Performance Management -- Basic Concepts

Much of the information in this topic is adapted from the books Field Guide to
Leadership and Supervision and Field Guide to Leadership and Supervision for Nonprofit
Staff.

Employee Performance Management is a process for establishing a shared workforce understanding

about what is to be achieved at an organisation level. It is about aligning the organisational objectives
with the employees' agreed measures, skills, competency requirements, development plans and the
delivery of results. The emphasis is on improvement, learning and development in order to achieve the
overall business strategy and to create a high performance workforce

An assessment of an employee, process, equipment or other factor to gauge progress toward

predetermined goals. See also organizational development (OD), performance appraisal,
application performance management (APM), business performance management (BPM),
operational performance management (OPM)

performance appraisal
The process by which a manager or consultant (1) examines and evaluates an employee's work
behavior by comparing it with preset standards, (2) documents the results of the comparison, and
(3) uses the results to provide feedback to the employee to show where improvements are needed
and why.
Performance appraisals are employed to determine who needs what training, and who will be
promoted, demoted, retained, or fired.

Multi-Phase Appraisal | Performance

Management
Performance Management: Multi-Phase Appraisal
Best practices in Performance Management dictate a proactive approach to the Performance
Appraisal or Review Process that follows the multi-phase design:

Planning Phase:
Set mutually agreed upon goals and guidelines for employee evaluation. Determine the key
objectives for measuring success in the position and set developmental goals to encourage
greater productivity and results.

Performance Phase:
The longest phase that allows the employee to meet goal and objectives, develop new skills and
track accomplishments or set backs in the system throughout the process. Managers are
reviewing performance and making notes as well.

Assessment Phase:
Employees are given an opportunity near the end of the performance cycle to provide feedback
on the preset goals, competencies and objectives to deliver to their manager. This is when the
manager will document feedback on the employee performance as well. The system allows
senior managers to review all submitted documentation and sign off before the actual review is
complete.

Review Phase:
Manager and employee sit down together to discuss the year in review. Reviews can be
presented online or printed and e-signature that the review took place can be captured in the
system to protect the organization if legal review should occur.

5 Reasons Why Performance Appraisal Is Essential

Regular performance appraisals help create a corporate culture that promotes personal success,
along with collaboration. Individual employees need the reinforcement of knowing that their
contributions are valued by upper management. The appraisal process offers several benefits
organizationally, generating an atmosphere of excellence. Performance appraisals allow
management personnel to establish guidelines for compensation increases; track employee
strengths and weaknesses; identify the best candidates for promotion; offer feedback for
improvements; and promote training programs.

1. Establishing compensation guidelines

Employee compensation should be directly tied to performance. Employees that go above and
beyond the call of duty normally receive higher annual increases than employees that do the bare
minimum. Compensation is the single best way to reward exemplary job performance. The only
way to consistently track exception performance is through an appraisal process. Regular, oneon-one, discussions about an employees execution of job responsibilities helps when assessing
the year for those in different raise brackets.

2. Track strengths and weaknesses

No one person determines an organizations success. Different workers bring their experience
and strengths to the table, allowing projects to succeed with minimal delays. Identifying the
right candidates for the right teams is a crucial part of successful management. The best way to
ensure the right workers come together is to track individual strength and weaknesses.
Consistent performance appraisals make that information easily accessible when it is time to
hand out new assignments.

3. Identifying promotion candidates

Hiring from within an organization keeps organizational memory strong, allowing for continuity
of management styles. Unfortunately, not every applicant has the skill set needed to make the
transition to a higher position. Quarterly, or even annual, appraisals allow hiring managers to
look back over the applicants entire work history and find the best internal candidates for a
promotion.

4. Offer feedback
Constructive criticism provides employees with the necessary information to improve their onthe-job performance. Good managers give feedback that motivates employees to strive for
improvement. Employees informed about performance expectations are better able to meet the challenges
of excellence. By giving employees feedback about their performance on a regular basis, managers open
up the lines of communication, enabling a good working relationship and encouraging a spirit of
collaboration. Employees and managers work together to tackle the roadblocks to success.
5. Introducing training programs
Performance reviews offer an excellent time to discuss additional training and continuing
education requirements. Professionals need to stay up-to-date on industry best practices.
The only way to ensure this happens, is to track training and offer programs internally. Not
only do training programs help keep employees current on new policies and procedures,
they also help keep employees on the cutting edge of technology. Office software, project
management solutions and even management philosophies change as businesses adapt to
changes in the marketplace. The success of an organization depend s on every memaking
training an integral part of continued success.

