The following are cases of legal disputes caused by the implementation of "performance appraisal" and "last elimination" management methods.
Case 1: A company's lab technician Xiao Zhang was disqualified from the annual examination, so he terminated his labor contract. Xiao Zhang refused to accept the decision and thought that the company had insufficient reasons to terminate the labor contract, so he filed an arbitration request with the labor dispute arbitration tribunal. In the arbitration tribunal, the representative of the company issued the assessment basis for Xiao Zhang's unqualified performance appraisal, but the arbitration commission finally ruled that Xiao Zhang and the company resumed labor relations.
Case 2: A sporting goods manufacturing company implemented the "last elimination system" assessment method. When the jane doe inspector of the company was identified as the "last elimination" after examination and decided to implement the "elimination", labor arbitration was triggered. Finally, the labor dispute arbitration committee ruled in favor of the female worker and found that the "last elimination" was illegal.
Case 3: In the quarterly assessment of a listed company, Ding Mou, the head of the sales department, did not receive the accounts receivable after selling his products. The company decided to deduct Ding Mou's quarterly assessment bonus and stop paying wages from this month until he recovered the accounts receivable. On the payday, the company stopped paying Ding's salary. The next day, the company received a letter from lawyer Ding, which suggested that the company had not paid the labor remuneration as agreed. According to Article 32 of People's Republic of China (PRC) Labor Law, if the employer fails to pay the labor remuneration as agreed, the employee may terminate the labor contract at any time. At the same time, according to the relevant regulations, the employer must pay economic compensation, make up the salary and terminate the labor contract in accordance with the relevant regulations.
When strengthening human resource management and implementing various management methods, enterprises must act within the framework of laws and regulations based on relevant laws.
According to the provisions of Article 26 of the Labor Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), even if the employee is incompetent, the employer cannot immediately terminate the labor contract, but must go through the procedures prescribed by law, that is, "the employee fails to pass the examination-training or changing jobs, and is proved to be unqualified again".
The above case: Xiao Zhang only reached the first step, that is, the examination failed, and the company failed to fulfill the following two steps stipulated by law. Therefore, it is impossible to terminate the labor contract immediately.
A female inspector is "competent" as long as she has completed the specified indicators or tasks, even if she has just completed them, even if she is not in place. Therefore, the labor contract cannot be terminated.
As long as Ding fulfilled the labor contract, regardless of his performance, the labor remuneration must be paid. If he doesn't perform well, he can deduct the bonus that is not agreed in the labor contract, but he can't deduct the salary agreed in the labor contract.
The management mode of "performance appraisal" and "no elimination" and the labor contract are two different appraisal systems. The labor contract is rigid and is regulated and recognized by law.
The law is supreme, and we must abide by its provisions. All clauses and agreements that violate laws and regulations are invalid. Therefore, it is inevitable that the labor disputes caused by the above companies will end in failure.
Performance risk
Performance evaluation has become popular in many organizations. However, in practical work, managers and employees often feel anxious, irritable and even disgusted during the monthly, mid-year and year-end evaluation. Performance appraisal has become a "chicken rib", because the important role and necessity of performance appraisal have been recognized in theory and practice, so many organizations are constantly and stubbornly repeating it. But at the same time, we are constantly asking questions: "Is the performance appraisal effective? What is the effect? "
Performance appraisal makes organizations spend expensive costs, and managers and employees spend countless energies. From these aspects, performance appraisal is essentially an investment activity and behavior of an organization. So, "Is the performance appraisal effective? What is the effect? " These two questions are superficial, but in the practice of performance appraisal, the deeper question is "Is there any risk in performance appraisal?" What are the risks? "If you can't avoid and minimize risks, performance appraisal may be' harmful'.
A performance appraisal system is very complicated, which consists of many internal elements, such as appraisal purpose, appraisal tools, appraisal procedures, appraisal information sources, appraisal index setting, appraisal result application, feedback, appraisal subject, object and training. These elements are in the organizational environment, closely linked with other management activities and processes of the organization, and they influence and interact with each other. There are both positive and negative effects, and negative effects bring risks.
On the basis of practice and investigation, this paper analyzes seven risks that often appear in the performance appraisal of scientific research institutions, probes into the causes of the risks, and puts forward corresponding countermeasures.
Risk 1: strategic adjustment is hard to return.
In an organization, performance evaluation is generally carried out from three aspects: evaluating "how people do things" by means of target management; Assess "How do people do things?" Use the evaluation method to evaluate whether people can do things. The so-called results, behaviors and abilities. The correct establishment of the evaluation system is based on the well-organized strategy, and then the evaluation system and strategy are effectively and organically combined. As a result, the organization began to implement the strategy and evaluate it in a certain period of time. People think this process is correct.
