in the appraisalprocess. It also re-evaluates the lack of theoretical development in appraisaland move from he psychological approachesof analysistoamorecritical realisation ofapproaches before re-evaluating the challenge to remove subjectivity and bias in judgement of appraisal.13.1IntroductionThis paper will define and outline performance management and appraisal. It will start by evaluating what form of performance is evaluated, then develop links to the development of different performance traditions (Psychological tradition, Management by Objectives, Motivation and Development).It will outline the historical development of performance management then evaluate high performance strategies using performance appraisal. It will evaluate the continuing issue of subjectivity and ethical dilemmas regarding measurement and assessment of performance. The paper will then examine how organisations measure performance before evaluation of research on some recent trends in performance appraisal.This chapter will evaluate the historical development of performance appraisal from management by objectives (MBO) literature before evaluating the debates between linkages between performance management and appraisal. It will outline the development of individual performance before linking to performance management in organizations. The outcomes of techniques to increase organizational commitment, increase job satisfaction will be critically evaluated. It will further examine the transatlantic debates between literature on efficiency and effectiveness in the North American and the United Kingdom) evidence to evaluate the HRM development and contribution of performance appraisal to individual and organizational performance.13.2 What is Performance Management?The first is sue to discuss is the difficulty of definition of Performance Management. Armstrong and Barron(1998:8) define performance management as: A strategic and integrated approach to delivering sustained success to organisations by Improving performance of people who work in them by developing the capabilities of teams And individual performance.13.2.1 Performance AppraisalAppraisal potentially is a key tool in making the most of an organisation’s human resources. The use of appraisal is widespread estimated that 80–90%of organizations in the USA and UK were using appraisal and an increase from 69 to 87% of organisations between 1998 and 2004 reported a formalperformance management system (Armstrong and Baron, 1998:200).There has been little evidence of the evaluation of the effectiveness of appraisal but more on the development in its use. Between 1998 and 2004 a sample from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD, 2007) of 562 firms found 506 were using performance appraisal in UK.What is also vital to emphasise is the rising use of performance appraisal feedback beyond performance for professionals and managers to nearly 95% of workplaces in the 2004 WERS survey (seeTable 13.1).Clearly the use of Appraisals has been the development and extension of appraisals to cover a large proportion of the UK workforce and the coverage of non managerial occupations and the extended use in private and public sectors.13.2.2 The Purpose of AppraisalsThe critical issue is what is the purpose of appraisals and how effective is it ？Researched and used in practice throughout organizations? The purpose of appraisals needs to be clearly identified. Firstly their purpose. Randell (1994) states they are a systematic evaluation of individual performance linked to workplace behaviour and/or specific criteria. Appraisals often take the form of an appraisal interview,usually annual,supported by standardised forms/paperwork.The key objective of appraisal is to provide feedback for performance is provided by the linemanager.The three key questions for quality of feedback:1. What and how are observations on performance made?2. Why and how are they discussed?3. What determines the level of performance in the job?It has been argued by one school of thought that these process cannot be performed effectively unless the line manager of person providing feedback has the interpersonal interviewing skills to providethat feedback to people being appraised. This has been defined as the “Bradford Approach” which places a high priority on appraisal skills development (Randell, 1994). This approach is outlined in Fig. 13.1 whichidentifies the linkages betweeninvolving,developing, rewarding and valuing people at work..13.2.3 Historical Development of AppraisalThe historical development of performance feedback has developed from a range of approaches.Formal observation of individual work performance was reported in Robert Owens’s Scottish factory inNew Lanarkin the early 1800s (Cole, 1925). Owen hung over machines a piece of coloured wood over machines to indicate the Super intendent’s assessment of the previous day’s conduct (white forexcellent, yellow, blue and then black for poor performance).The twentieth centuryled to F.W. Taylor and his measured performance and the scientific management movement (Taylor, 1964). The 1930sTraits Approaches identified personality and performance and used feedback using graphic rating scales, a mixed standard of performance scales noting behaviour in likert scale ratings.This was used to recruit and identify management potential in the field of selection. Later developments to prevent a middle scale from 5 scales then developed into a forced-choice scale which forced the judgement to avoid central ratings.The evaluation also included narrative statements and comments to support the ratings (Mair, 1958).In the 1940s Behavioural Methods were developed. These included Behavioural Anchored Rating Scales (BARS); Behavioural Observation Scales (BOS); Behavioural Evaluation Scales (BES); critical incident;job simulation. All these judgements were used to determine the specific levels of performance criteria to specific issues such as customer service and rated in factors such asexcellent,average orneeds to improve or poor.These ratings are assigned numerical values and added to a statement or narrative comment by the