CHAPTER 11

Sample Forms

In this chapter, I have gathered a number of performance appraisal forms that come from many types and sizes of organizations. (The names of the specific organizations have been taken off the forms.) They also reflect many different approaches to appraising employee performance, and you may find it helpful to compare them.

Each form or set of forms is preceded by my observations on its strong and weak features. As you study the forms, look for ideas that you can use or adapt. Keep in mind the following criteria:

1.The forms must accomplish your objectives.

2.They must be successfully communicated and sold to those who will use them.

3.Your organization must be able to handle the paperwork.

4.The forms should be useful both for clarifying what’s expected and for appraising performance.

5.They should result in improved performance on the part of the employee.

6.They should help to maintain rapport between manager and employee.

Example 1

Instead of establishing standards ahead of time, appraisers are asked to describe the employee’s status regarding each factor. This invites a great deal of subjective evaluation even though the form suggests that judgment should be based on facts and figures whenever possible.

Too much writing is required. It would be better to have ratings with possible comments to explain them. Also, the last question is too subjective to be of any value. (“Is there understanding and acceptance of standards to measure future performance?”)

The overall performance rating symbols stand for:

I=	Incompetent
S=	Satisfactory
Cd=	Conditional
C=	Commendable
M=	Marginal
O=	Outstanding

Example 2

For a simple form, this has some good features. It has been designed for a specific job (sales) and excludes sales volume, which is evaluated in objective terms.

Five major segments have been identified. After each one, each rating is explained instead of described in general rating words such as outstanding or satisfactory. It also encourages examples and comments.

Another positive feature is the requirement to identify strengths and areas to improve. It also asks for suggestions regarding training or experience to make the individual a more valuable employee. This is far short of a performance improvement plan but goes further than most forms do in considering ways to improve performance.

This form lends itself nicely to self-appraisal.

Example 3

Again, for a simple form, this has some good features. Eight major factors have been selected. Although standards have not been developed, each rating is explained. In order to encourage objectivity on the part of the appraiser, major weak points as well as strong points of the employee are required.

The form’s major weakness is the lack of specifics regarding improved performance. One question asks what further training would be helpful, but this is inadequate to accomplish the objective of improved performance.

This type of form also works well for a self-appraisal.

Example 4

This form has some strong features and some weak ones. On the good side, three simple rating categories are described for Part II of the form: below requirements, meets requirements, and exceeds requirements. (I’d like to see another category here called outstanding.) Supporting statements are requested of the supervisor, and strengths and improvement needs must be identified.

On the negative side, major end results must be described by the supervisor in order of importance. This probably requires much time, effort, and frustration on the part of the person who develops the tasks. Much training would be required to implement this form. Also, there is no reference to what can be done to improve performance.

Example 5

This simple form breaks down the employee’s job into sixteen different segments, which helps to pinpoint the specific factors to be judged. The descriptions help to clarify the factors but fall far short of standards. The three categories of appraisal are simple and quite descriptive.

This type of form may be useful in an organization that is not paperwork oriented. It might also be helpful where managers are not going to spend much time on performance appraisal because they are too busy meeting production schedules. Though it won’t achieve the results that could be accomplished by the approach recommended in this book, it sure beats nothing. The form helps to communicate how an employee is doing and at least suggests job segments to be improved. Finally, it lends itself very well to a self-appraisal.

Example 6

This form has many positive features. First, it has identified the major segments of the job. Although standards have not been established, the descriptions of each rating convey quite clearly the performance to be evaluated. And the instructions suggest that the manager should compare each employee to the same standard. The form offers some practical help for appraising and interviewing. It also suggests that an employee development plan should be prepared with the employee.

The problem with this form is that the form itself requires little time and effort to complete. To implement the many suggestions on the instructions would require much initiative, time, and paperwork on the part of the manager, and most of the time it won’t be done.

Example 7

This form combines the writing of goals and achievements with the checking of boxes regarding specific aspects of performance. It requires the manager to use the position description to clarify the prime responsibility results. General statements instead of standards of performance are used to explain the factors being rated.

The degrees of performance range from poor to superior, with average in the middle. The word average should not be used because it suggests a comparison with other people instead of evaluating the performance against a standard.

This type of form requires much thought, time, and effort to fill out. Managers would need careful training in how to use it effectively.

