13th International Research/Expert Conference

”Trends in the Development of Machinery and Associated Technology”

TMT 2009, Hammamet, Tunisia, 16-21 October 2009

A PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL MODEL PROPOSAL FOR BLUE-

COLLAR EMPLOYEES IN A UNIVERSITY

Cihan Evecen Ahmet Beşkese

Bahçeşehir University, Department of Industrial Engineering
34100, Beşiktaş, Istanbul
Turkey

ABSTRACT
There is a wide variety of research devoted to the performance appraisal in human resources
management (HRM) literature. This study contributes to the field by providing a hierarchical
framework for performance evaluation criteria, and defining importance weights for them.
Keywords: Performance Appraisal, AHP, Prioritization, Blue-collar employees.

1. INTRODUCTION
There are many similar definitions of performance appraisal in the literature. It could be seen as a
personnel evaluation method which measures the work effectiveness of the employees to reach the
organizational goals with using objective criteria. The aim is reaching higher productivity outcomes by
the help of preset job specifications and standards, and deploying these throughout the company.
Performance appraisals provide a formal, recorded, regular review of an individual's performance, and
a plan for future development. As De Cenzo and Robbins stated some 35 years ago, performance
evaluation studies were designed primarily to tell employees how they had done over a period of time,
and to let them know what pay raise they would be getting. Although this may have served its purpose
then, as they claimed, today there are some other reasons for performance appraisals especially related
to development and documentation concerns as well. [1] On a more individual level, for example,
performance management is commonly used for performance coaching in which feedback is provided
to individuals on performance, or performance appraisal where an individual's performance is
documented and feedback is provided. [2]

This paper aims at constructing a hierarchical framework for performance evaluation criteria to
appraise blue-collar employees. Since the criteria sets are somewhat different for blue and white-collar
employees, they should not be evaluated against the same model to end up with more appropriate
results. It is expected to help managers perform a clearly understood and unbiased performance
appraisal. To reach that aim, the rest of the study is formed as follows: In Chapter 2, the standards and
measures for performance appraisal are explained. In Chapter 3, the proposed methodology is briefly
defined, the hierarchical model is shown, and the calculated importance weights are listed. Finally, the
paper ends with a brief conclusion in Chapter 4.

2. STANDARDS AND MEASURES FOR PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

Performance appraisal is a multistage process. The process begins with the establishment of the
performance standards in accordance with the organization’s strategic goals. These standards should
be clear and objective enough to provide consistency, and both sides (i.e. Managers and employees)
should mutually agree on specific job performance and measures. Maintaining objectivity in defining

269
the performance standards, which serve as benchmarks against which performance is measured, is a
major challenge for performance appraisal systems.

Assessment for employees with different levels of responsibilities is directed at the different nature of
work performed by them [3]. Hence, the proportions (or importance weights) of the criteria differs
according to the level of employment.

There are various methods available for assessing results, behavior and personal characteristics of an
employee. These methods can be used according to the particular circumstances and requirements.

To ensure the reliability and validity of a performance appraisal system, a company must design the
evaluation process carefully and develop appropriate measuring scales. Employees can be appraised
against (1) absolute standards, (2) relative standards, or (3) objectives. No one approach is always
best: each has its strengths and weaknesses.

3. METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS ACHIEVED

The AHP approach, developed by Saaty [4], became very popular in assessing criteria weightings in
various multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problems. [5] The methodology offers various
advantages in prioritization of the elements in MCDM problems. It involves decomposing a complex
MCDM problem into a hierarchy, assessing the relative importance of decision criteria, comparing
decision alternatives with respect to each criterion, and determining an overall priority for each
decision alternative and an overall ranking for the decision alternatives. [6] The hierarchical body
makes easy to do pair-wise comparisons.

This study takes the criteria in “Dartmouth College Employee Performance Evaluation and
Development Plan” [7] as a basis. The criteria and their sub-criteria are placed in a hierarchical model
under the goal, measuring performance of blue-collar employees, as can be seen in Figure 1.

