Bogusława
Ziółkowska[1]
EVALUATION OF
PERSONNEL AS A DETERMINANT IN THE EFFICIENCY OF THE
FUNCTIONING OF THE ORGANISATION OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Abstract: Contemporary organizations function in conditions of globalization, IT
revolutions and discontinuation. The prevailing significance for their
efficiency and effectiveness is held by intangible assets including human
resources as the fundamental element of intellectual capital. Attention to the
care and development of human resources corresponds with its periodical
assessment. In order for employee assessment to be successful and for the
results to be reliable and useful in taking decisions about personnel in an
organization, it must be professionally prepared and implemented.
In this paper, an analysis has been made of the
principles which managers should use in working out a system of employee
assessment, the most frequently applied criteria of assessment while also the
mistakes and irregularities that occur in the process of assessing employees. Regularly
assessed employees facilitate the diagnosis of the potential of employees and
also constitutes an important motivational instrument, which in turn enables
the optimal use of human resources in an organization.
Key words: human resources, personnel, employee
assessment, HR management, public administration, aims of employee assessment, principles and criteria of assessment, mistakes in employee
assessment.
Notion of public administration
Public administration is part of the
state civil service, service of the establishment and executive body of the
political authorities. Administration
is simultaneously a structure and a set of actions.[2] The science of
administration views administration in a functional sense and treats it as an
organisational and executive organ of the state. “By the term administration we
understand a series of organisational and executive activities, actions and
undertakings which are carried out on the basis of realizing the public
interest by various entities, organs and institutions on the basis of legal
acts and in specified legal forms”[3]. In scientific literature in Poland after
1990 various definitions of administration appeared which are related to
the socio-constitutional system in
Poland. Apart from the most frequent definition
of “public administration”, a frequently used term is that of “government
administration”, “state administration”
, as well as “self-administration”.
Public administration is the
entirety of the organisational structures of the state, as well as the
people employed in these structures carrying out public tasks. Government
administration is a group of organs,
offices of central and regional institutions, serving to fulfill the collective
and individual needs of the people resulting from their co-existence in
society. Central administration exists
at the central level whose structure
includes the centre of government, namely the government and office of the
premier, ministries, central offices and state organisational units. The
regional administration of the government functions at the level of particular
units of territorial divisions whose structure is created by the government
administration as a whole, e.g. provinces (voivodships), grouped administration
and ungrouped administration. State administration includes such state organs
as e.g. the President of Poland, the Supreme Chamber of Inspection, the State
Office of Inspection of Work and others, that perform the function of state
administration but do not form part of the governmental administration. Self-administration is a group of
institutions serving the area of public issues within local communities. This
administration exists in the units of state territorial divisions e.g. in
communes, administrative districts and provinces.[4] Thus, public
administration is a wide ranging notion as it encompasses not only the activity
of the state, governmental and self-governmental organs, but also other
entities, administrative units, state enterprises, social organisations,
foundations and other agencies
performing tasks that are commissioned by public administration[5].
Personnel and the efficiency of the functioning of an
organisation
The
efficiency and effectiveness of human efforts depends on the method of
organisation. The role of the appropriate
organisation of work increases with the increase in the level of difficulty and
complication, as well as the numbers of people called on to carry out this
work. The offices and institutions of
public administration constitute a form of team activity and its organisation
and functioning deal with the science of public administration which widely
avails of the fruits of the theory of organisation and management, by applying
it to the needs of administration. The skill of applying the principles, laws
and methods of management into practice positively influences the efficiency
and effectiveness of the functioning of public administration both from the
point of view of the micro and macro systems.
The lack of application of scientific principles in the organisation and
activity of public administration reduces the efficiency of organisational
units and can cause the
paresis of the whole system of public administration.
The
most important element in every organisation is that of the personnel. Three
levels can be distinguished in this area as follows:
1.
Unit level – which concentrates on the features and personalities of
particular employees in the organisation.
2.
Group level – which is associated with the formation and functioning of
social groups.
3.
