Assignment 01
Submitted to:
Dr. Mohd Hasanur Raihan Joarder Associate Professor, Director, School of Business (!", nited !nternational ni#ersit$
Submitted by: Name %asria Alam Sadman Shouro# Sumi$a Basair %oma %ashfea
ID 111 1&' 0' 111 1&' 11' 111 1'1 )* 111 +la +la +la
Section B
&nd A-ril &01)
United !nternational University
Assignment topics
1. &. '. /.
A--raisal Method and ffecti#eness Pro+lems and o+stacle in -erformance a--raisal Performance A--raisal from sociological -ers-ecti#e aria+les influencing em-lo$ees -erformance
VARIABLES INFLUENIN! E"#L$%EE #ERF$R"ANE
Introduction
m-lo$ee -erformance is defined as 2hether a -erson e3ecutes their 4o+ duties and res-onsi+ilities 2ell. %he 4o+ related acti#ities e3-ected of a 2or5er and ho2 2ell those acti#ities 2ere e3ecuted. Man$ +usiness -ersonnel directors assess the em-lo$ee -erformance of each staff mem+er on an annual or 6uarterl$ +asis in order to hel- them identif$ suggested areas for im-ro#ement.
An em-lo$ee -erformance a--raisal is a -rocess7often com+ining +oth 2ritten and oral elements72here+$ management e#aluates
and
-ro#ides feed+ac5 on em-lo$ee 4o+
-erformance, including ste-s to im-ro#e or redirect acti#ities as needed. Documenting -erformance -ro#ides a +asis for -a$ increases and -romotions. A--raisals are also im-ortant to hel- staff mem+ers im-ro#e their -erformance and as an a#enue +$ 2hich the$ can +e re2arded or recogni8ed for a 4o+ 2ell done. !n addition, the$ can ser#e a host of other functions, -ro#iding a launching -oint from 2hich com-anies can clarif$ and sha-e res-onsi+ilities in accordance 2ith +usiness trends, clear lines of management9em-lo$ee communication, and s-ur re9 e3aminations of -otentiall$ hoar$ +usiness -ractices. :et Joel M$ers notes in Memphis Business Journal that ;in man$ organi8ations, -erformance a--raisals onl$ occur 2hen management is +uilding a case to terminate someone. !t
%here are man$ #aria+les that affect the -erformance of em-lo$ees at 2or5 -lace. %hese #aria+les include managers attitude, organi8ational culture, -ersonal -ro+lems, 4o+ content and financial re2ards. All of these #aria+les ha#e -ositi#e im-act on the -erformance of the em-lo$ees e3ce-t -ersonal -ro+lems of the em-lo$ees that hinders the -erformance of the em-lo$ees. =e 2ill see the effect of these #aria+les managers attitude, organi8ational culture, -ersonal -ro+lems, 4o+ content and financial re2ards.
Performance of em-lo$ees is affected +$ numerous factors at 2or5 -lace. !t is defined as the 2a$ to -erform the 4o+ tas5s according to the -rescri+ed 4o+ descri-tion. Performance is the art to com-lete the tas5 2ithin the defined +oundaries. %here are lots of factors that affect the -erformance of em-lo$ees. %he main theme of the stud$ re#ol#es around those #aria+les. %his stud$ 2ill focus to 5no2 a+out the -erformance and factors affecting the em-lo$ees. %he #aria+les that are determined to affect the -erformance at 2or5 -lace include managers attitude, organi8ational culture, -ersonal -ro+lems, and 4o+ content and financial re2ards. %hese #aria+les are descri+ed in different studies that affect the -erformance of em-lo$ees at 2or5 -lace. %his stud$ 2ill find out the im-act of managers attitude, organi8ational culture, -ersonal -ro+lems and 4o+ content and financial re2ards on the em-lo$ees -erformance. !t 2ill also highlight ho2 these #aria+les affect the -erformance either -ositi#el$ or negati#el$. Although the -ositi#e affect has +een seen through the literature re#ie2 +ut this stud$ 2ill determine it again
&'eoretica( )rame*or+
Employee Performance
Employee Performance
Mangers attitude
Organization al Culture
Personal Problems
Financial Job Content Reward
Motivation Commi
Re(ations'ips Bet*een "anager,s Attitude and Emp(oyee,s #er)ormance:
%he managerial control affects the -erformance of em-lo$ees at 2or5 -lace. !f the managers attitudes fair 2ith the em-lo$ees, then the em-lo$ees are 2illing to 2or5 energeticall$. %he -erformance +ar of the em-lo$ees is raised -ositi#el$ if the managers control is fair in monitoring them. !f the control and attitude of the manager is interacti#e and -romoting, then the em-lo$ees 2or5 in the +etterment of the organi8ation. !f the manager is un+iased to2ards em-lo$ees, these organi8ations -rogress more than others. !t is necessar$ that the manager is un+iased and treats e#er$ em-lo$ee 2ithout discrimination. Managerial standards can +e a factor in moti#ating or de9moti#ating em-lo$ees, according to technolog$ em-lo$ment resource %ech Re-u+lic. Managerial standards should +e in line 2ith the 4o+ duties outlined in the 4o+ descri-tion outlined +$ human resources. %he +ac5ground of the em-lo$ee, including their educational histor$, is also outlined in a 4o+ descri-tion. Mana gers should 5ee- their e3-ectations in line 2ith the duties assigned to the em-lo$ee. B$ e3-ecting more from an em-lo$ee than the$
2ere hired for, or than their +ac5ground has -re-ared them for, can diminish em-lo$ee -erformance.