Example 8

This is a complicated approach that requires much time and writing. It also requires extensive training so that reviewers have the necessary understanding and skills to implement it effectively.

A number of positive features are included, such as the identification of strengths, job segments needing improvement, and specific action plans.

PERFORMANCE PLANNING

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Example 9

This form requires the managers to establish their own standards and appraise performance against these standards. It leaves too much to the individual appraiser and requires much writing.

It isn’t clear whether each factor should be rated from poor to superior or whether the reviewer should simply describe the performance. The only specific rating required is for overall performance. This may be sufficient for salary administration purposes, but it is unsatisfactory if improved performance is the objective. The word average should not be used.

A great deal of communication and training is required for this approach, and the results may not warrant the time and effort.

Example 10

This complicated approach requires much writing. It combines responsibilities with objectives in one column and asks for comments in the next column. This is more confusing and less beneficial than identifying job segments and standards and then using specific ratings.

Although the general content of the form is satisfactory, and although there is a section on plans for improvement, too much writing and initiative are required of the appraiser. This makes the form impractical. This approach could not be used for self-appraisal.

Example 11

This form has many positive features. Although specific standards are not used, the descriptions of each job segment help to clarify what is expected as the basis for appraisal. Additional comments are encouraged. The five ratings are described in detail so that objectivity is encouraged. (See the performance category definitions following the form itself.) This form lends itself to a self-appraisal.

Its weakness is its lack of emphasis on and specific guidelines for improved performance.

EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE REVIEW
(Nonexempt Salaried Employees Only)

Rate the employee on each of the factors below by placing an X in front of each factor that most closely describes the employee being rated. Should a particular description fail to adequately describe the employee’s performance, feel free to delete or add words as appropriate.

QUANTITY OF WORK

______	High-volume producer; frequently does more than is expected or required.
______	Turns out satisfactory volume of work; occasionally does more than is required.
______	Output is generally satisfactory but requires occasional prodding; does only what is required.
______	Very slow worker; output consistently low.

QUALITY OF WORK

______	Consistently produces error-free work; work is always neat and orderly.
______	Usually produces error-free work; work is usually neat and orderly.
______	Generally produces satisfactory work both as to accuracy and neatness.
______	Room for improvement; errors frequent, work requires checking and re-doing.

RELIABILITY

______	Always gets the job done on time; excellent attendance and tardiness record; dependable under pressure.
______	Usually gets the job done on time; seldom absent or tardy; works fairly well under pressure.
______	Performs satisfactorily; requires occasional prompting and checks on performance; generally satisfactory attendance record.
______	Reluctant to accept responsibility; frequently careless or forgetful; frequently absent or tardy; fails to complete work on time.

INITIATIVE

______	Displays unusual drive and perseverance; anticipates needed actions; frequently suggests better ways of doing things.
______	A self-starter; proceeds on own with little or no direction; makes some suggestions for improvements.
______	Does not proceed on own but waits to have procedures outlined; seldom makes suggestions for improvements.
______	Continually needs prompting to complete assignments; never makes suggestions for improvements.

UTILIZATION OF TIME

______	Always on the job; looks for additional work; does not distract others.
______	Usually on the job; generally does not distract others.
______	Easily distracted; room for improvement
______	Spends too much time off the job; disturbs others.

JUDGMENT

______	Uses exceptionally good judgment and makes sound decisions.
______	Handles most situations well and makes sound decisions under normal conditions.
______	Uses questionable judgment at times; room for improvement.
______	Uses poor judgment in dealing with people and situations.

JOB KNOWLEDGE

______	Expert in job; has thorough grasp of all phrases of job; seldom requires assistance or instruction.
______	Understands and performs most phases of job well; occasionally requires assistance and instruction.
______	Limited knowledge of job, further training required; frequently requires assistance and instruction.
______	Inadequate; lacks basic understanding of job; constantly requires assistance and instruction.

ADDITIONAL FACTORS

Please comment on factors such as clerical skills, technical proficiency, attendance, or personnel relationships that have an important effect on employee’s performance. If appropriate, make recommendations or suggestions for future personnel action.

Expanded Definitions of Performance Categories

Marginal—1
Use of this performance category implies:

•Has been on the job long enough to have shown better performance. Probably should be told time is running out.

•Is creating a bit of a morale problem with those who have to help carry his or her load (including yourself).