Cultural level – which pays attention to the atmosphere, attitudes,
behaviour and customs practiced by the personnel which forms the organisational
culture.[6]
The
aims of the organisation, organisational structure, processes and civil service
are defined and created by people. The management of personnel is the activity
of the organisation in attracting, developing and retaining the effectively
working employees.[7] In public
administration in Poland, the personnel constitutes the employees of the civil
service, as well as others employed in offices and the remaining units of
public administration. The notion of the employees of public administration is
understood to mean the “people carrying out activities associated with the
functioning of administration in other than administrative units of state
offices regardless of the manner of creating a working relationship with them.”[8]
As in
the case of every organisation the personnel of public administration plays a
significant role. The possibility of realizing the mission of public
administration, as well as the achievement of the aims set out depends on the
way it functions. Hence, the efficiency
of the functioning of the organisation is decided on by the personnel and the
quality of the aforesaid personnel is decided on by the employees of the
organisation. An important tool in personnel management, apart from
recruitment, selection and employment is the appropriately constructed and
implemented system of employee evaluation. The proper evaluation provides
important information which is not only for the management, but also enables
the employees to improve themselves in terms of the activities carried out on
behalf of the organisation in which they are employed and constitutes a
significant motivational factor. The subjection of the public administrative
personnel to a profound evaluation and informing the personnel of the results
positively influences the efficiency of the functioning of particular office
and institutions of public administration, as well as public administration In
general.
Essence and aims of employee assessment.
Contemporary
organizations function in a stormy environment, so the efforts of the creators,
organizers, as well as those managing an organization aim towards the creation
of an organization with a flexible structure of activity whose aim is to adjust
to the employee – organization arrangement within the framework of human
resource management. One of the instruments that enables such an adjustment is
the process of assessing employees, which we can define as any type of
procedure that is aimed at gathering, checking, comparing, illustrating,
transferring, updating and using information gained from employees and about
employees with the aim of defining the effects of their work, as well as the
potential possibilities that are useful in an organization. As a result of
employee assessment it is possible to provide information to their employers as
well as themselves about the results gained, behaviour, as well as personality
features from the point of view of the work carried out in the organization in
question.[9]
Employee
assessment constitutes a key issue in the system of HR management. Regardless
of the applied forms of organization and techniques of management in every
organization, for the creation of the appropriate conditions of rationalizing
the costs of personnel it is necessary to define and assess the value of work
which is carried out by the people employed in the company. In the contemporary
world, in conditions of global competition, as well as in the face of
expectations of a fast pace of growth in values, this knowledge takes on a
special meaning. Without this it is not possible to effectively manage work
resources, development of human capital in an organization, as well as the total
satisfaction of employees in terms of the work carried out and the remuneration
received. The results of employee assessment help the process of rational
decision making regarding many issues of the personnel e.g. the appropriate
filling of work positions, planning and managing of the development of
employees, the creation of successors for managerial positions, promotion and
variations in remuneration. The motivational significance of work assessment is
equally important, as is the role in shaping the culture of the organization.[10]
It is
possible to list many detailed aims which serve the process of assessing
employees carried out in an organization. All of them are possible to group
under two main aims: the organizational aim and the psycho-social aim.
The
organizational aim of assessment comes down to gaining the necessary
information for making decisions about the personnel with regard to the
following: [11]
-
employment of an employee or extending employment e.g. after the trial
period has passed,
-
transferring an employee within the organization,
-
planning the professional careers of specified employees,
-
awarding premiums, prizes or other distinctions,
-
imposing penalties,
-
recognition of the development potential of a firm,
-
perfection of the system of personnel information ,
-
coordination of administrative activities in the area of managing human
resources in an organization, e.g. carrying out an analysis of the descriptions
of work positions from the point of view of their current validity in the firm.
-
taking decisions about a revaluation of a work position in the case
whereby the range of tasks for the position in question has significantly
changed.
The
essence of the psycho-social aim is the shaping of the basis and behaviour of
employees by providing them with information on a regular basis with regard to
their achievements and failures, as well as the opportunities for professional
development. This aim is particularly important in the case of the construction
of a coherent firm of a singular culture that has its roots in its mission,
strategy and the associated values held in the organization in question. [12].