assessor. It would also lead to identify any potential need for training and more importantly to identify talent for careers in linemanagement supervision and future managerial potential.Post1945 developed into the Results-oriented approaches and led to the development of management by objectives (MBO). This provided aims and specific targets to be achievedand with in time frames such as pecific sales, profitability,and deadlines with feedback on previous performance (Wherry, 1957).The deadlines may have required alteration and led to specific performance rankings of staff. It also provided a forced distributionof rankingsof comparative performance and paired comparison ranking of performance and setting and achieving objectives.In the 1960s the developmentof Self-appraisal by discussion led to specific time and opportunity for the appraisee to reflectively evaluate their performance in the discussion and the interview developed into a conversation on a range of topics that the appraise needed to discuss in the interview. Until this period the success of the appraisal was dependent on skill of interviewer.In the 1990s the development of 360-degree appraisal developed where information was sought from a wider range of sources and the feedback was no longer dependent on the manager-subordinate power relationship but included groups appraising the performance of line managers and peer feedback from peer groups on individual performance (Redman and Snape, 1992). The final development of appraisal interviews developed in the 1990s with the emphasis on the linking performance with financial reward which will be discussed later in the paper.13.2.4 Measures of PerformanceThe dilemma of appraisal has always to develop performance measures and the use of appraisal is the key part of this process. Quantitative measure of performance communicated as standards in the business and industry level standards translated to individual performance. The introduction of techniques such as the balanced score card developed by Kaplan and Norton (1992).Performance measures and evaluation included financial, customer evaluation, feedback on internal processes and Learning and Growth. Performance standards also included qualitative measures Which argue that there is an over emphasis on metrics of quantitative approach above the definitions of quality services and total quality management.In terms of performance measures there has been a transformation in literature and a move in the 1990s to the financial rewards linked to the level of performance.The debates will be discussed later in the paper.13.3 Criticism of AppraisalsCritiques of appraisal have continued as appraisal shave increased in use and scope across sectors and occupations. The dominant critique is the management framework using appraisal as an orthodox technique that seeks to remedy the weakness and propose of appraisals as a system to develop performance.This “orthodox” approach argues there are conflicting pur poses of appraisal (Strebler et al, 2001). Appraisal can motivate staff by clarifying objectives and setting clear future objectives with provision for training and development needs to establish the performance objective. These conflicts withassessing past performance and distribution of rewards based on past performance (Bach, 2005:301).Employees are reluctant to confide any limitations and concerns on their current performance as this could impact on their merit related reward or promotion opportunities(Newton and Findley, 1996:43).This conflicts with performance as a continuum as appraisers are challenged with differing roles as both monitors and judges of performance but an understanding counsell or which Randell(1994)argues few manager shave not received the raining to perform.Appraisal Manager’s reluctance to criticise also stems from classic evidence fromMcGregor that managers are reluctant to make an egative judgement on an individual’s performance a sit could be demotivating,leadto accusationsoftheirown supportand contributiontoindividual poor performance and to also avoid interpersonal conflict (McGregor, 1957).One consequence of this avoidance of conflict is to rate all criterion as central and avoid any conflict known as the central tendency.In a study of senior managers by Long neckeretal.(1987),they found organisational politics influenced ratings of 60 senior executives.The findings were that politics involved deliberate attempts by individuals to enhance or protect self-interests when conflicting courses of action are possible and that ratings and decisions were affected by potential sources of bias or inaccuracy in their appraisal ratings (Longeneckeret al., 1987).There are methods of further bias beyond Longenecker’s evidence. The polit ical judgements and they have been distorted further by overrating some clear competencies in performance rather than being critical across all rated competencies known as the halo effect and if some competencies arelower they may prejudice the judgment acrossthe positive reviews known as the horns effect (ACAS, 1996).Some ratings may only cinclude recent events and these are known as the recency effects. In this case only recent events are noted compared to managers gathering and using data throughout the appraisal period .A particular concern is the equity of appraisal for ratings which may be distorted by gender ,ethnicity and the ratings of appraisers themselves .A range of studies in both the US and UK have highlighted subjectivity in terms of gender (Alimo-Metcalf, 1991;White, 1999) and ethnicity of the appraise and appraiser(Geddes and Konrad, 2003). Suggestions and solutions on resolving bias will be reviewed later.The second analysis is the radical critique of appraisal. This is the more critical management literature that argues that appraisal and performance management are about management control(Newton and Findley, 1996;Townley, 1993). It argues that tighter management control over employee behaviour can be achieved by the extension of appraisal to manual workers, professional as means to control. This develops the literature of Foucault using power and