Human resource managers and supervisors use performance evaluation tools, such as multi-source assessment appraisals, to measure the actual performance against the expected standards to enhance efficiency of their workforce (See Reference 2). Correctly handled evaluation of personnel performance yields honest feedback, which benefits both employers and employees. However, like any other human resource practices, a performance evaluation can also be disadvantageous depending on its intention and accuracy.

Employer Objectivity

Performance evaluations highlight an individual employee’s contribution and value to a company. They also help identify potential in employees that can be developed, and reinforce accountability to poorly performing employees. Most employers prefer to promote personnel as opposed to acquiring new staff. They use evaluation reports as an avenue to recognize and promote competent employees to higher positions.

Career Development

Performance evaluations facilitate career development. Although employers use performance evaluations mainly to assess the overall worth of individual workers, employees get empowered by communicating their concerns through feedback. Employees can raise issues such as the need for improved morale and a better work environment, which may lead to raises and enhanced insurance coverage.

Biased Reports

Most performance evaluations are conducted once a year, leaving gaps that could compromise their accuracy in appraising an employee’s performance. For instance, an employee may anticipate an upcoming evaluation and work harder to enhance his report status. In other cases, a well-performing employee may get sick before the evaluation, which may lead to a negative report. Such scenarios lead to inaccurate evaluation reports that do not represent the real depiction of an employee’s overall performance.

Conflicting Purposes

Employees love feedback when it’s positive and improves careers. But an employer may not fully analyze the failures identified in a performance evaluation when awarding a promotion. The employer may not compare requirements of the new position against the employee’s qualifications. In most cases employers don’t ensure factors evaluated in the employee’s previous position reflect job requirements of the new position, thereby undermining performance standards.