The article takes Linzhi city perfect education as the object of performance appraisal. With a perfect education company to field visit investigation and using the methods such as interview, questionnaire investigation, the authors learn the existing problems in the company currently and they also find the causes of the problems. In order to develop staff progress review and convenient staff performance appraisal management, the authors complete the establishment of the balanced scorecard and the construction of key performance indicators (kpis) examination cycle model.
One of the important reasons why China’s famous new Oriental, China public corporation education and other large training institutions still maintain their vigorous development is that corporate development is closely combined with employee performance management [
In 2016, Linzhi onlytoya college foreign language school was officially listed on the perfect education of the company. The company is given priority to basic education with setting up a kindergarten, primary school class, interests typically exposes and will conduct of civil servants training. At present, the company is in the initial stage, and there is still a lack of teachers in the construction.
Employees’ performance appraisers are mainly middle managers of the company. At present, Haobo education has not set up a special staff assessment team or a special HR department. The performance evaluation of the company is mainly based on the attendance rate of teachers. There is no specific performance appraisal checklist, and the setting of assessment indicators is not combined with employee motivation, so it is not publicly quantified. The company’s assessment indicators are too simple, the qualitative and quantitative indicators are not highlighted, and there is no standardization in the performance assessment process. In the performance appraisal process, the perfect education company and employees are lack of effective communication, the assessment results are not linked to rewards and punishments, the company’s performance appraisal feedback mechanism is not sound, thus lead to a lag of employees’ responses to the company’s performance evaluation indicator setting and the assessment results. Therefore, employees’ work initiative is extremely low, and the goal of the company’s performance is ultimately unable to be realized.
Some employees of the company hold multiple posts, and the allocation of posts is not scientific. The responsibilities of posts are ambiguous, and the job objective is difficult to be determined, which makes it difficult to conduct scientific evaluation on teachers and staff. At present, the company is lack of effective public feedback mechanism; the management does not give appraisal result, and is unable to effectively communicate with staff; faculty members cannot understand oneself in the work of managers, and they even don’t know what place still need to improve in the process of management.
The company’s performance management is not the same height as its corporate strategy. The performance management is only for the goodness or badness of the inspection work, and only pays attention to the surface performance. Only management personnel participates the design of performance appraisal evaluation system, and they do not pay attention to the opinions of the staff, parents and students.
At present, the company’s performance appraisal plan for employees is relatively general and the assessment indicators are relatively simple. For each staff, the nature of work, individual character and interpersonal relationship all have an effect on the performance review results. If a single standard is used to measure all employees, it will be unfair, and even leads to the results of performance appraisal greatly deviated from the purpose of the performance evaluation to motivate the employees. In addition, the unreasonable weight allocation, set according to individual management level, only focuses on individual subjective consciousness to a large extent, and seldom adopts scientific and objective methods. Therefore, the development of performance evaluation indicators lacks practical significance in the process of application.
In the company’s daily performance appraisal, with the completion of the inspection work, the assessment result is limited to the print edition published on board, the corresponding rewards and punishment after the implementation of the relevant information become invalid. It makes the assessment work is a one-off, randomness. It’s not only unfavorable to the inspection data effectively preserved for a long time, but also brought difficult to other personnel to consult. Due to the lack of assessment means and the non-standard form, the assessment work loses its original significance and cannot effectively constrain the norms and motivate employees.
The balanced scorecard (BSC) is required by the assessment indexes in the company’s strategic goal and responsibility [
See
This paper proposes a combination of qualitative and quantitative system analysis method, analytic hierarchy process (AHP), in combined with Satty 1 - 9 scaling method (see
targeted at a level of a factor which is concerned [
This paper adopts the method of questionnaire survey. The research on the teaching staff of Haobo company is also conducted for the students and parents who come to the company for education training. In addition, the data of this paper are obtained through data collation [
The judgment matrix of first-order indicators is as follows:
U = ( 1 2 6 3 1 / 2 1 4 3 1 / 6 1 / 4 1 2 1 / 3 1 / 3 1 / 2 1 )
A maximum characteristic value of lambda Max = 4.2216, the normalization processing after the corresponding eigenvectors is: W = (0.486, 0.304, 0.11, 0.1) T, consistency index CI = (4.2216 − 4)/(4 − 1) = 0.07, random consistency index RI = 0.9 (look-up table), the consistency ratio CR = CI/RI = 0.08 < 0.1, through the consistency check.
scale | Meaning |
---|---|
1 | It means that the two factors are of equal importance compared to each other |
3 | Element i is slightly more important than element j |
5 | Element i is significantly more important than element j |
7 | Element i is stronger more important than element j |
9 | Element i is extremely more important than element j |
2, 4, 6, 8 | Represents the intermediate value of the above adjoining judgment |
reciprocal | The ratio of factors to their importance is 1/aij |
The secondary indicators | λmax | CI | CR | The secondary index normalized W corresponding to the eigenvector |
---|---|---|---|---|
U1 | 3.0858 | 0.0429 | 0.07 | (0.6738, 0.2255, 0.101) |
U2 | 3.0858 | 0.0429 | 0.07 | (0.6267, 0.2797, 0.0936) |
U3 | 3 | 0.000 | 0.00 | (0.6, 0.2, 0.2) |
U4 | 3.0246 | 0.012 | 0.02 | (0.5696, 0.3331, 0.0973) |
The judgment matrix of secondary indicators is as follows:
U 1 = ( 1 4 5 1 / 4 1 3 1 / 5 1 / 3 1 ) , U 2 = ( 1 3 5 1 / 3 1 4 1 / 5 1 / 4 1 ) U 3 = ( 1 3 3 1 / 3 1 1 1 / 3 1 1 ) , U 4 = ( 1 2 5 1 / 2 1 4 1 / 5 1 / 4 1 )
It can be seen from
First, after full communication between the company top leadership and employees, set criteria to the company staff’s key performance appraisal indicators, and then according to the key indicators score of the staff multiplied by the corresponding weight value, get the staff performance appraisal scores e.g., [
As seen from
In order to clarify the key contents of the performance appraisal process and promote the smooth implementation of the performance appraisal work, a flow chart for the implementation and operation of the performance appraisal scheme is formulated, as shown in
Whether the setting of the appraisal cycle is reasonable will directly influence whether the effect of performance appraisal can be properly played. Due to the short period of cycle setting, it is easy to make employees eager for quick results and quick profits. They pursue rapid assessment and fast reaching the target
item | Ranked distribution | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Score Y | Y ≥ 80 | 70 ≤ Y < 80 | 60 ≤ Y < 70 | Y < 60 |
Performance rating | excellent | well | qualified | disqualified |
[
Based on the implementation of the company staff performance appraisal process as well as continuously exploration, summarization and gradually perfect of the performance appraisal management method, the perfect education found that at present there are still many deficiencies in terms of performance appraisal of the company [
The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.
He, Y., Zhang, W. and Yu, Q. (2018) Study on the Optimization Path of Performance Appraisal from the Perspective of Motivating Employees’ Enthusiasm―Take Lin Zhi Haobo Education Training Co., LTD as an Example. Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies, 6, 228-238. https://doi.org/10.4236/jhrss.2018.63039
Appendix 1. Staff performance appraisal index system.
Appendix 2. Staff performance assessment criteria of teaching department.