However, up to now, a large number of data show that changes in tactics and policies will also lead to fundamental changes in "results, behaviors and abilities" in the process of strategy implementation. For example, in order to ensure customer satisfaction, the sales department of a securities company increased the toll-free telephone number for customer consultation. In this way, the labor cost and line cost increase, and customer satisfaction increases, while in the short term, the cost increases and the profit decreases. Even make a series of indicators change. Due to the different weights of each index, the evaluation is in trouble. If the sales manager does not increase the number of free consultation calls at all considering the evaluation problems of the year, it may lose the customer market and lead to the failure of the medium and long-term strategy.
Why is this happening? Because the frequency of tactical and policy changes is impossible to change the complex and highly related index system. The most popular comprehensive scorecard evaluation technology can't do it either.
Performance appraisal brings certain risks to the implementation of the strategy. However, when the strategy is adjusted, performance appraisal will bring longer-term risks.
In the initial investment stage, some enterprises take opening up the market and expanding market share as the leading strategy, and to a certain extent, adopt the standard of maximizing orders to evaluate their performance. With the development of enterprises, it is necessary to adjust the strategy to take the sales profit rate as the main assessment standard, but after the implementation, not only the sales profit rate has not improved, but also the orders have shrunk dramatically. The result of the survey is that marketers with good performance can't achieve new strategic goals at all.
The revision of the evaluation system also meets the requirements of strategic adjustment. But why is the result not good? After careful analysis, it is found that the top-down business behavior habits of enterprises are difficult to change because of the internal mechanism of evaluation and the long-term strengthening function, and marketers are used to grasping orders rather than profits. Therefore, in order to implement the early strategy and evaluate it effectively, it leaves risks for strategic adjustment.
The internal mechanism and important purpose of evaluation are based on two psychological principles, namely, reinforcement principle and domestication principle. The reinforcement principle refers to the affirmation and promotion of the ongoing satisfactory behavior. Any evaluation of policies and measures adopted is to encourage satisfactory behaviors at that time and punish and correct dissatisfied behaviors. Domestication principle means that under the continuous strengthening, the behavior of organizations and individuals will become the prescribed direction of self-control, and gradually develop habits. Once the behavior is naturalized, it needs to be strengthened more forcefully if it wants to change. Based on these two principles, continuous evaluation strengthens and naturalizes the behavior of individuals and organizations and forms habits. In strategic adjustment, it takes a long time to change habits, and sometimes it can't be changed. Therefore, when establishing an evaluation system, many factors must be selected according to the future strategic shift, not just according to the needs of strategic implementation at that time.
Risk 2: brain drain
If we use an exaggerated expression: with the existing evaluation system, it is impossible for most organizations to keep Einstein. Why? Undeniably, excellent talents in an organization only account for 20% of all employees, as evidenced by the "28 rule" summarized by McKinsey management consulting company. The characteristics of excellent talents are that his ideas are ahead of ordinary people, his skills are more or stronger than others, his efficiency is higher than most people, his goals are even more ambitious than organizations, and his desires cannot be satisfied in most teams. At this time, the so-called fair evaluation may be suitable for most people, but it is a kind of harm to him. Because all the evaluation methods are nothing more than three kinds: dictatorship-a superior has full decision; Index formula (also known as scientific calculation formula)-a series of indicators that most people can reach, carry out statistical calculation and give the total score; Vote-colleagues, customers, experts, the public, etc. to evaluate and score. And these three ways often can't correctly evaluate outstanding talents. Therefore, it is easy for outstanding talents to leave the organization because of evaluation.
For example, a company wants to publicly issue shares and go public. Introduce an investment banking expert from the securities company, and at the same time transfer several people from the company to form the issuance and listing department, which he is responsible for. The goal set by the company is to issue shares and go public within two years. As a result, the task of issuing shares and going public has not been completed. The expert also resigned and left the company. Later, the company mobilized a layman to take charge of this matter. As a result, it was not issued and listed, and it was cheated by others for 6.5438+million yuan. When analyzing the project afterwards, everyone agreed that the implementation of the whole performance appraisal system drove the experts away. First of all, the knowledge of this senior professional can't be found in the whole board of directors, and other colleagues can't understand his ideas. No one has the skills he requires. Some internal resources of issuance and listing can't be integrated, and some can't judge whether some practices are right or not. When scoring comprehensively, they will score according to their personal likes and dislikes.
