skill builders _

Employee evaluation:measure performance, not attitude

III!II

By Stephen C. BushardtM. E. Schnake

The problems involved in appraisingemployees is a recurring topic in man-.agement literature. It is no easy task toobjectively evaluate an employee's per-formance, but the reality of organiza-tionallife is that the manager must makejudgments concerning pay, promotion,and transfer. The issue is not whether ornot to appraise employees, because theevaluation of employees will occur infor-

"Sktll Builders'' is a monthiy columnfeatun'ng short articles aimed at helpingmanagers improve their "people" sktlls,submitted by various management au-thorities.. Stephen C. Bushardt is assistantpro-

fessor of management at the Universityof Southern Mississippi. Mr. Busbardthas held positions in private business asuel! as serving as an instructor in busi-ness administration at another univer-sity, and he developed and directedmanagement training programs in coun-ty hospitals.

Melvin E. Schnake is presently com-pleting his graduate work for the Docto-rate of Business Administration at Missts-szppi State University where he alsoservesas a teaching assistant. He has hadarticles published in Supervisory Man-agement and in the proceedings of theMidwest Division of the Academy ofManagement Annual Meeting.

mally if not formally. The central issueis, are performance evaluations beingconducted properly? Are they accom-plishing what is intended?

Employee evaluation should be basedon job performance, but to objectivelymeasure this is no easy task. A commonpitfall is for managers to evaluate em-ployee attitude, which is much easier.How many employees have missed outon a promotion or received a lower salaryincrease because of a "bad attitude?"How many times have you heard thatsomeone has an attitude problem?

Managers who place a great deal ofemphasis on attitudes in evaluating em-ployees are emphasizing the wrong fac-tor. This is unfortunate because it tendsto be dysfunctional to the employee, thesuperior, and the organization in that itserves to obscure the real issue of theemployee's performance.

The use of employee attitude as aproxy for measuring performance is mis-guided for a number of reasons. First, itis based on false assumptions; second, wecan't measure attitudes; third, attitudesare not easy to change; and fourth, theuse of attitudes obscures the real measureof performance (i.e., behavior).

False Assumptions. Many managersapparently assume that attitudes affectperformance. For example, if an employ-ee has a bad attitude about the job, he orshe will perform poorly. The manager in

this situation may threaten to dischargethe employee if his or her attitude doesnot improve. It is important to point outthat such threats seldom alter a person'sattitude.

Perhaps the employee was a poor per-former because he or she did not havethe necessary skills. In this case, the poorperformance may have lead to a bad atti-tude, instead of the attitude leading toperformance. If the manager continuesto be concerned with trying to changethe employee's attitude, he or she maynever get to the real cause of the employ-ee's poor performance.

Similarly, many managers apparentlyassume that a good attitude leads togood performance. The employee mayalways appear happy and enthused withthe job, and tell the manager exactlywhat he or he wants to hear, when infact, this person is actually spendingmuch of the day in social interaction atthe neglect of the job.

Thus, it is clear that the assumptionthat attitude leads to performance doesnot always hold true. At times perfor-mance leads to attitude and yet at othertimes, there appears to be little relation-ship between the two.

Measurement Problem. Even if itcould be determined that attitudes arethe most important factor in determin-ing job performance, it is extremely dif-ficult to measure them. Hire three psy-

Management World February 1981 41

FOURTAPESTOMOTIVATE!

Four "hard-hitting" cassettetapes on vital personnel topicsare now available for use bychapters at regular or specialmeetings or half-day seminars.

• How To Be An EffectiveSupervisor

• Motivating Employees forMaximum Results

• Why Good Employees Quit

• Challenges of ModernLeadership

Each tape runs for approxi-mately 40 minutes and can beused effectively for group dis-cussions. They provide a learn-ning experience for all levels ofmanagement.

Send your orders for thesemanagement tools to JudyMessina, AMS Home Office,Maryland Rd., Willow Grove,PA 19090. The price for eachtape is $12.