Within
the framework of the aims of assessment that are understood in this way, it is
therefore possible to lead to the integration of all the elements of the
management of human capital without exception to the level of organization as a
whole by using a successfully designed system of periodical assessment for
employees. In such a case, the role of the employee assessment system can be
referred to market research and its use in the practical operations of the
company. Employee assessment can be therefore a rational basis for taking all
decisions in the area of managing human capital in the organization in
question.
The
desired effect of assessment is the situation in which employees learn to
assess their results according to defined criteria in order for their work to
fulfil the quality norms accepted. They can control the level of their own
work, gather data on the subject of their work and compare it with the results
gained by other employees. Employee assessment is to lead to the situation
whereby employees solve their own problems and correct their own mistakes with
the aim of increasing the work efficiency. This is also the reason why in order
for the assessment to fulfil its role in HR management the following elements
should be incorporated:
- individual results
achieved by an employee in his work position over a specified time period in
accordance with the accepted criteria previously known by the employee;
- individual features
and skills which are necessary for carrying out work in a given work position;
- range of
responsibilities and independence in taking decisions in a given position;
- listening to an
employee’s comments on the topic of the assessment gained;
- discussion about
the professional aspirations of an employee and individual career paths in the
company;
- predicting the
forms of improving qualifications which the employee should take part in.[13]
Among
the principles of employee assessment, the most frequently mentioned ones in
the associated literature[14] and applied in the
practice of human resource management can be particularly indicated as follows:
-
principle of regularity – all employees of the organization are subject
to assessment;
-
principle of flexibility – adjusting the criteria and techniques of
assessment to specific situations and the aims of the assessment, the specifics
of a given organization and its size, while also the type of business activity
run;
-
principle of clarity – the employees assessed should be familiar with
the aims and criteria of the assessment and the results achieved;
-
principle of simplicity – the system of assessment applied should be
understandable for the people being assessed and easy to use by the assessor.
Furthermore, attention is paid[15] to the objectivity
of the process of assessment, or in other words, with reference to the greatest
degree of external facts, data and evidence in order to eliminate emotional and
personal factors, prejudice, as well as the conscious bad will from the process
of assessment.
The appropriate elaboration of the criteria of employee assessment is
one of the most significant problems facing the people who are responsible for
implementing a system of employee assessment in an enterprise. All the criteria
of assessment applied can be characterized in the form of 4 basic groups. These
are as follows: [16]
- qualification
criteria;
- effectiveness
criteria;
- behavioural
criteria;
- personality
criteria.
The
qualification criteria comprise general knowledge and skills gained at school,
college, at courses, during the course of work or in the form of
self-education. This group of criteria can include the following: education,
professional experience, expertise in carrying out specified activities,
knowledge of foreign languages, knowledge of computer techniques, familiarity
with specific procedures or legal regulations, knowledge of management
techniques or sales techniques. This type of criteria is applied first and foremost
in the process of assessing candidates for work positions, but also in systems
of vertical and horizontal promotion in the company in the system of training
and development of employees. In the opinion of many specialists this group of
criteria should also include those associated with physical and mental
condition.[17]
The
effectiveness criteria consist of the results of work in terms of detail or
values. They can refer to one employee or groups of employees creating a team
or even to the whole organization. This group of criteria consists of the
amount of work carried out, the quality and timeliness of the work carried out,
the cost of realization regarding the tasks handed out, the savings gained, the
value of sales, the shortening of the time of realization of tasks etc. The
effectiveness criteria are the most frequently applied in systems of premiums,
as well as the needs to reduce employment numbers.[18]
The
behavioural criteria serve to assess the behaviour of an employee or work
teams. This type of criteria are readily applied where the measurement of the
effects of work is impossible or significantly hindered. In such cases, there
is a drive towards the definition of specific patterns of behaviour assuming
that their fulfilment favours the effectiveness of work. The behavioural
criteria consist of among others, reliability and regularity in operations,
scrupulousness of the work carried out, professionalism, honesty, loyalty,