surveillance. This literature uses cases in examples of public service control on professionals such a teachers (Healy, 1997) and University professionals(Townley, 1990).This evidence argues the increased control of public services using appraisal as a method of control and that the outcome of managerial objectives ignores the developmental role of appraisal and ratings are awarded for people who accept and embrace the culture and organizational values . However, this literature ignores the employee resistance and the use of professional unions to challenge the attempts to exert control over professionals and staff in the appraisal process (Bach, 2005:306).One of the different issues of removing bias was the use of the test metaphor (Folgeretal.,1992).This was based on the assumption that appraisal ratings were a technical question of assessing “true” performance and there needed to be increased reliability and validity of appraisal as an instrument to develop motivation and performance. The sources of rater bias and errors can be resolvedby improved organisational justice and increasing reliability of appraiser’s judgement.However there were problems such as an assumption that you can state job requirements clearly and the organization is “rational” with objectives that reflect values and that the judgment by appraisers’ are value free from political agendas and personal objectives. Secondly there is the second issue of subjectivity if appraisal ratings where decisions on appraisal are rated by a “political metaphor”(Hart le, 1995).This “political view” argues that a appraisal is often done badly because there is a lack of training for appraisers and appraisers may see the appraisal as a waste of time. This becomes a process which managers have to perform and not as a potential to improve employee performance .Organisations in this context are “political” and the appraisers seek to maintain performance from subordinates and view appraises as internal customers to satisfy. This means managers use appraisal to avoid interpersonal conflict and develop strategies for their own personal advancement and seek a quiet life by avoiding censure from higher managers.This perception means managers also see appraisee seeks good rating and genuine feedback and career development by seeking evidence of combining employee promotion and pay rise.This means appraisal ratings become political judgements and seek to avoid interpersonal conflicts. The approaches of the “test” and “political” metaphors of appraisal are inaccurate and lack objec tivity and judgement of employee performance is inaccurate and accuracy is avoided.The issue is how can organisations resolve this lack of objectivity?13.3.1 Solutions to Lack of Objectivity of AppraisalGrint(1993)argues that the solutions to objectivity lies in part with McGregor’s (1957) classic critique by retraining and removal of “top down” ratings by managers and replacement with multiple rater evaluation which removes bias and the objectivity by upward performance appraisal. The validity of upward appraisal means there moval of subjective appraisal ratings.This approach is also suggested to remove gender bias in appraisal ratings against women in appraisals (Fletcher, 1999). The solution of multiple reporting(internal colleagues, customers and recipients of services) will reduce subjectivity and inequity of appraisal ratings. This argument develops further by the rise in the need to evaluate project teams and increasing levels of teamwork to include peer assessment. The solutions also in theory mean increased closer contact with individual manager and appraises and increasing services linked to customer facing evaluations.However, negative feedback still demotivates and plenty of feedback and explanation by manager who collates feedback rather than judges performance andfail to summarise evaluations.There are however still problems with accuracy of appraisal objectivity asWalker and Smither (1999)5year studyof 252 managers over 5 year period still identified issues with subjective ratings in 360 degree appraisals.There are still issues on the subjectivity of appraisals beyond the areas of lack of training.The contribution of appraisal is strongly related to employee attitudes and strong relationships with job satisfaction(Fletcher and Williams, 1996). The evidence on appraisal still remains positive in terms of reinvigo rating social relationships at work (Townley,1993)and the widespread adoption in large public services in the UK such as the national health Service (NHS)is the valuable contribution to line managers discussion with staff on their past performance, discussing personal development plans and training and development as positive issues.One further concern is the openness of appraisal related to employee reward which we now discuss.13.3.2 Linking Appraisals with Reward ManagementAppraisal and performance management have been inextricably linked to employee reward since the development of strategic human resource management in the 1980s. The early literature on appraisal linked appraisal with employee control (Randell, 1994;Grint, 1993;Townley, 1993, 1999) and discussed the use of performance related reward to appraisals. However therecent literature has substituted the chapter titles employee “appraisal” with “performance management”(Bach, 2005; Storey, 2007) and moved the focus on performance and performance pay and the limits of employee appraisal. The appraisal and performance pay link has developed into debates to three key issues:The first issue is has performance pay related to appraisal grown in use?The second issue is what type of performance do we reward?and the final issue is who judges management standards?The first discussion on influences of growth of performance pay schemes is the assumption that increasing linkage between individual effort and financial reward increases performance levels. This linkage between effort and financial reward increasing levels of performance has proved an increasing trend in the public and private sector (Bevan and Thompson, 1992;Armstrong and Baron, 1998). The drive to increase