ROLES OF SUPERVISORS
Coach
A good supervisor places a high priority on coaching employees. Good coaching involves working with employees to
establish suitable goals, action plans and time lines. The supervisor delegates and also provides ongoing guidance
and support to the employee as they complete their action plans. Rarely can job goals be established without
considering other aspects of an employee's life, e.g., time available for training, career preferences, personal
strengths and weaknesses, etc. A supervisor is sometimes confronted with walking a fine line between being a
supervisor and the employee's confidant.

Mentor
Usually the supervisor understands the organization and the employee's profession better than the employee.
Consequently, the supervisor is in a unique position to give ongoing advice to the employee about job and career.
The employee can look to the supervisor as a model for direction and development. An effective mentor-mentee
relationship requires the supervisor to accept the responsibility of mentorship. A good supervisor can be a priceless
addition to the career of an employee.

Advocate for Organization

Often, the supervisor is the first person to tell employees about new policies and programs from management. It's
not uncommon that employees are confused or frustrated by these new actions, and need further clarification and
support from supervisors. In the rapidly changing world of today's organizations, it can be a major challenge to
present new programs to employees without their being frustrated or even cynical. The supervisor must be
authentic, yet tactful.

Advocate for Employee

The supervisor is often responsible to represent the employee's requests and to management, along with also
representing the employee's case for deserving a reward. For example, if an employee deserves a promotion, the
supervisor often must justify the case for promotion to the supervisor's supervisor, as well. If the employee has a
rather unique personal situation that warrants special consideration by the rest of management, the supervisor
must explain this situation and how it can be handled. It's not unusual for employees to sometimes see the
supervisor as part of "management" while at other times seeing the supervisor as a personal friend.

management by objectives (MBO)

A management system in which the objectives of an organization are agreed upon so that
management and employees understand a common way forward.
Management by objectives aims to serve as a basis for (A) greater efficiency through systematic
procedures, (B) greater employee motivation and commitment through participation in the
planning process, and (C) planning for results instead of planning just for work. In management
by objectives practice, specific objectives are determined jointly by managers and their
subordinates, progress toward agreed-upon objectives is periodically reviewed, end results are
evaluated, and rewards are allocated on the basis of the progress. The objectives must meet five
criteria: they must be (1) arranged in order of their importance, (2) expressed quantitatively,
wherever possible, (3) realistic, (4) consistent with the organization's policies, and (5) compatible
with one another. Suggested by the management guru Peter Drucker (1909-2005) in early 1950s,
management by objectives enjoyed huge popularity for some time but soon fell out of favor due
to its rigidity and administrative burden. Its emphasis on setting clear goals, however, has been
vindicated and remains valid.

Electronic Performance Management

designed to make your appraisal process quick and easy.

Aspiration EPerformance management places effective performance management where it

belongsin the hands of line managers. Performance contracting and appraisal has never been
easier. Goals or KPIs are linked to the balanced scorecard elements giving the organisation an
overall view of performance with drill down capability to departments, sub departments and
individuals.

Key Features
Job or Individual Centred Performance Contracts
Uploading of Performance Goals from previous periods
Secure Password Controlled Environment
Secure On Line Appraisal
Option of automatic E mail Notification of Completed
Appraisal to employee and next level manager
Client Specific Performance Periods
Workflow control to monitor appraisal progress
Archive Capability for Previous Period Appraisals
Options of different weighting protocols
Option to include competency ratings

Most Serious Performance Appraisal Problems

1. Dont assess actual performance most of the assessment that managers complete
focuses on the person, including characterizations of their personal traits (i.e. commitment),
knowledge (i.e. technical knowledge) or behaviors (i.e. attendance). While these factors may
contribute to performance, they are not measures of actual output. If you want to assess the
person, call it person appraisal. Performance is output quality, volume, dollar value, and
responsiveness.
2. Infrequent feedback if the primary goal of the process is to identify and resolve
performance issues, executing the process annually is silly. A quality assessment/control
program anywhere else in the business would operate in real time. At the very minimum, formal
feedback needs to be given quarterly, like the GE process.