42 Management World February 1981

chologists who specialize in attitudemeasurement to measure an employee'sattitude and you will more than likelyget three differing opinions. Certainlythe average manager is in no position tomeasure such a nebulous concept as atti-tude.

Furthermore, many managers cannotagree on what a "bad attitude" actuallyis. What one manager may perceive as abad attitude may be perceived as devo-tion to duty by another, and which mayin fact be frustration on the part of a sub-ordinate who is unable to satisfy impor-tant needs. .

For example, the subordinate mayhave a strong need to achieve, to moveup in the organization. Perhaps he or sheis making every effort to ensure a highlevel of performance and yet hasn'tachieved his or her goal of a promotion.This is more likely to occur in organiza-tions where factors other then perform-ance are considered in promotional deci-sions (i.e., personality traits and politicalfactors). The subordinate who is doinghis or her best to perform, perceives thathe or she is in fact doing so, and yet isn'trewarded for it is likely to experiencefrustration. This may appear to the supe-rior as a "bad attitude."

Thus, the subordinate who may ap-pear not to care about his or her work orthe organization may, in fact, be just theopposite - the fact that he or she doescare a great deal has led to the problem.

Attitudes Are Difficult to Change.Again, even if attitudes could be deter-mined to be the most important factor indetermining job performance, it is ex-tremely difficult to alter them. An em-ployee's attitudes toward his or her job ortoward work in general tends to be anintegral part of his or her personality,which has taken years to develop, andtends to be relatively stable. In the caseof managers threatening their employeeswith punitive action unless their attitudeirnpoved, it is extremely doubtful thatfive minutes of counseling can truly alteran employee's attitude, even under thethreat of losing one's job.

Quite often what we see as an attitudechange is a charade designed to fool themanager. When this occurs, the employ-ee's attitude toward the job may have, infact, taken a turn for the worse. In thiscase, by attempting to change the em-ployee's attitudes rather than dealingwith behavior, the manager has unknow-

ingly achieved just the opposite of whathe or she intended!

A case in point involved a superiorwho informed the subordinate that animportant factor in determining meritraises is attitude toward the job. Thesubordinate responded with "tell mewhat attitude I need to receive a ten per-cent raise, and I'll have it."

The process of altering an employee'sattitude toward his job is extremely diffi-cult because we tend to have intense atti-tudes toward work. In addition, there isoften a lack of resources available tospend on employee attitude change.Quite frankly, it tends to be more eco-nomical to change employees than toalter attitudes.

The Real Issue is Behavior. Managers,in using employee attitudes as a proxyfor performance, are obscuring the realmeasure of performance - behavior. Asa measure 01 performance, behaviorovercomes the limitations of attitudes.Unlike attitudes, specific behavior is di-rectly linked to performance. Further-more, since we can describe the behaviorthat leads to successful performance, wecan measure it. Behavior is, obviously,more readily observable than attitudes,and is also more readily determined byemployees, who are in a much better po-sition to determine what is expected ofthem than if they were told they neededto improve their attitudes.

Finally, behavior can be altered by thesuperior. This is accomplished by simplyrewarding desirable behavior and not re-warding or applying negative sanctionsto undesirable behavior.

As difficult as the evaluation of subor-dinates is for most managers, the processshould not be complicated unnecessarilyby including employee attitudes. This isnot to say that employee attitudes do notaffect performance. It simply means thatthere is no clear, consistent relationshipbetween the two. Furthermore, even ifwe could accurately measure attitudes, itis doubtful that we have the skills to alterthem direct! y.

Behavior, on the other hand, over-comes the limitations of attitudes in theevaluation of employees. We can specifythe behavior that impacts upon perform-ance, measure it, and, if necessary, alterit. If we concentrate on effectively evalu-ating and correcting employee behavior,the attitudes will tend to correctthemselves. 0