Human Resource Management Psychology and Policing

Question: Discuss about the Human Resource Management for Psychology and Policing. Answer: Introduction: Business use performance appraisal as effective tool for determining how effective employees aim at achieving goals as well as job scope and communicating with others. However, at the same time, if not done right, it can create a negative experience (Pichler, 2012). Performance appraisal considered time-consuming as well as overwhelming to managers with many employees. This particular tool assessment is based on human aspect as well as subject to rater errors and biasness. If not performed adequately, it will be a waste of time and energy by the managers and supervisors (Espinilla et al., 2013). At the same time, it can create stressful environment for employees working in a business organization. Managers mostly bring their own biasness as well as subjective notions at the time of appraisal process for attainment of organizational goal. Bias often skews the results in precise peer review based appraisal schemes as well as causing employees loss of faith in the system. Traditional performance review tools takes into consideration only the manager view regarding the performance of their subordinates. If a particular manager supervises given direct reports and response to own supervisor, then the manager will have limited amount of time for observing employee in action for overcoming problems (Bernardin Wiatrowski, 2013). Most of the companies overcome this disadvantage by employing peer appraisal based assessment tools for intriguing into account for maintaining working relations. It is argued that companies uses performance appraisal as individual tool and this act as risk of added conflicts between subordinates as well as supervision. This erodes employee motivation and renders negative impact on performance appraisal system leading to organizational goal (Aggarwal Thakur, 2013). Managers should take into consideration all the drawbacks resulting from performance appraisal tools and find other innovative way to motivate employees for working more in the business organization. Halo effect is one of the disadvantages of performance appraisal whereby superior appraises the person based on certain positive qualities. In this, negative personality traits are not taken into consideration (Bernardin Wiatrowski, 2013). By explaining the above meaning, it reveals that this type of appraisal fails to give true picture regarding any employee working in an organization. In some cases, it may happen that non-deserving employees gets promotions easily. Horn effect is other drawback whereby only negative qualities of the employees are taken into consideration as well as based on appraisal. This appraisal system fails because appraisal may not present a true picture regarding employees working in an organization. Central Tendency means superior giving an appraisal by central values. In other words, this prevents real talented employees for getting promotions what they actually deserve. Sometimes, it happens that bosses are lenient in grading employees and leads to biasness of results (Espinilla et al., 2013). On the contrary, some bosses are even strict by nature. By this action, deserving employees will not be getting the opportunity that they actually deserve. In case of spillover effect, the ultimate boss based on past performance judges employees. It may happen that employee improves over level of performance but does not get special benefit. Reference List Aggarwal, A., Thakur, G. S. M. (2013). Techniques of performance appraisal-a review. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT) ISSN, 2249-8958. Bernardin, H. J., Wiatrowski, M. (2013). Performance appraisal. Psychology and Policing, 257. Espinilla, M., de Andrs, R., Martnez, F. J., Martnez, L. (2013). A 360-degree performance appraisal model dealing with heterogeneous information and dependent criteria. Information Sciences, 222, 459-471. Pichler, S. (2012). The social context of performance appraisal and appraisal reactions: A meta?analysis. Human Resource Management, 51(5), 709-732.