Introduction
The influence of unconscious or even overt prejudice on the performance management (PM) process is a severe issue in the workplace. The performance management process of a corporation may be influenced in a variety of ways, including the establishment of job expectations, the assessment of employee performance, and the granting of awards and advancements. As a result, businesses must be aware of the various ways prejudice can express itself in the workplace.
Gender, race, age, and other characteristics can contribute to these biases (Bilan et al., 2020; Porumbescu et al., 2021). For example, a manager unknowingly biased against specific workers may establish lower performance standards, resulting in worse evaluations and fewer prospects for development (Bilan et al., 2020). Similarly, a prejudiced manager may unjustly appraise employees, limiting their chances of advancement or other benefits (Porumbescu et al., 2021). These prejudices can also contribute to a toxic workplace, resulting in high turnover rates and poor productivity.
The Influence of Organizational Culture on Performance Management Design
Based on one theory, the organization’s culture and values highly impact the PM process when it is designed and executed. There is data to support the hypothesis that the culture and values of the business highly impact the PM process. For example, Gu et al. (2020) discovered that firms with a strong culture of equality and fairness were more inclined to have a PM process that workers felt to be impartial and equitable.
Similarly, Bauwens et al. (2019) discovered that firms that highlighted the relevance of objective achievement criteria in their PM process were more likely to have a fair and successful system. As a result, the PM process should be developed to be consistent with the broader mission and goals of the business. This involves making sure that the process is fair and impartial, with clear goals and criteria to assess employee performance. However, if the business culture tolerates or even fosters prejudice, this can be observed in the PM process.
Strategies to Minimize Bias and Enhance Fairness in Performance Management
Organizations may take many initiatives to reduce the influence of bias on PM procedures. They can, for example, instruct managers and staff on the value of inclusiveness, equity, and diversity in the workplace. They may also develop standardized assessment standards and methods, as well as guarantee that performance objectives are clearly and consistently conveyed to all workers (Helmold & Samara, 2019).
Furthermore, implementing mechanisms for oversight is a step toward ensuring the effectiveness of their performance management method. Furthermore, managers must be thoroughly taught in the process, including how to offer constructive criticism and create realistic goals for their personnel. Additionally, firms can foster a culture of ongoing feedback in which workers are encouraged to offer regular feedback to one another (Helmold & Samara, 2019). Finally, firms may leverage technology, such as automated solutions for recording and evaluating employee performance data, to expedite the PM process.
Conclusion
In conclusion, bias may have a substantial influence on the PM process. It can have an impact on how employees view their worth and how they are judged, thereby hurting their productivity, motivation, and participation. Furthermore, it might result in discrepancies in the allocation of awards and promotions, giving employees a sense of injustice and anger.
Organizations should take measures to ensure that the PM process is impartial and equitable to reduce this impact. Establishing clear objectives and criteria for assessing employee performance based on realistic and relevant indicators is one method to do this. Other actions that firms may take to improve the effectiveness of their PM process include establishing checks and balances, educating managers, developing a culture of continual feedback, and utilizing technology.
References
Bauwens, R., Audenaert, M., Huisman, J., & Decramer, A. (2019). Performance management fairness and burnout: implications for organizational citizenship behaviors. Studies in Higher Education, 44(3), 584–598. Web.
Bilan, Y., Mishchuk, H., Samoliuk, N. M., & Mishchuk, V. (2020). Gender discrimination and its links with compensations and benefits practices in enterprises. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 8(3), 189–204. Web.
Gu, F., Nolan, J., & Rowley, C. (2020). Organizational justice in Chinese banks: understanding the variable influence of guanxi on perceptions of fairness in performance appraisal. Asia Pacific Business Review, 26(2), 169–189. Web.
Helmold, M., & Samara, W. (2019). Progress in performance management. Management for Professionals. Web.
Porumbescu, G. A., Piotrowski, S. J., & Mabillard, V. (2021). Performance Information, Racial Bias, and Citizen Evaluations of Government: Evidence from Two Studies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 31(3), 523–541. Web.