Performance Management 233
In many public and nonprofit organizations supervisors lack the
authority to determine the purpose of evaluation. As noted earlier, pro-
motions may be based on competitive examinations and seniority, and
pay - for - performance may not exist. In such cases, however, supervisors can
use the evaluation process to develop their employees. The evaluation process
should open up communication between supervisors and employees and
be used to discuss with employees areas for development and the best ways
to achieve their goals. A systematic approach to performance appraisal will
help employers make sure that they and their employees have the same
understanding of the expectations for satisfactory performance.
Ethical Issues in Performance Appraisal
Requiring documentation by raters is critical if employees and supervi-
sors are to believe in the integrity of the process. Longenecker and Ludwig
(1990) report that supervisors often inflate or deflate performance
appraisals. More than 70 percent of supervisors surveyed admitted that
they intentionally infl ated or defl ated subordinates ’ ratings for a variety
of reasons, such as because they believed that accurate ratings would
have a damaging effect on the subordinate ’ s motivation and performance,
wanted to avoid airing the department ’ s dirty laundry, wanted to improve
an employee ’ s eligibility for merit raises, wanted to reward employees for
displaying great effort even when results were relatively low, or needed to
avoid confrontation with hard - to - manage employees. Reasons provided by
supervisors as to why they often defl ate employee ratings included wanting
to scare better performance out of an employee, wanting to punish a diffi cult
or rebellious employee, or wanting to encourage a problem employee to
leave the organization.
The deliberate distortion of performance evaluations can be discouraged
by the organization by not only requiring documentation to substanti-
ate ratings but also by holding supervisors accountable for their ratings.
Supervisors should be evaluated on the accuracy and comprehensiveness
of the performance appraisals they complete. While infl ating performance
ratings may be benevolent or discourage confl icts in the short term, the
long - term consequences may prove deleterious for the agency. Poorly per-
forming employees may not improve. Or an unforeseen reduction in force
might necessitate the layoff of staff. The courts require documentation
for dismissals or layoffs to prove that they were based on performance, so
infl ated evaluations do not demonstrate cause or differentiate the levels of
