Performance Appraisals, Small Group
The existence of small groups and teams proves the cornerstone of sustaining organized behavior to stimulate operations within all levels of the organization. Increasingly, the latter offers a favorite channel upon which the management organizes their employees to accomplish set objectives and ease workplace learning. The essence of establishing small groups emerges from the necessity of subdividing broader assignments into unit tasks that identify with the specific challenges, underlying issue and possible solutions. Considering their central contribution, they influence decisions and effectiveness of solving emerging problems. It mandates the assumption of a higher-level reflection on the accepted norms, roles, cohesiveness and groupthink during performance appraisal as the frames of reference sanctioning the immediate working environment.
Appreciating small groups and teams as vital platforms to accomplish organizational objectives involves embracing an objective means to evaluate their success and failure. Although embracing own reflection and timed analysis offers a straight route to assess what the group accomplished, it is essential to overcoming the subjective influence characterizing most performance appraisals (Harris & Sherblom, 2010).
[...] E. (2008). Applied Organizational Communication: Theory and Practice in a Global Environment ed.). New York: Taylor & Francis. Pfeffer, J. (2009, July 23). Low Grades for Performance Reviews. [...]
[...] While Group task roles ensues while initiating, elaborating, summarizing and conveying information, group maintenance behaviors manifest themselves in harmonizing, facilitating communication and setting standards for the group to succeed. To the contrary, self-oriented behavior comprises aggressive, dominating, hindering the group from attaining consensus. Although the aforementioned categorization is barely exclusive, it appreciates the variety of behaviors exhibited by individuals (Harris & Sherblom, 2010). This facilitates role assumption, hence resolving role ambiguity and potential role conflict. Besides the moderation served by group norms, explicit clarification of goals, identification of roles and involvement of members in the decision-making processes translates to greater group cohesion. [...]
[...] Initially, this entails overcoming the gender bias and the preference of employees who share a similar social demographic. Secondly, it necessitates recognizing that higher performance scores to individuals portraying ones ingrained expectations subtly erode the impartiality. In addition, focusing on presumed deficiencies regarding the individual diverts the evaluation attention from the underlying factors translating PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS AND FEEDBACK into poor performance. This demands embracing continuous assessment to capture performance within the lengthy cycles of interdependence and delayed outcome (Pfeffer, 2009). [...]
[...] For that reason, an insightful evaluation and feedback will prioritize selfexamination, debriefing sessions, and engaging external evaluators. Additionally, a comprehensive evaluation platform comprising verbal interactions and content analysis allows specific analysis of individual behavior and worthwhile in performance reviews. Finally, involvement of members and observers feedback forms the focal point of embracing informative performance appraisals to develop a good communication platform in a small group. PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS AND FEEDBACK 6 Bibliography Harris, T. E., & Sherblom, J. C. (2010). Small Group and Team Communication ed.). Boston: Pearson Education. Nelson, M. D., & Harris, T. [...]
[...] This serves to eliminate social loafing. Nevertheless, sensitivity to incidences of groupthink camouflaging in isolation, selfcensorship and enemy stereotypes reduces erroneous decision making processes (Harris & Sherblom, 2010). This stimulates a reference point where unlimited examination of alternatives and consultation reduces errors and poor performance evident in groupthink cases. PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS AND FEEDBACK Although establishing group roles, structure and norms stimulate good communication, misunderstood tasks and lacking consensus generates group conflicts. Nonetheless, aversion of the situation requires forming negotiated interactions of all stages in the decision making process. [...]
using our reader.