public sector performance effort and setting of targets may even be inconsistent in the experiences of some organizational settings aimed at achieving long-term targets(Kessler and Purcell, 1992;Marsden, 2007). The development of merit based pay based on performance assessed by a manager is rising in the UK Marsden (2007)reported that the: Use of performance appraisals as a basis for merit pay are used in65 percent of public sector and 69 percent of the private sector employees where appraisal covered all nonmanagerial staff(p.109).Merit pay has also grown in use as in 1998 20% of workplaces used performance related schemes compared to 32% in the same organizations 2004 (Kersley et al., 2006:191). The achievements of satisfactory ratings or above satisfactory performance averages were used as evidence to reward individual performance ratings in the UK Civil Service (Marsden, 2007).Table 13.2 outlines the extent of merit pay in 2004.The second issue is what forms of performance is rewarded. The use of past appraisal ratings as evidence of achieving merit-related payments linked to achieving higher performance was the predominant factor developed in the public services. The evidence on Setting performance targets have been as Kessler (2000:280) reported “inconsistent within organizations and problematic for certain professional or less skilled occupations where goals have not been easily formulated”. There has been inconclusive evidence from organizations on the impact of performance pay and its effectiveness in improving performance. Evidence from a number of individual performance pay schemes report organizations suspending or reviewing them on the grounds that individual performance reward has produced no effect in performance or even demotivates staff(Kessler, 2000:281).More in-depth studies setting performance goals followed by appraisal on how well they were resulted in loss of motivation whilst maintaining productivity and achieved managers using imposing increased performance standards (Marsden and Richardson, 1994). As Randell(1994) had highlighted earlier, the potential objectivity and self-criticism in appraisal reviews become areas that appraisees refuse to acknowledge as weaknesses with appraisers if this leads to a reduction in their merit pay.Objectivity and self reflection for development becomes a weakness that appraises fail to acknowledge as a developmental issue if it reduces their chances of a reduced evaluation that will reduce their merit reward. The review of civil service merit pay (Makinson, 2000)reported from 4major UK Civil Service Agencies and the National Health Service concluded that existing forms of performance pay and performance management had failed to motivate many staff.The conclusions were that employees found individual performance pay divisive and led to reduced willingness to co-operate with management ,citing managerial favorites and manipulation of appraisal scores to lower ratings to save paying rewards to staff (Marsden and French, 1998).This has clear implications on the relationship between line managers and appraises and the demotivational consequences and reduced commitment provide clear evidence of the danger to linking individual performance appraisal to reward in the public services. Employees focus on the issues that gain key performance focus by focusing on specific objectives related to key performance indicators rather than all personal objectives. A study of banking performance pay by Lewis(1998)highlighted imposed targets which were unattainable with a range of 20 performance targets with narrow short term financial orientatated goals. The narrow focus on key targets and neglect of other performance aspects leads to tasks not being delivered.This final issue of judging management standards has already highlighted issues of inequity and bias based on gender (Beyer, 1990; Chen and DiTomasio, 1996; Fletcher, 1999). The suggested solutions to resolved Iscrimination have been proposed as enhanced interpersonal skills training are increased equitable use of 360 degree appraisal as a method to evaluate feedback from colleagues as this reduces the use of the “political metaphor”(Randell, 1994;Fletcher, 1999).On measures linking performance to improvement require a wider approach to enhanced work design and motivation to develop and enhance employee job satisfaction and the design of linkages between effort and performance are significant in the private sector and feedback and awareness in the public sector (Fletcher and Williams, 1996:176). Where rises be in pay were determined by achieving critical rated appraisal objectives, employees are less self critical and open to any developmental needs in a performance review.13.4 ConclusionAs performance appraisal provides a major potential for employee feedback that could link strongly to increasing motivation ,and a opportunity to clarify goals and achieve long term individual performance and career development why does it still suffers from what Randell describes as a muddle and confusion which still surrounds the theory and practice?There are key issues that require resolution and a great deal depends on the extent to which you have a good relationship with your line manager . Barlow(1989)argued `if you get off badly with your first two managers ,you may just as well forget it (p. 515).The evidence on the continued practice of appraisals is that they are still institutionally elaborated systems of management appraisal and development is significant rhetoric in the apparatus of bureaucratic control by managers (Barlow, 1989). In reality the companies create, review, change and even abolish appraisals if they fail to develop and enhance organisational performance(Kessler, 2000). Despite all the criticism and evidence the critics have failed to suggest an alternative for a process that can provide feedback, develop motivation, identify training and potential and evidence that can justify potential career development and justify reward(Hartle, 1997).绩效考核的困境Peter Prowse and Julie Prowse摘要本文旨在用绩效考核方法来解决绩效管理的困境。

人力资源专业绩效考核管理方面英文文献及中文翻译