3. Non-data-based assessment most processes rely 100% on the memory of those

completing the assessment because pre-populating the forms with data to inform decisions
would be too difficult (cynicism). In addition, most assessment criteria are fuzzy and
subjective.
4. Lack of effectiveness metrics many accept that the goals of the process are to
recognize results, provide feedback to address weaknesses, determine training needs, and to
identify poor performers. Unfortunately, rarely do process owners ever measure their processes
contribution to attaining any of these goals. Instead, the most common measure relating to
performance appraisal is the percentage completed.
5. Lack of accountability managers are not measured or held accountable for providing
accurate feedback. While they may be chastised for completing them late, there is no penalty
for doing a half-assed job or making mistakes on them, which is incredibly common. One firm
attempting to remove a troublesome employee found that the manager had rated the individual
the highest within the department and awarded them employee of the year.
Process related problems
6. Disconnected from rewards in too many organizations, getting a merit raise, bonus, or
promotion is completely disconnected from an employees performance appraisal scores. When
there is a weak link, employees and managers are not likely to take the process seriously.
7. No integration the process is not fully integrated with compensation, performance
management, development, or staffing (internal movement). A lack of integration and
coordination leads to duplication and missed opportunity.
8. Individual scores exceed team performance without controls, quite often the average
score of team members exceeds the actual performance of the team (i.e. the team reached 80
percent of its goals but the average performance appraisal for its members was 95 percent).
9. Each year stands alone each performance appraisal by definition covers a finite period of
time. However, if the goal is to assess potential and identify patterns, an employees
performance must be assessed over multiple years.
10. No comprehensive team assessment although individuals on the team are assessed,
there is no simultaneous overall assessment of the team. Often contingent workers on the team
are not addressed at all.
11. A focus on the squeaky wheel most performance appraisal systems focus on weak
performers. There is significantly less focus on top performers and thus there is no system to
capture their best practices and then to share them with others.
12. Little legal support performance appraisals may be an executives worst enemy in
grievances and legal proceedings. Even though the process may be flawless, poor execution by
managers often results in performance appraisals that do not aid in a disciplinary action. Errors
may include unfettered discretion, improper handwritten notes, generalizations about race,
gender, or age, and appraisals that do not match the performance data. At my university, a
study demonstrated that while Asians got the highest performance score, they somehow
managed to get the lowest average pay raise. When the HR director was confronted, he was
furious that anyone would calculate and expose the obvious discrimination.
13. No second review even though the process may have impacts on salary, job security,
and promotion, in many firms the assessment is done by a single manager. If there is a second
review, it may be cursory, and therefore not ensure accuracy or fairness.
14. Not reliable or valid most process managers do not regularly demonstrate with metrics
that the process is consistently repeatable (reliable) and that it accurately assesses
performance (valid).

15. Cross-comparisons are not required one of the goals of the process is often to
compare the performance of employees in the same job. Unfortunately, most appraisal
processes (with the exception of forced ranking) do not require managers to do a side-by-side
comparison, comparing each member of the team with one another.
16. Assessments are kept secret although a salespersons performance ranking may be
posted on a wall, performance appraisals are often kept secret. An overemphasis on privacy
concerns might allow managers to play favorites, to discriminate, and to be extremely
subjective. Keeping ratings secret allows managers to avoid open conversations about equity.
17. Process manager is not powerful often the process is managed by lower-level HR
administrators without a complete understanding of performance and productivity.
18. No process goals the overall process operates without clear and measurable goals, and
as a result there is little focus.
19. Not global most processes and forms are headquarters centric, failing to address
cultural, language, and legal differences.
20. Forced ranking issues although forced ranking has some advantages, using it may
result in significant morale and PR issues.
21. No ROI calculation HR fails to do a periodic business case justifying the value added
compared to the time and the cost of the process.
Instrument (form) problems
22. Doesnt address diversity all too often, the same appraisal form is applied to a large but
not homogeneous group of employees (i.e. all hourly, all exempts, all managers etc.). As a
result, the assessment form does not fit the job. Only management-by-objective-type
approaches address individual needs.
23. The process does not flex with the business rarely does any portion of the appraisal
process flex to address changing business objectives.
24. The factors are all equal most forms treat all assessment factors as if they are of equal
importance. Instead, they should be weighted based on their relative importance in a particular
job (i.e. a janitors customer service rating should be weighted lower than for a salesperson.
25. Inconsistent ratings on the same form it is not uncommon for managers to put one
level (high, average or low) of ratings in the Likert scale portion of the form, but another level of
rating in the overall assessment box. The final narrative portion of the assessment may
contain still another completely different level of assessment.
26. Disconnected from job descriptions in many cases, the factors on the form are
completely different from the factors on an employees job description, bonus criteria, or yearly
goals. This can confuse employees and cause them to lose focus.
Manager/execution problems
27. Managers are not trained in most organizations, managers are not trained on how to
assess and give honest feedback. If the process includes a career development component, it is
even more likely that managers will not know how to enhance the career path of their
employees.
28. Managers are chickens some managers will do almost anything to avoid tough
decisions or confrontation. Some provide no differentiation and spread peanut butter (an even
distribution) to avoid it, while others give everyone above
29. Gaming the system often managers artificially rate individual employees to save money
or to keep employees from becoming visible for promotion. Some selfishly give a score just