After taking the expert evaluations by the help of a survey questionnaire, the pair-wise comparison
scores were entered to Expert Choice software. Overall scores were calculated as in Figure 2 with 0.09
inconsistency (acceptable inconsistency ratio is defined as 0.1).

“Budgeting time effectively and being well organized and focused” has the largest overall score,
showing that it is relatively more important (10.6%) than others. “Establishing and accomplishing
duties in a competent and timely manner” is the second most important (10.4%) criterion.

4. CONCLUSION
Defining the performance standards, which serve as benchmarks against which performance is
measured, with maintaining objectivity is a major challenge for performance appraisal systems. This
study proposes a hierarchical model for the performance evaluation of blue-collar employees in a
university, and defines the importance weights of evaluation criteria. By looking at the results, the HR
managers should spend more time to train the blue-collar employees in basics of time management,
and supervise them while performing their duties.

270
 Performance of
Blue Collars

A. Job B. Quality of C. Productivity, D. Problem E. Initiative, F. Teamwork G. Interpersonal H. Compliance I. Consumer J. Cost
Knowledge Work Accuracy and Identification, Innovation and and Cooperation and Relations/ Effectiveness
Timeliness Solving and Creativity Communication Hospitality/
Analytic Skills Skills Service

Job Awereness, Conforms to Yields Determines and Develops new Acts as a Fosters an env. Works within Understanding Effectively
and ability to established appropriate isolates ideas and does cohesive of collabor.s legal, regulatory of service budgets time, is
perform duties standards work output or problems improvements member of a through and ethical standards and well organized
volume within his/her team effective comm. practice strives to and focused
responsibility standards achieve them

Knowing recent Is accurate, Work is correct, Identifies Promotes Achieves goals Demonstrates Follows safe Achieves Conserves and
knowledge thorough, exact and causes and /facilitates specifically by effective practices positive economizes if
presentable, precise formulates innovation on working communication required for the relations within expendable
appropriate, effective the part of with/through skills, oral and position his/her span of resources are
clear, concise solutions others others written control concerned

Willingness to Establishes, Effectively Is self-starting, Is cooperative Effectively Complies with Is accessible Actively
self-training accomplishes facilitates/imple creative as and easily articulates own appropriate and appropriate supports cost
duties in a ments solutions applied to duties obtains position policies and with users of containment
competent and of position cooperation procedures department measures.
timely manner from others services

Is a willing Listens and Brings potential

participant in interacts effec. compliance
problem solving without matters to
alienating others supervisor

Compromises, Effective Complies with

recognizes the communication training
needs of the style with all requirements,
overall levels of as appropriate
Figure 1. Hierarchical structure of performance evaluation organization personnel to position

criteria
Is willing to
make
concessions
271 when
appropriate
 Figure 2. Priority weights of performance evaluation sub-criteria

5. REFERENCES
[1] De Cenzo, D.A., & Robbins, S.P., (1994). Human Resource Management (4th. Edtn.), John Wiley&Sons
Inc.
[2] Mulvaney, R.R.H., Zwahr, M., & Baranowski, L., (2006). The trend toward accountability: What does it
mean for HR managers?, Human Resource Management Review, 16, 431–442.
[3] McCrie, R., (2006). Security Operations management, (2nd Edtn)., Butterworth Heinemann.
[4] T.L. Saaty, The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resources Allocation, McGraw-
Hill, London, 1980.
[5] Yu-Ting, L., Wei-Chih, W., Han-Hsiang W., (2008). AHP and simulation-based budget determination
procedure for public building construction projects, Automation in Construction, 17 (5), 623-632.
[6] Ying-Ming, W., Ying, L., Zhongsheng, H., (2008). On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its
applications, European Journal of Operational Research, 186 (2), 735-747.
[7] http://www.dartmouth.edu/~hrs/pdfs/eval07a.pdf, Access date: June 10, 2009.

272