Re(ations'ips Bet*een $rgani-ation,s u(ture and Emp(oyee,s #er)ormance:
%he organi8ations culture matters a lot in u-grading the em-lo$ees -erformance. !f the en#ironment is eas$ and comforta+le to 2or5, then the em-lo$ees are encouraged to 2or5 effecti#el$ and efficientl$. %he good and com-etiti#e organi8ation culture enhances the -erformance of the 2or5 force. %he mem+ers of the organi8ations are encouraged to 2or5 effecti#el$ if the culture of the organi8ation is strong and moti#ating. >rgani8ational culture is a reflection of em-lo$ees -erformance. !t is directl$ -ro-ortional to the em-lo$ees -erformance
Re(ations'ips Bet*een #ersona( #rob(ems and Emp(oyee,s #er)ormance:
Personal traits of the em-lo$ees affect the -erformance of the em-lo$ees at 2or5. Personal -ro+lems are a ma4or hindrance in the -roducti#it$ of the em-lo$ees. An em-lo$ee 2ith a dull mind set cannot 2or5 2ith attention. !f the em-lo$ee 2ill +e fresh and free from tensions, he 2ill +e a+le to gi#e -ositi#e results and out-ut at 2or5. %he intelligence of the em-lo$ees is affected +$ the -ersonal -ro+lems. An$ -erson distur+ed from famil$ -ro+lems or u-set mentall$ cannot 2or5 2ill full ca-acit$ at 2or5. Personal -ro+lems ha#e negati#e im-act on the -erformance of the em-lo$ees
Re(ations'ips Bet*een .ob ontent and Emp(oyee,s #er)ormance:
An$ 4o+ re6uires creati#it$, enthusiastic en#ironment and challenging goals to accom-lish. !f the 4o+ content is challenging and inno#ati#e then the em-lo$ees are 2illing to gi#e -ositi#e out-ut. !f the 4o+ tas5s are creati#e and attainment of goal is necessar$, then the em-lo$ees gi#e more out-ut than others. ?or this 4o+ enrichment and 4o+ rotation is im-ortant. m-lo$ees get +ore of doing the same routine tas5 all the time. !nno#ation and creati#eness enhance the em-lo$ees -erformance
Re(ations'ips Bet*een Financia( Re*ards and Emp(oyee,s #er)ormance:
%here is a strong relationshi- +et2een financial re2ards and em-lo$ees -erformance. !f the -erformance is +ac5ed +$ financial re2ards, then em-lo$ees 2or5 more energeticall$. !t is considered a great moti#ator for the em-lo$ees. !ncenti#es increase the em-lo$ees commitment 2hich ultimatel$ results in good -erformance. Assigning financial +enefits result in the -ositi#e -erformance of em-lo$ees at 2or5.
Re(ations'ip bet*een "otivation and Emp(oyees, per)ormance
%o get the +est -erformance from em-lo$ees, there needs to +e some sort of moti#ation +e$ond the 2ee5l$ -a$chec5. Moti#ation can come in the form of financial incenti#es, the o--ortunit$ to get in#ol#ed in com-an$ -ro4ects, a career -ath that leads to management and direct in#ol#ement from management into the dail$ tas5s. ffecti#e moti#ation can create a -roducti#e 2or5 force, +ut a lac5 of moti#ating factors can lea#e em-lo$ees searching for reasons to gi#e their ma3imum effort.
Re(ations'ip bet*een ommitment and Emp(oyees #er)ormance
m-lo$ees that feel as though the com-an$ has made a commitment to em-lo$ee success tend to -erform +etter, according to Personnel S$stems Associates. @ommitment means offering a com-etiti#e rate of -a$ and +enefits -ac5age, offering assistance in -a$ing for em-lo$ee
Emp(oyee Eva(uations
An effecti#e em-lo$ee e#aluation is an interacti#e -rocess 2here the manager gi#es his in-ut on the em-lo$ee
onc(usion
%he factors a+o#e -ro#ide an inno#ati#e attem-t at in#estigating an o+#ious $et neglected lin5 there is a -ositi#e relationshi- +et2een the managers attitude and em-lo$ees -erformance. %he firms 2ith congenial managers attitude ha#e more -ositi#e im-act on em-lo$ees -erformance. %he factors also suggest that there is a -ositi#e relationshi- +et2een the >rgani8ations culture and em-lo$ees. %here is a relationshi- +et2een the Personal -ro+lems and em-lo$ees -erformance.
Re)erence:
1. Bang, H.S., %.. Ross and Jr, Reio, &01'. ?rom moti#ation to organi8ational commitment of #olunteers in non9-rofit s-ort organi8ations %he Role of Jo+ Satisfaction.
&. @hen, ., R.. Plo$hart, H.@. %homas, . Anderson and P.D. Bliese, &011. %he -o2er of momentum A e2 Model of D$namic Relationshi-s Bet2een Jo+ Satisfaction @hange and %urno#er !ntentions.
'. Denc5er, J.@., M. ru+er and S.C. Shah, &00. !ndi#idual and >--ortunit$ ?actors !nfluencing Jo+ @reation in e2 ?irms. /. Janssen, >. and =. an $-eren, &00/. m-lo$ees goal orientations, the 6ualit$ of leader9mem+er e3change and the outcomes of 4o+ -erformance and Jo+ Satisfaction.
. Cir5man, B.E., B. Rosen, P. %eslu5 and @. i+son, &00/. %he im-act of team em-o2erment on #irtual team -erformance %he Moderating Role of ?ace9to9face !nteraction.
). Eiao, H. and A. @huang, &00/. A Multile#el !n#estigation of ?actors !nfluencing m-lo$ee Ser#ice Performance and @ustomer >utcomes.
F. Eiao, H. and A. @huang, &00/. A Multile#el !n#estigation of ?actors !nfluencing m-lo$ee Ser#ice Performance and @ustomer >utcomes.
