Performance Appraisal Systems and the Role of HRM
This paper examines the role of Human Resource Management (HRM) in designing and overseeing performance appraisal processes within organizations. It discusses how HRM connects performance management to business strategy, ensures transparency, trains managers, and maintains records. The paper then compares three major appraisal approaches — trait-based, behavioral, and results-based systems — outlining the strengths and appropriate contexts for each. It concludes by recommending a behavioral appraisal system using a graphic rating scale for service-oriented organizations, and evaluates the advantages and limitations of numeric, letter, and Likert-style rating scales in measuring employee performance.
- Role of HRM in Performance Management: HRM's responsibilities in managing appraisal processes
- Trait, Behavioral, and Results-Based Performance Appraisal Systems: Comparing three core appraisal system types
- Selecting the Most Suited Appraisal Method: Recommending behavioral appraisal for logistics organizations
- Rating Scales and Their Applications: Evaluating numeric, letter, and Likert rating scales
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Clearly distinguishes between three appraisal frameworks — trait, behavioral, and results-based — using concrete workplace examples that make abstract concepts accessible.
- Connects theoretical HRM functions to practical organizational outcomes, such as the link between poor performance reviews and damaged manager-employee relationships.
- Provides a justified recommendation for a specific appraisal method, grounding the choice in the operational characteristics of a real organization (Maersk).
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates applied comparative analysis: it systematically defines three appraisal systems, evaluates each against real-world criteria, and then selects and defends one as most appropriate for a specific organizational context. This technique — define, compare, recommend, and justify — is a foundational approach in HRM and business coursework that moves beyond description into analytical argumentation.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with an overview of HRM's responsibilities in the performance management process, covering strategy alignment, transparency, manager training, and record-keeping. It then surveys three appraisal system types with illustrative examples. The third section applies this knowledge by recommending a behavioral appraisal with a graphic rating scale for a logistics context. The final section evaluates rating scale formats — numeric, letter, and Likert — noting both their practical utility and their limitations in guiding employee development.
Role of HRM in Performance Management
The performance management process must be connected with HR processes for success to be realized. It must be consistent with the business strategy and ensure that all processes are managed top-down. In most cases, employees must be provided with the right feedback for them to appreciate it and act on it. It is the role of HRM to train managers to provide honest feedback concerning employee performance. HRM is also responsible for making the process transparent and clear, meaning that the performance management process should be consistent across every department in the organization.
HRM ensures that employee results are comparable, since outputs may be used to inform other HR processes (Dusterhoff, Cunningham, & MacGregor, 2014). For any proposal brought forward by HRM to be seen as relevant by top management, it must be fair and transparent. Similarly, HR should make the process as straightforward as possible by focusing on collecting the most valuable information. As noted, HRM also trains managers on the performance appraisal system and manages the relationship between employees and their managers, since poor performance reviews can create a tense dynamic between the two parties. Another key responsibility of HRM is to record and store performance reviews securely.
Trait, Behavioral, and Results-Based Performance Appraisal Systems
Traits can be used as a standard in the appraisal system. Traits are characteristics possessed by an individual and may include attitude, initiative, ethics, employee loyalty, and leadership ability. For example, in a role where someone must be immaculately groomed or dressed in a specific way, appearance can serve as part of the appraisal system.
Behavioral appraisal differs from trait-based appraisal in that traits describe characteristics while behaviors describe actions. HR managers must ensure that the behaviors being evaluated are directly related to job performance. For example, organizational citizenship behavior can be incorporated into the appraisal program when employees consistently report to work on time, assist colleagues, or voluntarily stay late to complete a task without expecting overtime pay.
The results-based appraisal system uses outcomes achieved by employees to determine how well they perform their tasks. This approach is particularly useful in complex jobs where there are limited alternative ways to measure desired results. In sales, for instance, results naturally take center stage, as employees are measured by what they have achieved over a defined period within their department.
Selecting the Most Suited Appraisal Method
There are many appraisal methods that could work effectively in a logistics and delivery organization. However, the behavioral appraisal system is the best fit for this context. This is because such organizations thrive based on the actions of their employees — including speed of work and quality of service — which directly determines customer retention. A graphic rating scale is the most suitable tool for this situation. A scale ranging from "poor" to "excellent" would be applied, with average employees falling in the middle, low performers leaning toward poor, and high performers leaning toward excellent.
The main advantage of this system lies in its ease of application and interpretation across any organizational setting. It also saves time for the supervisors and managers responsible for conducting employee evaluations (Bernardin & Wiatrowski, 2013).
References
Bernardin, H. J., & Wiatrowski, M. (2013). Performance appraisal. Psychology and Policing, 257.
Dusterhoff, C., Cunningham, J. B., & MacGregor, J. N. (2014). The effects of performance rating, leader–member exchange, perceived utility, and organizational justice on performance appraisal satisfaction: Applying a moral judgment perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 119(2), 265–273.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.