Secondly, other departments of the company have no requirements for listed projects in the evaluation, and many matters that need to be coordinated have no contact with other departments in the evaluation, so it is impossible for other departments to coordinate and help the company in the issuance and listing.
Third, he thinks there is nothing wrong with what he has done. He thinks he has worked day and night and has done his best. Not only did he fail to live up to his expectations, but he was also punished by evaluation and filled with indignation.
Risk 3: Initiate internal conflicts.
No matter what form of conflict, its essence is incompatible. Every element of performance appraisal may bring and aggravate the above four conflicts. There are many goals to be set in performance appraisal. Goals between individuals, individuals and groups, and groups and groups are often incompatible. There are both contradictory goals and the same goals, but the ability to achieve them is inconsistent. Conflicts within individuals can give people a sense of frustration. For example, there are at least three key performance appraisal indicators for a salesperson: sales growth rate, capital withdrawal rate and sales profit rate. In a market where prices continue to fall, the more sales increase, the lower the profit rate. This kind of internal conflict often makes salespeople in a dilemma and get into trouble. Conflicts at other levels are often caused by the establishment of goals, the source of evaluation information, the different ratings of evaluators and other factors, which often lead to the failure to achieve various goals.
Cognitive conflict occurs between individuals because of the inconsistency of ideas and thoughts. To give a simple example, when a company determines the sales volume for the next year, different individuals have different understandings of market forecast, and conflicts often occur when putting forward sales targets, which will affect the enthusiasm of the work.
When the feelings between individuals are inconsistent, emotional conflicts will occur. Due to the differences in personality, hobbies and emotions between individuals, the same evaluation may cause emotional conflicts. It is conceivable that a face-saving person may hold a grudge for life when his colleagues point out his shortcomings in public during the interview and evaluation. The survey shows that the conflict most easily caused by performance appraisal is emotional conflict. Even if it is evaluated, it can't be avoided. Only by paying attention to it and reducing risks.
Procedural conflict refers to the differences between individuals and groups in the process of solving problems. Performance appraisal is a project with strict procedures. Most organizations argue endlessly about the time limit of assessment, the deadline for completing tasks, when to meet the assessed, when to give rewards, and the promotion procedures of employees, which makes it difficult to draw conclusions and brings many conflicts.
Risk 4: chaotic division of labor and chaotic cooperation.
The most difficult thing for managers in the performance appraisal system is the division of functions and responsibilities and the determination of interrelated performance indicators. The basis of modern mass production is division of labor and cooperation. In a unified evaluation system, job descriptions need a strict division of labor to avoid confusion between functions and responsibilities. And key performance indicators must be compatible in the team. For example, in a newspaper, the advertising department and editorial department often lead to the risk of confusion in division of labor and cooperation for this reason. The advertising department is solely responsible for advertising revenue, and the editorial department is solely responsible for layout. However, when an advertisement is published in a newspaper, the samples provided by the advertising department must meet the requirements of the newspaper layout: when the editorial department assembles the manuscript, it must meet the needs of the advertising department if it thinks that it meets the requirements of the layout. In the process of setting evaluation indicators, when the two departments set advertising revenue and page reader satisfaction indicators respectively, the two departments compete for pages and ignore each other's needs. The advertising department is responsible for advertising revenue, but the editorial department ignores it and often withdraws advertisements, causing dissatisfaction among advertising owners. Later, in order to coordinate the work, both sides of these two indicators have a certain score, so these two indicators are related to the two departments. At this time, the editorial department is also linked with advertisers, which makes the newspaper have multiple windows. This leads to confusion between functions and responsibilities.
Because this kind of confusion caused by performance appraisal often occurs, organizations must consider this kind of risk when implementing every element of performance appraisal.
Risk 5: Decline in efficiency
It is impossible for any performance appraisal system to include all the abilities, behaviors and achievements of employees. Therefore, the organization has a process of combining the scope, standards and information sources of evaluation. Some organizations have set hundreds of indicators, each with 2-3 points. From the annual assessment to the Spring Festival, there is often no result, which delays the payment of wages and the work plan for the new year. There are also some enterprises that need employees to make very complicated records and fill in a large number of forms as the basis for assessment in order to avoid losing performance evidence after a long time. In practice, there is often a phenomenon of emphasizing evaluation and ignoring business promotion. Results The evaluation not only failed to improve the efficiency, but also reduced it.
Most of the performance appraisal not only can't produce effective emergency ability, but also can hinder the implementation of emergency measures when an organization has an emergency. Because the assessment indicators are often set once a year, the set indicators can not adapt to the rapid changes in the market and organizations, and when the indicators are solidified, they will soon age. The efficiency of an organization is often produced by flexible management. While performance appraisal brings order to the organization, it often makes the organization lose its flexibility and leads to a decline in efficiency.