人力资源专业绩效考核管理方面英文文献及中文翻译Performance assessment inquiryAbstractIn the aspect of human resource management, performance appraisal methods of diversity, in the end should adopt what kind of performance evaluation method is more reasonable, performance appraisal should be by what kind of way is easier to implement and achieve the better management results, is a question worth pondering. This paper will focus on the types of performance assessment and its effect, analyze the types of performance assessment, and explore how to correctly andappropriately assess the performance, and do a good job in management.1.Performance appraisals - purpose and how to make it easierPerformance appraisals are essential for the effective managementand evaluation of staff. Appraisals help develop individuals, improve organizational performance, and feed into business planning. Formal performance appraisals are generally conducted annually for all staff in the organization. His or her line manager appraises each staff member. Directors are appraised by the CEO, who is appraised by the chairman or company owners, depending on the size and structure of the organization.Annual performance appraisals enable management and monitoring of standards, agreeing expectations and objectives, and delegation of responsibilities and tasks. Staff performance appraisals also establishindividual training needs and enable organizational training needs analysis and planning.Performance appraisals also typically feed into organizationalannual pay and grading reviews, which commonly also coincide with the business planning for the next trading year.Performance appraisals generally review each individual'sperformance against objectives and standards for the trading year,agreed at the previous appraisal meeting. Performance appraisals arealso essential for career and succession planning - for individuals, crucial jobs, and for the organization as a whole.Performance appraisals are important for staff motivation, attitude and behavior development, communicating and aligning individual and organizational aims, andfostering positive relationships between management and staff.Performance appraisals provide a formal, recorded, regular review ofan individual's performance, and a plan for future development.Job performance appraisals - in whatever form they take - aretherefore vital for managing the performance of people and organizations.Managers and appraises commonly dislike appraisals and try to avoid them. To these people the appraisal is daunting and time-consuming. The process is seen as a difficult administrative chore and emotionally challenging. The annual appraisal is maybe the only time since last year that the two people have sat down together for a meaningful one-to-onediscussion. No wonder then that appraisals are stressful - which then defeats the whole purpose.Appraisals are much easier, and especially more relaxed, if the boss meets each of the team members individually and regularly for one-to-one discussion throughout the year.Meaningful regular discussion about work, career, aims, progress, development, hopes and dreams, life, the universe, the TV, common interests, etc., whatever, makes appraisals so much easier because people then know and trust each other - which reduces all the stress and the uncertainty.Put off discussions and of course they loom very large. So don'twait for the annual appraisal to sit down and talk. The boss or the appraises can instigate this.If you are an employee with a shy boss, then take the lead. If you are a boss who rarely sits down and talks with people - or whose people are not used to talking with their boss - then set about relaxing the atmosphere and improving relationships. Appraisals (and work) all tend to be easier when people communicate well and know each other.So sit down together and talk as often as you can, and then when the actual formal appraisals are due everyone will find the whole process to be far more natural, quick, and easy - and a lot more productive too.2.Appraisals, social responsibility and whole-person developmentThere is increasingly a need for performance appraisals of staff and especiallymanagers, directors and CEO's, to include accountabilities relating to corporate responsibility, represented by various converging corporate responsibility concepts including: the “Triple Bottom Line”; corporate social responsibility (CSR);Sustainability; corporate integrity and ethics; Fair Trade, etc. The organization must decide the extent to which these accountabilities are reflected in job responsibilities, which would then naturally feature accordingly in performance appraisals. More about this aspect of responsibility is in the directors’ job descriptions section.Significantly also, while this appraisal outline is necessarily a formal structure this does not mean that the development discussed with the appraises must be formal and constrained. In fact the opposite applies. Appraisals must address “whole person”development - not just job skills or the skills required for thenext promotion.Appraisals must not discriminate against anyone on the grounds of age, gender, sexual orientation, race, religion, disability, etc.The UK Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006, (consistent with Europe), effective from 1st October 2006, make it particularly important to avoid any comments, judgments, suggestions, questions or decisions which might be perceived by the appraises to be based on age. This means people who are young as well as old. Age, along with other characteristics stated above, is not a lawful basis for assessing andmanaging people, unless proper 'objective justification' can be proven. See the Age Diversity information.When designing or planning and conducting appraisals, seek to help the 'whole-person' to grow in whatever direction they want, not just to identify obviously relevant work skills training. Increasingly, the best employers recognize that growing the 'whole person' promotes positive attitudes, advancement, motivation, and also develops lots of new skills that can be surprisingly relevant to working productively andeffectively in any sort of