willingness to improve professional skills, attitude to co-workers.[19]
The
personality criteria are the features of the psyche of an employee that are
important from the point of view of the requirements of the work position in
question. Examples of the personality criteria are as follows: reliability,
energy, responsibility, creativity, imagination, control, assertiveness,
resistance to stress. This group of criteria is applied rather rarely due to
the commonly held view of the lack of positive co-relation between the majority
or even all types of such criteria and the results of the work of the people
being assessed.[20]
The
problem which emerges with the application of criteria from the effectiveness
group is the establishment of the level of effectiveness of the work of an
individual employee or task group. The assessment of work with the aid of the
application of the effectiveness criteria involves the assignment of aims for
an employee or group which would simultaneously constitute the criteria of the
assessment. It is important to also remember about the need to agree on the
criteria of assessment and their appropriate standards with the employees in
question. These criteria must be understandable and exclude the possibility of
various interpretations as much as possible. Furthermore, they must have a
defined and appropriate degree of difficulty, which in practice means that the
criteria can not be too difficult to achieve, as this would discourage
employees, nor can they be too easy, as this would in turn not lead to the
motivation for action and development of employees. [21] The effectiveness
criteria are most frequently applied in the concept of management through aims
and also in management through values. Supporters of the application of the
behavioural criteria state that the behaviour of an employee constitutes the
only category that comes under a rational assessment. Measuring the
effectiveness of work in the case of many work positions is very difficult or
indeed impossible, while the application of other criteria such as the
qualification or personality ones is futile or doubtful in terms of ethics.
Opponents of behavioural criteria are of the opinion that a pleasant, obedient
and seemingly eternally busy employee does not mean that the employee in
question is carrying out his duties appropriately. The personality features of
an employee appear in terms of his behaviour. The application of behavioural
criteria would seem to be sufficient, while being of course complemented by the
effectiveness and perhaps qualification criteria. One of the basic functions of
employee assessment is as should be remembered, their corrective function.
All attempts at changes in the
personalities of the employed should be acknowledged as ineffective and more
importantly-unethical.
Employee assessment will not fulfil its role
appropriately in the management of human resources if the employees do not
accept nor agree with it. One of the reasons for which employee assessment does
not find approval among employees is due to the mistakes made during the
process of carrying out assessment, as well as communicating the results to the
assessed.
The
most difficult mistake to avoid, while at the same time the most common one in
employee assessment is that of mistakes in objectivity. This results from the
tendency of each person to assess all aspects through the prism of their own
experience, convictions and expectations. This commonly observed phenomenon was
best analysed with reference to school assessment. T. Tyszka[22] describes the
results of research referring to significant discrepancies which depended first
and foremost, on the form of exam and the exam subject. In most cases, these
significant discrepancies were detected in the afore-mentioned situations. In
another research programme, large discrepancies were stated in the assessment
of the same assignments by various teachers. The variation in the assessment
amounted to as much as 13 points in a 20 point scale.
Naturally, the process of assessing pupils and
the system of employee assessment in the organization significantly varied and
the use of excessively far reaching conclusions is senseless. However, the
situation in which the majority of employees are assessed by one manager gains
very high results, while when the subordinates are assessed by another leads to
low results gives food for thought. The differences in the assessment may
result not from another type of approach in assessing the employees and their
duties carried out by them, but from another type of employee assessment
carried out by both managers.[23]
An
error in labelling is the interpretation of a single behavioural pattern as
proof of a permanent feature on the part of an employee. It sometimes occurs
that a manager defines an employee who once presented an incomplete project as
slipshod, while a subordinate who happened to grant a request which exceeded
routine tasks as obliging and cooperative.
An
error in attributing reasons most frequently involves the false interpretation
of the behaviour of an employee. This is a huge problem in the assessment
itself. We do not know the intentions which lie at the basis of human activity,
but only its effects. Therefore, more often than not, mistakes are made in
trying to decide whether the given event was the result of extremely
unfortunate external coincidence or the occurrence of bad will on the part of
the employee.