Risk 6: Organizational culture conflict
Many studies show that the talent and ability of employees and managers can not completely determine the effectiveness and success of an organization. The culture of an organization-the complex beliefs, expectations, ideas, values, attitudes and behavior patterns enjoyed by members of the organization-is stronger than anyone and any formal instructions. Any existing or developing organization has its own unique culture. When an organization realizes its own strategy, there are two choices consciously and unconsciously, either maintaining the original organizational culture or changing its own culture. A basic assumption that people agree with is that organizational culture is directly related to organizational performance; It is related to direct participation in performance appraisal. Performance appraisal is not only influenced by organizational culture, but also affects the maintenance and reform of organizational culture. On the one hand, a large number of enterprises can't identify the organizational culture system when designing performance appraisal, on the other hand, they simply don't consider the factors of organizational culture. Imagine, in an organization full of personal heroism, what would happen if marketers rated it for assisting other members to complete tasks? It may be a disaster for individuals and organizations to evaluate the attendance of a programmer who works punctually at 8 am to 2-3 am every day.
Therefore, when an organization realizes a certain strategy, it needs to maintain the original culture, because the evaluation may be counterproductive and may lead to the risk of cultural change. When an organization needs to change its original culture, evaluation may prevent cultural change.
Risk 7: Conflict with law and morality.
In China, the most common legal risk caused by appraisal is the violation of the organization's "labor contract". Some labor contracts have a term of 3-5 years or even longer, and are revised once a year. Some evaluation methods and structured evaluation tools directly conflict with labor contracts. For example, the "last elimination system" often does not conform to the terms of the labor contract. The soft index evaluation score of "enthusiasm, initiative, etc." cannot be used as the legal basis for dismissing employees in labor contracts. In other cases, when the difference between equipment and personal ability is difficult to distinguish, the legal risk brought by the evaluation of personal performance.
The moral hazard of evaluation is more common in organizations. The greater risk can be seen from the following aspects.
First, there is a risk of burying talents in the evaluation of immediate superiors, and almost no immediate superiors are willing to promote their subordinates to surpass themselves. According to the practice in the army, the company commander will not promote the platoon leader, nor will the battalion commander promote the company commander. Second, personal grudges, prejudices and values will distort the evaluation. Third, if we fail to meet the target, we will make up for the losses in the embankment and use our resources to do other business. Fourth, some independent evaluation criteria lead to unfair internal competition, and coordination is in trouble and mutual destruction. Fifth, a large number of evaluations only focus on the results and ignore the process, which brings the risk of "unscrupulous".
The risk cannot be eliminated, but it can be reduced. There are many risks in performance appraisal. These risks, like investment, are accompanied by the benefits of performance appraisal and are determined by the essential characteristics of performance appraisal.
The results of performance appraisal are highly related to personal interests, so it is very difficult to communicate on personal interests and sometimes it is impossible to coordinate. At the beginning of the establishment of the evaluation system, it is a better solution to sign an evaluation agreement. Many elements of performance appraisal are subjective, such as scoring soft indicators and determining excellent, good, medium and low grades. There are almost inevitable contradictions in this respect. It is worth trying to reduce subjective factors, which are only used to improve work and are not linked to interests.
Many goals of performance appraisal are short-term and sometimes deviate from long-term strategic goals. The quarterly strategic review method can reduce the risk of short-term behavior. The so-called strategic evaluation of evaluation means that the evaluation results of each month and quarter are not only used to reward and punish individuals and teams, but also fed back to the whole strategy implementation process, and dynamically revised to make its evaluation consistent with strategic intentions.
The demographic indicators of performance appraisal are predictive and difficult to adapt to the constant changes of the market. When the external environment and internal conditions of enterprises change, many indicators are meaningless in evaluation. A better countermeasure is to increase the probability calculation of indicators and set constraints at the same time as setting indicators.
The information of performance appraisal is incomplete, and even some information sources are unclear. The solution is to collect information through multiple channels and repeatedly verify the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the information. The tools of performance appraisal are all flawed, so any one should be used carefully. I don't know if I'm pregnant.
The index system of performance appraisal is always one-sided. In order to eliminate this defect, it is necessary to cooperate with other management methods and tools in daily management, such as "Nissin Rijie" founded by Haier Company and intranet electronic communication adopted by some western companies, and incorporate performance appraisal into the overall management system of enterprises.