Appraisals need a fresh look

        雕龍文庫 分享 時間: 收藏本文

        Appraisals need a fresh look

        As year draws to an end, employees in many, if not all, work units begin to get nervous. Companies and government organizations start to sack employees graded last in their work performance assessments. The policy is commonly known as "eliminating the last-graded (ELG)".

        This method of employee management originated in Western countries and was introduced to China in mid-1990s. Under this system, all employees are graded from excellent to very poor in a comprehensive assessment of their work performance. Those at the tail end are fired.

        Ever since its introduction, the practice has been blamed for being "inhuman" in terms of labor-management relations because it places all employees in constant fear of being surpassed by co-workers. Managers, however, favor the system because they claim it stimulates employees to keep improving in their work.

        Controversy aside, the system is not rational, and does not result in the effective management of human resources.

        First, the system is illogical.

        It determines an employee's qualification by comparing his/her performance with that of others rather than gauging the performance against certain standards. In evaluating performance, some standards must have been adopted, hence the different marks every employee is given. It is highly probable that all employees measure up to the standards though there are differences.

        The ELG system, however, eliminates those who rank last in disregard to their having met the standards. This means that no matter how hard one works, one cannot avoid being eliminated if others have done better.

        Second, no method of evaluation is absolutely objective. Many subjective factors interfere in an assessment and conditions are usually too complicated for rules to be applied without discrimination.

        For instance, a person who is more enthusiastic and responsible about work tends to undertake more work or insists on co-workers abiding by the standards, hence there are more chances of making mistakes and inviting jealous resentment.

        Third, as ELG is conducted on the basis of individual departments, it is highly likely that one who ranks last in one department outperforms many others who work in another. Then, is it fair to fire this person simply because he ranks last in a better-performing department?

        ELG derives from the so-called quantized management, which applies mathematical models to all links in the process of management and translates the assessment of all aspects of work performance into digits. Quantized management makes final evaluation easier and more objective. It is based on a comprehensive, scientifically structured system and meticulous observation of every detail of the rules and standards.

        Scientific management is a good thing but it also imposes higher requirements on managers. To ensure more reasonable and effective management, especially of human resources, managers should improve their abilities and work harder rather than rely on a sluggard's magic formulae, such as ELG.

        Otherwise, they will be eventually eliminated themselves.


        As year draws to an end, employees in many, if not all, work units begin to get nervous. Companies and government organizations start to sack employees graded last in their work performance assessments. The policy is commonly known as "eliminating the last-graded (ELG)".

        This method of employee management originated in Western countries and was introduced to China in mid-1990s. Under this system, all employees are graded from excellent to very poor in a comprehensive assessment of their work performance. Those at the tail end are fired.

        Ever since its introduction, the practice has been blamed for being "inhuman" in terms of labor-management relations because it places all employees in constant fear of being surpassed by co-workers. Managers, however, favor the system because they claim it stimulates employees to keep improving in their work.

        Controversy aside, the system is not rational, and does not result in the effective management of human resources.

        First, the system is illogical.

        It determines an employee's qualification by comparing his/her performance with that of others rather than gauging the performance against certain standards. In evaluating performance, some standards must have been adopted, hence the different marks every employee is given. It is highly probable that all employees measure up to the standards though there are differences.

        The ELG system, however, eliminates those who rank last in disregard to their having met the standards. This means that no matter how hard one works, one cannot avoid being eliminated if others have done better.

        Second, no method of evaluation is absolutely objective. Many subjective factors interfere in an assessment and conditions are usually too complicated for rules to be applied without discrimination.

        For instance, a person who is more enthusiastic and responsible about work tends to undertake more work or insists on co-workers abiding by the standards, hence there are more chances of making mistakes and inviting jealous resentment.

        Third, as ELG is conducted on the basis of individual departments, it is highly likely that one who ranks last in one department outperforms many others who work in another. Then, is it fair to fire this person simply because he ranks last in a better-performing department?

        ELG derives from the so-called quantized management, which applies mathematical models to all links in the process of management and translates the assessment of all aspects of work performance into digits. Quantized management makes final evaluation easier and more objective. It is based on a comprehensive, scientifically structured system and meticulous observation of every detail of the rules and standards.

        Scientific management is a good thing but it also imposes higher requirements on managers. To ensure more reasonable and effective management, especially of human resources, managers should improve their abilities and work harder rather than rely on a sluggard's magic formulae, such as ELG.

        Otherwise, they will be eventually eliminated themselves.


        亚洲男人的天堂久久精品 | 久久国产精品亚洲综合| 亚洲午夜电影在线观看高清| 亚洲无线电影官网| 亚洲AV成人无码久久精品老人| 亚洲国产日韩在线视频| 亚洲一区二区三区在线视频| 久久综合亚洲色hezyo| 亚洲av成人片在线观看| 国产精品亚洲专区无码唯爱网| 亚洲色少妇熟女11p| 在线观看亚洲AV每日更新无码| 91丁香亚洲综合社区| 亚洲精品午夜国产va久久| 一本天堂ⅴ无码亚洲道久久| 男人天堂2018亚洲男人天堂| 亚洲香蕉久久一区二区| 一本色道久久88—综合亚洲精品| 亚洲色中文字幕在线播放| 亚洲精品人成网线在线播放va | 国产亚洲情侣一区二区无| 综合亚洲伊人午夜网| 亚洲精品色午夜无码专区日韩| 亚洲精品无码Av人在线观看国产| 亚洲Av永久无码精品三区在线| 无码乱人伦一区二区亚洲一| 中文字幕亚洲精品| 亚洲二区在线视频| 亚洲中文字幕久久精品蜜桃| 亚洲av无码日韩av无码网站冲| 亚洲AV中文无码乱人伦在线视色| 亚洲人成人无码网www国产| 国产亚洲精品不卡在线| 亚洲高清专区日韩精品| 亚洲无线电影官网| www.亚洲成在线| 在线观看亚洲精品专区| 伊人久久综在合线亚洲91 | 亚洲AV成人无码网天堂| 亚洲一区二区视频在线观看| 久久九九亚洲精品|