below that required for a pay increase, while others give scores just above the point where they
would be required to take disciplinary action.
30. Recency errors managers, especially those who dont consult employee files and data,
have a tendency to evaluate based primarily on events that occurred during the last few months
(rather than over the entire year).
31. Corporate culture issues subjective appraisals can restrict cultural change in
organizations. In some organizations, there are cultural norms and values that influence
performance appraisals. For example, in one organization new hires were automatically given
an average rating for their first year, regardless of their actual performance. One top performing
hire I knew abruptly quit after receiving this cultural gift.
32. Inconsistency across managers some managers are naturally easy raters while
others are not. As a result, employees working under easy managers have a better chance of
promotion due to their higher scores. In firms that rely heavily on the narrative portion of the
assessment, having a manager with poor writing skills may hamper an employees career.
Without benchmark numbers to set as a standard, inconsistency is guaranteed in large
organizations.
33. Managers dont know the employee managers of large and global organizations, as
well as newly hired and transferred in managers may be forced to do appraisals on employees
they barely know. Recently promoted managers may be forced to assess their former friends
and colleagues. Following a merger, managers are likely to be confused about whether to focus
on the whole year or just post-merger work.
34. Secret codes I did some work with an army unit where by custom literally everyone got a
perfect numerical score. So assessments by higher-ups were made as a result of interpreting
code words in the small written narrative portion of the assessment. Unfortunately, if your
commander didnt know the code words, your army career was limited.
35. Mirror assessments most people, and managers are no exception, have a tendency to
rate people like themselves more positively. This can result in discrimination issues.
36. Managers are not rewarded managers that go out of their way to provide honest
feedback and actually improve the performance of their workers are not rewarded or
recognized.
37. Managers dont own it managers often feel they dont own the process, so they invest
little in it and proceed to blame HR for everything. Managers would embrace it instead of
grumbling if they were presented with a positive correlation proving that managers who did
excellent performance appraisals were among the highest performers with regards to business
result and bonus awards.
Employee/subject problems
38. High anxiety because the process is so subjective and no benchmark performance
numbers are set in advance, uncertainty can cause many employees high levels of anxiety
weeks before the process. Managers may also be anxious because of the uncertainty related to
the an employees reaction. I know one employee who sincerely thought she was going to be
fired prior to her assessment but ended up being the highest rated employee on the team.
Employees should have an accurate idea of their assessment long before any meeting is
scheduled.
39. One-way communication some managers simply give the employee the form to quickly
sign and they dont even solicit feedback. Many employees are intimidated by managers and
the process, and as a result, they say nothing during or after the appraisal.