Another
frequent mistake made in employee assessment is the so-called effect of the
first impression. Often the opinion about a given person is formed during the
phase of the first meeting. The impression that is created has an impact on the
assessment of all activities and behaviour of the employee. Employee assessment
should however be based on clear fundamentals. The assessor, in providing an
opinion about the manner of carrying out duties on the part of the employee
must be able to separate the facts from superficial observations.
The
transfer of the aesthetic stereotype has been documented on many occasions that
handsome and elegant people are higher up the ladder than people whose external
appearance does not seem to be so attractive. Beauty, a well sewn suit, a well
matched shirt and other things can result in the fact that the employee is seen
to be for instance, as a person who has the capability of analytical thinking.
The situation ceases to be humorous when on the basis of superficial features
decisions which are of significant meaning for the further destiny of the
employee being assessed are taken.
One of
the most frequent irregularities in employee assessment is the conformism of
the assessor. This tendency results from first of all, it would seem, the
caution of the assessor. Due to the fear of making a large mistake, he declines
to indicate an extreme rating. Most managers at various levels of management
indicate a worrying trend of averaging out the results of the assessment. Most
often this is caused by the following factors:[24]
- lack of authentic
interest in the aims of the process of the assessment;
- insufficient
knowledge of the results of their work in the case of the employees;
- fear of exposing
the subordinate to the risk of a low rating;
- fear of gaining the
opinion of an undemanding manager in
the case of giving a high rating;
- reluctance to
justify a rating above or below the average level.
One of
the most frequent reasons for an unfair assessment is deemed to be an error in
liberalism. An employee who has a more demanding superior can be assessed worse
than a colleague who does not fulfil his duties better but whose boss is a more
understanding person.
Another
irregularity in employee assessment is the effect of emissive power.[25] This involves
directing towards the assessment of the general impression and adopting partial
ratings. If the superior deems the subordinate to be an excellent expert, he is
more likely to give a high rating in all criteria, regardless of the actual
situation.
The
horn effect in turn involves the expansion of the negative assessment of one
feature of the employee. Hence, an employee that has problems with keeping
deadlines receives a low rating with reference to the remaining criteria,
although objectively speaking, he fulfils them at a good level.
The
halo effect is the suggestion that one or a few features and their
generalization for the remaining features, which causes the situation that the
assessment of all the criteria turns out to be more or less even. For instance,
if someone fulfils the criteria of “being open” to the highest degree, this
overshadows all the other aspects of his behaviour such as for example,
responsibility, striving to achieve goals are also assessed favourably although
from the actual point of view of behaviour should be assessed as average.
An
error in projection is the subconscious transfer of personal features to those
being assessed. We assess people who are similar to us in a more favourable
way, while those who present a different system of values or behaviour in a
worse way.[26] A common mistake
in employee assessment is only taking account of the most recent results of
work, whereas the assessment involves a period of a few or even umpteen months
of time.[27]
The effect of contact occurs when the mutual
spending of time has an impact on the results of the assessment. This becomes
really damaging when personal connections between the assessor and the assessed
start to decide on the effects of the whole procedure. This places an
exceptionally unfavourable impacts on the remaining employees who quickly come
to the conclusion that in order to receive a positive opinion and everything
that goes with it in terms of pay raises, premiums, promotion, it is not
decided by the results of the work carried out, but by an arrangement with the
superior. The afore-mentioned situations should be totally avoided, as even
their once-off occurrence causes losses in organizational culture that are hard
to make up.
Summary
As in the case of every organisation the personnel of public
administration plays a significant role. The possibility of realizing the
mission of public administration, as well as the achievement of the aims set
out depends on the way it functions. Hence, the efficiency of the functioning of the organisation is
decided on by the personnel and the quality of the aforesaid personnel is
decided on by the employees of the organisation. An important tool in personnel
management, apart from recruitment, selection and employment is the
appropriately constructed and implemented system of employee evaluation. The
proper evaluation provides important information which is not only for the
management, but also enables the employees to improve themselves in terms of
the activities carried out on behalf of the organisation in which they are
employed and constitutes a significant motivational factor. The subjection of
the public administrative personnel to a profound evaluation and informing the
personnel of the results positively influences the efficiency of the
functioning of particular office and institutions of public administration, as
well as public administration In general.