•Just doesn’t seem to have the drive or the know-how to do the job. Would be better off on some other job for which qualified.

•The employee’s work is holding up that of the other positions with which it interrelates.

•It is more than likely that the employee probably recognizes that the job is not getting done.

•If performance continues at this level, the employee should be replaced.

•Just doesn’t seem to get things accomplished.

•The work keeps falling behind. If you keep the employee much longer, you will be in real trouble.

•Seems to make one mistake after another; some of them are repeats.

•Apparently does not have the background to grasp the work.

•You have had adverse comments from outsiders concerning the employee’s performance.

Fair—2
Use of this performance category implies:

•This employee is doing the job reasonably well. Performance meets the minimum requirements for the position and many of the normal performance requirements.

•The employee’s performance is not really poor, but if all your people were at this performance level, you would be in trouble.

•You would like to see the employee improve, but in the meantime you really don’t have too much to complain about.

•May be the kind of employee who needs some pushing and follow-through, but does the job under close guidance.

•You may have to keep a close watch; otherwise, you would consider the employee competent.

•The employee shows drive but needs to acquire more know-how.

•You may have to plan the employee’s programs or assignments step by step. After that, the job usually gets done.

•Some of your employees have to “carry” the employee on occasion.

•Can’t always depend on the employee to complete the assignments or the daily work unless you keep checking.

Competent—3
Use of this performance category implies:

•This employee is doing a full, complete, and satisfactory job. Performance is what is expected of a fully qualified and experienced person in the assigned position.

•You would not require significant improvement. If improvement does occur, it’s a plus factor for your group’s effectiveness. If it does not, you have no reason to complain.

•If all your employees were as good, your total group’s performance would be completely satisfactory (in your judgment and your manager’s, too).

•You get few complaints from others with whom the employee’s work interfaces.

•Errors are few and seldom repeated.

•Demonstrates a sound balance between quality and quantity.

•Does not spend undue time on unimportant items, neglecting problems or projects that should have priority.

•You feel reasonably secure in quoting the employee’s input or recommendations.

•Requires only normal supervision and follow-up and usually completes regular work and projects on schedule.

•Has encountered almost all the activity fields of the position and has proved quite capable in each.

•You consider the employee a good, solid member of your team and feel reasonably secure in making any kind of an assignment within the scope of the job and level.

Commendable—4
Use of this performance category implies:

•This employee exceeds position requirements even on some of the most difficult and complex parts of the job. Takes the initiative in development and in implementation of challenging work goals. Normally, this individual would be considered for promotion.

•You are getting more than you bargained for.

•You find the employee accomplishing more than you expect.

•Is able to take on extra projects and tasks without defaulting in other assigned activity fields.

•Each project or job tackled is done thoroughly and completely.

•The employee’s decisions and actions have paid off to a higher degree than would be expected.

•Often provides “extras.”

•Requires only occasional supervision and follow-up.

•Frequently exceeds objectives.

•Does own advance planning, anticipates problems, and takes appropriate action.

•Shows a good grasp of the “big picture.” Thinks beyond the details of the job, and works toward the overall objectives of the department.

•“If you had four like this employee, you would only need three.”

Exceptional—5
Use of this performance category implies:

•Employee demonstrates a knowledge that normally can be gained only through long periods of experience in this particular type of work.

•Recognized by all as a real expert in this job area.

•This employee can usually be a prime candidate for promotion when a higher-level position in this or a related field becomes open.

•The employee’s actions show an understanding of work well beyond the assigned area. Outsiders seek the employee out because of knowledge of many facets of the department’s work.

•Requires little or no supervision or follow-up.

•Shows unusual initiative and is a self-starter.

•Almost invariably takes the best approach to getting the job done.

Note: This level of performance must be looked at in terms of both quantity and quality. Use of this category shows that you are recognizing really outstanding worth to the company within the level of this position.

Example 12

On the positive side, this form is simple to understand and easy to complete. It is very much oriented toward behavior and lends itself well to a self-appraisal.

On the negative side, nothing is included about the identification of strengths or weaknesses. Also, there is no form or procedure for planning and implementing improved performance.