40. Self-assessment is not possible if an ambitious employee wanted to self-assess their

performance midstream (in order to improve), most processes do not provide access to the
instrument. Providing each employee with a virtual assessment scoreboard and performance
management process would be an ideal solution.
41. No alerts most processes do not allow an employee to be notified midstream should their
performance change to the point where it was suddenly dramatically below standards.
42. No choice of reviewers although there are a few exceptions (Sun), in most cases, unlike
with 360 reviews, employees are not allowed input into who does their assessment.
43. One-way process in most cases, employees also have no input into the factors that they
are assessed on, how often they are assessed, and what type of feedback they can receive. It is
unfortunately even rare for a process manager to routinely survey their users for suggestions on
how to improve it.
44. No appeal process employees who disagree with her appraisal are seldom given the
opportunity to challenge the results with a neutral party.
45. Retention issues the ultimate cost of an unfair assessment may be that it actually
drives your top employees away because, for example, there was no differential in recognition
and rewards for their superior performance.
46. Many possible emotional consequences if performance appraisal is blotched, you can
expect a decrease in employee engagement, trust, employer brand strength, teamwork, and
innovation contribution. Employee referrals from disgruntled employees will probably also drop.
Timing issues
47. A time-consuming process most of the forms are incredibly long and time-consuming.
As a result, some managers routinely recycle last years evaluations. If HR is required to sit in
on the sessions, the amount of wasted time increases significantly.
48. It is historical the process is focused on capturing feedback about last year rather than
on discussing necessary changes to job and skill requirements that must necessitated by the
business strategy.
49. Not coordinated with business cycles some appraisal dates do not coincide with the
end of major business periods or seasons when all other business results are tabulated and
reported.
50. Not simultaneous if appraisals are done on the employees anniversary date, the entire
team will not be assessed at the same tim

Building blocks of a performance management system

A good performance management system will contain the following elements:
Recruitment

Recruit on behaviour and skills; train knowledge

Do not accept less than you require
Use behavioural event interview questions
Consider using in-tray exercises to determine ability to prioritise
Check references
Use probationary periods.

Training

o
o
o
o

Induct thoroughly
Induction is the time when the new employee gains their sense of purpose
Do not limit yourself to formal face-to-face and e-learning modules
Toolbox meetings
Quizzes, crosswords, puzzles
Competitions
Work site role plays
Design and create measures for the training outcomes you want before designing
training
Involve your people as trainers
Train managers and supervisors to coach.

Coaching and Counselling

Give fast, accurate, specific and timely feedback

Set up formal coaching sessions
Use experienced empathetic people in non-supervisory roles as coaches too
Counsel for poor performance and poor behaviour
The ninety percent of people who do not require counselling will be watching to see
what you do.

Appraisals

Set up formal appraisals no less than annually, preferably every six months
Appraise against quality, quantity, job knowledge, initiative, reliability, adaptability
Have supervisor and employee complete the appraisal and compare
Set new goals for next appraisal for everyone
Include completion of training as a goal
Career plan for those who want a career.

Reward and recognition

o
o
o

o
o

Use rewards that can link directly with the performance in the memory of the recipient
For monetary rewards use a salary plus pool system for best results
Create a pool of funds
The availability of the pool is triggered by a single measure which the team can
influence
The pool is divided amongst a team using a set of measures which the individual can
readily influence
Publically recognise performance
e.g. League tables for teams, outstanding employee
Take care not to embarrass shy people.

Career development

o
o

Publish typical career pathways

Identify competency development required along the pathway
Consider establishing coaching roles as additional pathways
Succession plan for leadership roles and key operational roles
Use assignments, project teams and temporary transfers to stretch and train people.

General
Home

Recommendations to improve performance appraisals

In a previous post we covered What do performance appraisals accomplish?. That post
discussed the perceptions that managers and subordinates have on the performance appraisal
regarding what functions are fulfilled. It highlighted the contrast between intention and actual
usege. Below are more in-depth recommendations to improve the effectiveness of performance
appraisals.

Recommendations:
Make sure mgrs and subordinates understand the appraisal system:
The appraisal system should be explicitly described specific to the purpose of the appraisal.
Organizations that clearly state the purpose for the appraisal reduce the confusion and ambiguity
of the process. The goal should be that everyone knows why you are conducting appraisals.
Think of it as purpose and procedure training.
Assess the effectiveness of your current system:
What are the intended functions of the current system? Recall that in What do performance
appraisals accomplish?, managers and subordinates agreed that the system uphold some
functions while falling short in other functions. Additionally, managers and subordinates have
different needs. Identify them, and construct a questionnaire to assess the degree to which org
members perceive the process to be effective. Only then is the organization in position to
develop a strategy to address shortcomings.
Appraisal skills training for your managers is a must:
It can reasonably be concluded that the ability of the supervisor to skillfully appraise his/her
subordinate is critical to an effective appraisal. Training must focus on helping managers develop
specific appraisal skills and confidence in their ability to effectively evaluate others. Skills
should include (each of these could be a book on their own):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Goal setting
Communicating performance standards
Observing subordinate performance
Coaching and providing feedback
Completing the rating form
Conducting the appraisal review

Increase managers willingness to conduct effective appraisals

Primary causes of appraisal ineffectiveness fall squarely on the managers shoulder. Its the
harsh truth, but organizations should take more steps to facilitate. Offer refresher trainings, or
training on the skills mentioned in the previous bullet. In short, arm or prepare managers to best
carry out effective appraisals.