[1]Ph.D. Czestochowa University of
Technology, Humanitas University, boguslawa.ziolkowska@gmail.com
[2] I. Lipowicz: Istota administracji
(Essence of administration), Z. Cieślak: Prawo administracyjne –
część ogólna (Administrative law-general section), Warsaw
2000, page 21.
[3] H. Izdebski, M. Kulesza:
Administracja publiczna – zagadnienia ogólne (Public
administration-general issues) Warsaw 1998, page 91.
[4] S. Cieślak: Praktyka
organizowania administracji publicznej (Practices of organising public
administration), Difin, Warsaw 2004, pages 14-15.
[5] J. Boć: Prawo administracyjne
(Administrative law), Wrocław 2000, page 16.
[6] Zarządzanie. Teoria i praktyka, edited by A. K.
Koźmiński, (Management. Theory and practice), W. Piotrowski, PWN, Warsaw 1998, page 56.
[7] R. W. Griffin: Podstawy
zarządzania organizacjami (Fundamentals of managing organisations) PWN
1996, page 419.
[8] E. Ura: Prawo administracyjne
(Administrative law), LexisNexis, Warsaw 2006, page 257.
[9] Listwan T.: Zarządzanie kadrami (Personnel Management)..C.H. Beck Publishing
House, Warszawa 2002, page 211
[10] Juchnowicz M. Sienkiewicz Ł: Jak
oceniać pracę? Wartość stanowisk i
kompetencji,( How to Assess Work? Value of Work Positions and Competence) Difin
Publishing House,
Warszawa 2006, page 17
[11] Juchnowicz M., Rostkowski T.: Narzędzia i praktyka zarządzania zasobami ludzkimi(Tools and practices of managing human resources) Poltext Publishing House, Warszawa 2003, page 142
[12] Pocztowski A.: Zarządzanie zasobami ludzkimi(Managing Human Resources) Ossolineum Publishing House, Wrocław 2001, page 125
[13] Listwan T. : Zarządzanie …as
previously given, pages 219-220.
[14] Pocztowski A. Zarządzanie zasobami…as previously given, page 149.
[15] Adamie M., Kożusznik B.,: Zarządzanie zasobami ludzkimi. Aktor – Kreator – Inspirator( Management of Human Resources. Actor-Creator-Inspirer). AKADE Publishing House, Katowice 2000, page 176.
[16] Sidor-Rządkowska M.: Kształtowanie nowoczesnych systemów ocen pracowniczych (Forming Modern Systems of Employee Assessment). Oficyna Ekonomiczna, Kraków 2000, page 113.
[17] Ibidem, page 117.
[18] Juchnowicz M., Rostkowski T.: Narzędzia i praktyka…as previously stated., page 147.
[19] Juchnowicz M., Rostkowski T.: Narzędzia i praktyka …as previously stated, page 147.
[20] Ibidem
[21] Listwan T.: Zarządzanie …as previously stated., page 218.
[22] Tyszka T.: Psychologiczne
pułapki oceniania i podejmowania decyzji(Psychological Traps of Assessing
and Making Decisions). Gdańsk Psychological Publishing House, Gdańsk 1999, page 16.
[23] Sidor-Rządkowska M.: Kształtowanie nowoczesnych… as previously stated, page 148.
[24] Juchnowicz M.: Ocena pracy i wyników pracy.(Assessment of Work and Work Results) Oficyna Wydawnicza Szkoły Głównej Handlowej, Warszawa 1998, pages 112-113.
[25] Sidor-Rządkowska M.: Kompetencyjne systemy ocen pracowniczych(Competent Systems of Employee Assessment). Wolters kliwer, Kraków 2006, page 110.
[26] Listwan T.: Zarządzanie… as previously stated, pages 227-228.
[27] Sidor-Rządkowska M.: Kompetencyjne…
as previously stated, page 111.