organization.Developing the whole-person is also an important aspect of modern corporate responsibility, and separately (if you needed a purely business-driven incentive for adopting these principles), whole-person development is a crucial advantage in the employment market, in whichall employers compete to attract the best recruits, andto retain the best staff.Therefore in appraisals, be creative and imaginative in discussing, discovering and agreeing 'whole-person' development that people will respond to, beyond the usual job skill-set, and incorporate this sort of development into the appraisal process. Abraham Maslow recognized this over fifty years ago.If you are an employee and your employer has yet to embrace or even acknowledge these concepts, do them a favor at your own appraisal and suggest they look at these ideas, or maybe mention it at your exitinterview prior to joining a better employer who cares about the people, not just the work.Incidentally the Multiple Intelligences test and VAK Learning Styles test are extremely useful tools for appraisals, before or after, to help people understand their natural potential and strengths and to help managers understand this about their people too. There are a lot of people out there who are in jobs which don't allow them to use and develop their greatest strengths; so the more we can help folk understand their own special potential, and find roles that really fit well, the happier we shall all be.3 .Are performance appraisals still beneficial and appropriateIt is sometimes fashionable in the 'modern age' to dismisstraditional processes such as performance appraisals as being irrelevant or unhelpful. Be very wary however if considering removing appraisals from your own organizational practices. It is likely that the critics of the appraisal process are the people who can't conduct them very well.It's a common human response to want to jettison something that onefinds difficult. Appraisals - in whatever form, and there are various - have been a mainstay of management for decades, for good reasons.Think about everything that performance appraisals can achieve and contribute to when they are properly managed, for example:(1)performance measurement - transparent, short, medium and longterm(2)clarifying, defining, redefining priorities and objectives(3)motivation through agreeing helpful aims and targets(4)motivation though achievement and feedback(5)training needs and learning desires - assessment and agreement(6)identification of personal strengths and direction - including unused hidden strengths(7)career and succession planning - personal and organizational(8)team roles clarification and team building(9)organizational training needs assessment and analysis(10)appraise and manager mutual awareness, understanding and relationship(11)resolving confusions and misunderstandings(12)reinforcing and cascading organizational philosophies, values, aims, strategies, priorities, etc(13)delegation, additional responsibilities, employee growth and development(14)counseling and feedback(15)manager development - all good managers should be able to conduct appraisals well - it's a fundamental process(16)the list goes onPeople have less and less face-to-face time together these days. Performance appraisals offer a way to protect and manage these valuable face-to-face opportunities. My advice is to hold on to and nurture these situations, and if you are under pressure to replace performance appraisals with some sort of (apparently) more efficient and costeffective methods, be very sure that you can safely cover all the aspects of performance and attitudinal development that a well-run performance appraisals system is naturally designed to achieve.There are various ways of conducting performance appraisals, and ideas change over time as to what are the most effective appraisals methods and systems. Some people advocate traditional appraisals and forms; others prefer 360-degree-type appraisals; others suggest using little more than a blank sheet of paper.In fact performance appraisals of all types are effective if theyare conducted properly, and better still if the appraisal process is clearly explained to, agreed by, the people involved.Managers need guidance, training and encouragement in how to conduct appraisals properly. Especially the detractors and the critics. Help anxious managers (and directors) develop and adapt appraisals methods that work for them. Be flexible. There are lots of ways to conduct appraisals, and particularly lots of ways to diffuse apprehension and fear - for managers and appraises alike. Particularly - encourage people to sit down together and review informally and often - this removes much of the pressure for managers and appraises at formal appraisals times. Leaving everything to a single make-or-break discussion once a year is asking for trouble and trepidation.Look out especially for the warning signs of 'negative cascaded attitudes' towards appraisals. This is most often found where a senior manager or director hates conducting appraisals, usually because theyare uncomfortable and inexperienced in conducting them. The senior manager/director typically will be heard to say that appraisals don't work and are a waste of time, which for them becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.All that said, performance appraisals that are administered without training (for those who need it), without explanation or consultation, and conducted poorly will be counter-productive and is a waste of everyone's time.Well-prepared and well-conducted performance appraisals provide unique opportunities to help appraise and managers improve and develop, and thereby also the organizations for whom they work.Just like any other process, if performance appraisals aren't working, don't blame the process, ask yourself whether it is being properly trained, explained, agreed and conducted.4. Effective performance appraisalsAside from formal traditional (annual, six-monthly, quarterly, or monthly) performance appraisals, there are many different methods of performance evaluation. The use of any of these methods depends