Start with effective performance planning

Planning is required to set the stage for effective appraisals. The majority of subordinates cited
unclear performance standards as a cause of ineffective appraisals. Meaningful and accurate
evaluation and feedback requires clear goals be established beforehand. Therefore a large part of
the process should be devoted to determining what actions need to be taken in the future. It is
harder to correct the results of poor planning than it is to plan correctly at the beginning.
Make informal appraisals ongoing activity
Annual appraisals are only as effective as what happens during the rest of the work year.
Managers can increase the effectiveness by scheduling periodic, informal appraisals with
subordinates on a regular basis. Mini-appraisals encourage honest communication, give the
manager an opportunity to monitor employee progress, provide employee with an ongoing
source of feedback, and address minor problems before they build or snowball. This can be
difficult to maintain throughout the year as workloads pile up. However, when systems and
structures are put in place, they can help ensure commitment to ongoing activity. Heres how
Point to Performance can help.
Provide resources necessary to link pay to performance
Linking rewards to performance appraisal results has been found to be one of the most unclear
and controversial issues. However, this value proposition or selling point is frequently made for
the appraisal. Few managers and subordinates believe the system effectively linked pay to
performance. When the following happens, the system will be viewed as a sham.
1. Changes in pay drive ratings instead ratings driving pay
2. Does not allow for differentiation among various levels of contribution to the
organization
When this happens, appraisal process loses its ability to have a positive effect on employee
motivation instead creates a lack of trust in the appraisal process, which can undermine the
potential for the system to effectively fulfill other functions. In short, define performance and
contribution and reward them.

Use Anniversary dates to stagger appraisals

Conducting appraisals can be burdensome. Not only do managers have project or client work to
do but also the administrative and internal work. To provide managers time to conduct more
effective appraisals, encourage the staggering of appraisals throughout the year. This reduces the
difficulty of managers having to conduct numerous appraisals in condensed period, which is a
serious threat to the effectiveness of the process.

GUIDELINES FOR EFFECTIVE PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS

1. Set an appointment with Employee about two weeks in advance of the meeting. [If for any
reason Employee chooses to have another employee present at the meeting, federal law requires
that Supervisor allow that to occur.]
2. Explain process to Employee: Employee downloads a copy of his/her portion of the appraisal
from HRs web site, www.acu.edu/hr, as well as a copy of his/her professional development
(PD) credits. Employee and Supervisor reach agreement on specific performance objectives or
position responsibilities to be used in the boxes of Section 1. Employee provides copy of his/her
appraisal and PD credits to Supervisor one to two days in advance of the meeting time.
Supervisor prepares his/her portion of the appraisal first and then reviews the Employees
appraisal to see if there are discrepancies. Supervisor makes any necessary changes to appraisal
prior to the meeting.
3. Supervisor prepares appraisal. Type major responsibilities from job description into Section 1
of the appraisal. These should be pre-stated responsibilities outlined in the Employees job
description, goals listed in the five-year plan, or other mutually agreed upon objectives. Review
notes about Employees performance from throughout the year not merely the last few months.
Use notes to provide specific examples under section 1 and 2 of the appraisal. After completing
all of the examples and other verbiage about Employees performance, type in the numeric rating
that best describes performance that corresponds with the written descriptions below: Complete
section 3 of the appraisal. Total scores to indicate Supervisor rating. Add Employees rating from
his/her portion of the appraisal. Complete back page of the appraisal (performance objectives for
next year).
4. Employee and Supervisor discuss the scores in the evaluation interview and add comments as
appropriate. Each signs the form. [If Employee chooses, he/she may type a response to appraisal
and give to Supervisor within a reasonable time frame (usually one to two days).]
5. If Employee refuses to sign appraisal, Supervisor indicates that fact on the appraisal.
6. Supervisor provides Employee with signed copy of the form if he/she wants a copy. 7.
Supervisor sends appraisal to Supervisors supervisor for signature.