EMPLOYEE JOB PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Instructions: Immediately to the left of each job behavior is a line on which you are to indicate the level of performance. Enter a numerical value on each line, indicating one of the following:

+2	Superior
+1	Commendable
0	Good
−1	Marginal
−2	Unsatisfactory

Job Behaviors

______	Carries out work as directed by Production Manager.
______	Plans and supervises shop work.
______	Assists with monthly inventory.
______	Spot-checks craftsmanship on finished products.
______	Supervises truck loading and unloading.
______	Makes out bills of lading.
______	Maintains storage areas in good condition.
______	Enforces safety rules and regulations.
______	Monitors for efficient use of materials.
______	Trains new employees.
______	Works well with employees.
______	Meets production standards.
______	Repairs salvageable materials when practical.
______	Organizes work efficiently.
______	Interviews and screens job applicants.
______	Maintains high morale among employees.
______	Motivates employees to higher productivity.
______	Employs and terminates shop employees with discretion.
______	Is flexible.
______	Maintains shop in cleanliness and in order.

From Robert W. Carsell, Evaluation Dynamics (Columbia, S.C.: The Interaction Press, 1979).

Example 13

This form is simple to understand and administer. It would be appropriate for a self-appraisal, and it is job oriented.

The word average is used, which will confuse the appraiser because of the dual standard of the job and other people. No forms or procedures are included for improving performance.

PLANNING	RATING
1. Does employee set both short-term and long-term goals for the department unit in verifiable terms (either qualitative or quantitative) that are related in a positive way to those of his or her manager and company?	_______
2. To what extent does he or she make sure that the goals of the department are understood by employees?	_______
3. How well does he or she assist subordinates in establishing verifiable and consistent goals for their operations?	_______
4. To what extent does he or she utilize consistent and approved planning premises and see that employees do likewise?	_______
5. Does he or she understand the role of company policies in decision making and ensure that employees do likewise?	_______
6. Does he or she attempt to solve problems of employees by policy guidance, coaching, and encouragement of innovation, rather than by rules and procedures?	_______
7. Does he or she help employees get the information they need to assist them in their planning?	_______
8. To what extent does employee seek out applicable alternatives before making a decision?	_______
9. In choosing from among alternatives, does he or she recognize and give primary attention to factors that are limiting, or critical, to the solution of a problem?	_______
10. In making decisions, how well does he or she bear in mind the size and length of commitment involved in each decision?	_______
11. Does he or she check plans periodically to see if they are still consistent with current expectations?	_______
12. To what extent does he or she consider the need for, as well as the cost of, flexibility in arriving at a planning decision?	_______
13. In developing and implementing plans, does he or she regularly consider longer-range implications of decisions along with the shorter-range results expected?	_______
14. When submitting problems to a manager, or when a manager seeks help in solving problems, does this employee submit considered analyses of alternatives (with advantages and disadvantages) and recommend suggestions for solution?	_______

RATINGS

5.0	=Superior: a standard of performance that could not be improved upon under any circumstances or conditions known to the rater.
4.0 or 4.5	=Excellent: a standard of performance that leaves little of any consequence to be desired.
3.0 or 3.5	=Good: a standard of performance above the average and meeting all normal requirements of the position.
2.0 or 2.5	=Average: a standard of performance regarded as average for the position involved and the people available.
1.0 or 1.5	=Fair: a standard of performance that is below the normal requirements of the position, but one that may be regarded as marginally or temporarily acceptable.
0.0	=Inadequate: a standard of performance regarded as unacceptable for the position involved.

From Harold Koontz, Appraising Managers as Managers (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971).

Example 14

This form has good features. First of all, ten significant job segments are listed. Although no standards were established, the various appraisal terms (unsatisfactory, marginal, and so on) are defined. Space is allowed for remarks, and the form lends itself nicely to a self-appraisal.

The main weakness of the form is its lack of emphasis and specifics in terms of development of the employee.

Example 15

This set of forms illustrates the principles described in this book. It begins with a blank form that can be used in any department. The specifics in the first two columns (significant job segments and standards of performance) must be developed by manager and employee. The appraisal headings are the ones suggested in this book: does not meet standards, meets standards, exceeds standards, and outstanding. A space for comments is also included.

The second form requires agreement on outstanding performance and performance needing improvement. The development of a specific performance improvement plan is then required for one or possibly two performance areas needing improvement.

The final form is to be completed by the manager. It may or may not be communicated to the employee.