on the purpose of the evaluation, the individual, the assessor, and the environment.The formal annual performance appraisal is generally the over-riding instrument, which gathers together and reviews all other performance data for the previous year.Performance appraisals should be positive experiences. Theappraisals process provides the platform for development and motivation, so organizations should foster a feeling that performance appraisals are positive opportunities, in order to get the best out of the people and the process. In certain organizations, performance appraisals are widely regarded as something rather less welcoming ('blocking sessions' is not an unusual description), which provides a basis only on which to develop fear and resentment, so never, never, never use a staff performance appraisal to handle matters of discipline or admonishment, which should instead be handled via separately arranged meetings.5. Types of performance and aptitude assessments(1)Formal annual performance appraisals(2)Probationary reviews(3)Informal one-to-one review discussions(4)Counseling meetings(5) Observation post(6) Skills or career-related tests(7) Assignment or task to follow the review, including the secondment(8)Assessment Centre, including the observation group exercises, presentations and other tests(9)Communicate with people who investigate the views of others(10) Acts of psychological tests and other assessment(11)Handwriting analysis绩效考核探究摘要在人力资源管理方面，绩效考核的方法多种多样，到底应该采用哪一种绩效考核方法更为合理，绩效考核又应该通过什么样的途径更易于实现并取得更好的管理成效，是一个值得深思的问题。

1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。

绩效考核外文翻译参考文献(文档含中英文对照即英文原文和中文翻译)原文:Performance management - how to appraise employeeperformanceAbstractPerformance appraisal is an important content of human resource management in modern enterprises. According to the problems existing atthe present stage Chinese enterprise performance evaluation, put forward the improvement measures to improve the performance appraisal. Performance management is the responsibility between managers and employees and improve the communication performance of the ongoing. The partners should understand why they become partners, thereby supporting the work. Performance evaluation is a part of performance management, do not confuse the twoIntroductionChallenges of performance managementReasons to avoid performance management: Manager: reports and program has no meaning; no time; afraid of conflict; feedback and observation. (performance management, prevent problems in investment in time, ensure the managers have the time to do the thing you should do staff: bad experience; what was about to happen no bottom; do not understand the significance of performance management; don't like received criticism. Criterion two, performance management, organizational success: 1 Factors: coordination among units means, towards a common goal; problem, find the problems, find problems or prevent problems; obey the law, be protected by the law; make major decisions, a way of getting information; improve the quality of staff, to make the organization more competitive., performance management of organization,must be useful to managers, the only reason of performancemanagement is to help employees to success. to understand better how to design and what made him act. , the performance management challenge is how to find practical,meaningful ways to finish it, which need thought and wisdom.Performance management is a systemThe performance plan -- starting point of performance management:employees and managers to work together, as employees do what, do what degree of problem identification, understanding.Continuous performance communication: both tracking progress, find the obstacles that affect performance and process so that the two sides success required information. Communication methods: (1) around were observed; (2)employees; (3) allow employees to work review;Performance diagnosis: to identify individuals, departments and organizational performance by the real reason for the problem of communication and problem solving process.Performance management is a small system in the large system. If you want to get the maximum profit, must complete the performance management process,and not a part of.Performance management and strategic planning, budget, staff ,employee salary incentive system, improve the quality of plans are related. Do the performance management process to do the preparation of1, there are two key points: with the staff to collect meaningful, to establish the information needed to measurable goals; to do some basic work, so that in the whole process of performance management and employee can fully cooperation. In part, access to information and data of performance management effect is it can help organizations, units and employees towards a direction some "target"information each employee's job description; (2) employee last performance review data and related documents.The performance plan three steps: preparation, meeting, finalize plans. your job, you should do what, how to measure your success, sets threat mosphere and seize the key; to review the relevant information, ask more,talk less; the job duties and specific goal; determine the success criteria; discuss what are the difficulties and need what help; discuss the importance level and authorized to ask problem; 4, note: in the performance management process, should pay attention to communication with staff thought is the action guide, to carry out effective performance communication, we must pay attention to in the thought. All aspects of the performance communication throughout the performance cycle, plays an important role in any one link in the chain, leaving the performance communication, any unilateral decisions managers will affect the enthusiasm of the staff, performance management. No performance communication there is no performancemanagement. In order to make the performance management on the right track, truly play its role,enterprises must put the supervisor and employee performance communication as a priority among priorities to research and development, through the system specification, performance management become competent habit, the habit of employees, to solve the performance problem employees work for dialogue and exchanges, the performance management into effect.Three methods of performance evaluation: Predicament 1, individual performance evaluation --: the best opera actor and amateur orchestra concert.The opera actors play the extreme, but the effect is very bad. No one is isolated,only focus on the individual, can not solve the problem. We call on an individual basis on employee performance evaluation, but if we emphasize individual performance but not the antecedents and consequences and conditions of performance, we do not progress, because we did not find the real reason -- may be because employees can not control things and punish employees, may also be because of the wrong reason 2, regardless of the what way to assess performance, avoid two traps are important: 1) don't do performance problems or"always the fault of employees" this hypothesis; 2) without any assessment can give the "why" and "what is happening in the picture". Evaluation is just the beginning, is a further discussion as well as the starting point of diagnosis. Three methods of performance evaluation: 3, 1) rating method:: features,to and behavior project; identify each project performance level gauge and other ways. Advantages: easy to finish the work of assessment. Disadvantages:forget why do this work; too vague, in the performance plan, prevention,protection and development staff and so did not what role in improving methods:with employees regularly write brief conversation; evaluation; interpretation and evaluation project meaning; together with the staff rating 2) ranking method:forcing staff to compete with each other, have stimulation can be short term, long term may cause internal malicious competition. 3) target and standard evaluation method: Standard: according to the prior and employees a series of established criteria to measure the performance of employees. Advantages: the personal goals and work together to reduce the possibility of target; both sides disagree;defect: need more time; text work more; more energy. Communication method and communication technologyWay of thinking: the process of performance management is the process of communication.Relationship with the staff is not only reflected in the behavior on performance management, but also should reflect the daily and how successful way of thinking: A, the process of performance management is a complete process together with the staff, not a for staff B, except for some unilateral disciplinary action, performance plan, communication and assessment should adopt a cooperative mode; C, most of the staff, once you understand what they are asked to do things,will try the method can meet the requirements D,performance management is not the purpose of staring past mistakes, clear posibility, but in the problem solving problems and possible e, performance deficit to be clear, the cause of the deficit, whether for personal reasons or the system reason; F, in most cases, if the manager will support staff as their work,so that each employee 2, must set some skills communication skills: Manager here guide employees to participate in the discussion process and understand the process of responsibility. Purpose: don't most probably it did not actually happen. Be prepared to establish a common responsibility and each stage all contribute to the relationship, the target. Clear the common responsibility: to improve the performance is not only the responsibility of the staff. Clear procedures: prevent conflict resolution skills: clear individual responsibility, invites employees to take advice. For the people of the criticism and comments: avoid if you don't listen, you don't know what you talking about,could you be quiet for a while, you read the report in the past did not remarks:avoid such as how many years, you always can't finish the job on time, we have ried that, there is no with the need need making guide guilty intent: to avoid if you really care about the team, you should work harder; I guess you don't care about this project not appropriate advice and sure: avoid as I know the project is late, but I'm sure you'll catch up; you will do well. You will understand the need,need to unsolicited advice and sure: avoid you mustdo it; this is the only way; to finish this today, and put it on my desk. A provocative question: Why did you say those who avoid. What you think; is the need to need; what is you get this conclusion? Don't trust to avoid language: are you sure you can finish on time?I've heard you need to exaggerate these need: avoid you never finish the work on time; you always try to reject my proposal. The cooling technique of fierce debate. The performance of a, discuss the process of dispute, we should pay attention to two goals: must make suggestions on conflict; avoid damage relations, cause new problems in the future performance. B, give employees a vent frustration and anger for feeling, not very fast counter attack. C, remember the people when they do appear conflict. D, the way of handling conflicts: conflicts through persuasion, won the right to try to understand the means; staff positions, find a solution. E, conflict is the most effective treatment technology is active listening.F, and be confused in mind or angry employees dealing, the basic principle is the first concern of his emotional. G, disputes arise, request the dispute settle ment measures, but never from the subject. H, too excited, communication should be suspended.The performance of communication is the core of performance management, is refers to between the employers and employees performance evaluation reflects the problems and evaluation mechanism itself to conduct substantive interviews,and tries to seek countermeasures,a management method for service in the later stage of enterprise and employee performance, improve and enhance the.A process of performance management is on the lower level on the performance target setting and implementation and ongoing two-way communication.译文:绩效管理——如何考评员工表现摘要绩效考核是现代企业人力资源管理的重要内容。