evaluating behaviorally oriented aviation maintenance resource ...
An Analysis of Performance Appraisal: Evaluating the...
Transcript of An Analysis of Performance Appraisal: Evaluating the...
Running head: PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 1
An Analysis of Performance Appraisal: Evaluating the Performance of Animal Adoption
Associates
Casey J. Holcom, Janiece M. Irby, Erica N. Moore, and Melinda M. Yang
Valdosta State University
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 2
Abstract
BARC Humane Society is a pet rescue organization in Lowndes County Georgia. BARC Human
Society rescues animals from surrounding local animal shelters; once the animals are removed
from the shelter they are placed into foster homes. Rescued animals will stay with their foster
family until they are adopted. The organization is made possible by volunteers and donations
from the community. The following performance methods were reviewed in order to determine
which method best fit the organization: 360 degree feedback model, weighted behavioral
checklist, and behaviorally anchored rating scale (BARS). The 360 degree feedback model was
an excellent way to give criticism to volunteers while still expressing gratitude for their service.
The weighted behavioral checklist is the most commonly used method; it provided a list of
performance related statements that are weighted. BARS provoke good discussion and produced
immediate performance improvements because employees and employers work together when
creating the behaviors that will be assessed.
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 3
An Analysis of Performance Appraisal: Evaluating the Performance of Animal Adoption
Associates
The concept of performance appraisal differs in almost every organization. Fletcher
(2001, p. 474) defined performance appraisal as “a general heading for a variety of activities
through which organizations seek to assess employees and develop their competence, enhance
performance and distribute rewards”. Performance appraisal is an important tool in performance
management to evaluate the performance and value employees provide. Performance appraisals
provide judgments to backup salary increases, promotions, transfers, demotions, and
terminations (Grote, 2011). A performance appraisal will inform the employee of how the
employee is performing at work, provide basis for coaching and counseling, suggest changes in
performance, and overall let the employee know where the employee stands with the supervisor.
In order to be valid and reliable, a rating scale must possess several characteristics in order to be
acceptable. One obvious characteristic is that performance dimensions should be clearly defined.
Raters can rate objectively if the scales represent specific behaviors. Keeping the rating scales
specific to the job is important. In addition, anchors or points should be brief and reflect the
dimension that is being rated.
In this instance, performance appraisal methods for event coordinators of animal adoption
events will be discussed. Speaking as someone who has been the head coordinator for several pet
adoption events, it is safe to say that performance appraisals are an absolute necessity for the
event workers. Every event is run by of team of people, and to run the best adoption events, the
workers should be recorded on team processes. It is imperative to be able to determine how well
one makes decisions, how well an individual communicates to the other team members, how
well one receives and gives feedback, how one demonstrates leadership, and as well as their
attitudes towards each other and their tasks (Knile & Sulsky, 2009, p. 162). The adoption events
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 4
conducted by BARC Humane Society occur every Saturday and Sunday and involve constant
interaction with animals and the public. If an individual is causing more harm to the event as a
whole, the coordinator should either let that worker go or work with the individual to help them
become more productive. In either case, it is important to have performance appraisals in place
to validate any claims you may make to an individual to ensure credibility.
With an organization such as BARC Humane Society, one should consider that the top
levels of scoring in the appraisal method align with that of the organization’s goals. Saving the
lives of the animals is often a very emotional topic for adoption event workers as well as the
public. The interaction between a supervisor and subordinate is also immensely important in the
appraisal process. Bryne et al. (2012, p. 129) stated that supervisor support leads to a higher level
of trust from their subordinates. Supervisor satisfaction and supervisor support are also
correlated with the reactions of the individual being evaluated (Pichler, 2012, p. 709). While
criticism is often required, it is also important not to forget to include praise in an appraisal. In
regards to public organizations, results of a study suggest that employees who had not been given
praise showed higher levels of job dissatisfaction. Generally, performance appraisal methods are
used to provide motivation for employees. When one sees that they may not be up to par with the
expectations bestowed upon them, they may feel obligated to increase their level of performance.
When individuals are doing well and being informed of their high performance, it gives these
employees incentive to continue their high level of performance. For public organizations, it has
been suggested that individuals being assessed should have a higher level of satisfaction and
morale than those who did not.
Additionally, one should be mindful of ways to improve the current rating scale as well
as possible scenarios in regards to how an individual can improve their scores on the next
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 5
evaluation. A low score on an appraisal is meaningless if there any no known ways to improve
one’s behavior. An employee must be given appropriate feedback in regards to both their
strengths and weaknesses. With all of this information taken into account, three different
appraisal methods were selected to evaluate the performance of the workers at an animal
adoption event. While the processes may vary, the appraisal techniques were selected as the three
most appropriate methods for this particular occupation to include the 360 degree feedback
model, weighted behavioral checklists, and behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS). It
should be noted, however, that many rescue organizations do not incorporate performance
appraisals of any sort due to the constant need of assistance from those willing to aid in their
cause. Yet, to have the highest level of organizational performance, productivity, motivation and
job satisfaction, performance appraisals would be useful. Therefore, it is imperative to analyze
various performance appraisal techniques that could prove to be instrumental when evaluating
the performance of animal adoption associates.
The 360 degree feedback model, for example, provides an excellent way to give criticism
to volunteers while still expressing gratitude for their service. Implementing this model can be a
delicate process but if done correctly, can result in the best possible results for the company as
well as an opportunity for personal growth for the individual volunteer. The 360 degree feedback
model is an ideal performance appraisal method because it can be so versatile and is easily
manipulated to provide the best results for a volunteer. One advantage is that it includes more
than just the supervisor’s opinion. By including colleague input as well, the 360 degree feedback
model provides a well-rounded picture of performance. Additionally, this appraisal technique has
the added benefit of empowering the volunteer. Knowing that other volunteers notice their work
ethic and the good job they do shows the significance of their work. To make sure that this
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 6
approach is as useful as possible, several details should be considered. First, it is imperative that
feedback is confidential. Confidentiality will ensure the most honest answers are given.
Feedback also needs to be specific. Volunteers will typically want to do the best job possible, so
providing specific ways to do so will be appreciated. Thirdly, the purpose of the appraisal needs
to be clarified. Volunteers need to be made aware of the fact that the performance appraisal is
just to provide feedback (Lepsinger & Lucia, 2009). Other purposes for the 360 model can
include gauging the volunteer’s progress, tracking their development, and ensuring personal
growth. All of these can be explained to the volunteer so they better understand why the
appraisal is being conducted. The 360 degree feedback model in general is an excellent source
for feedback and popular among organizations. According to Fortune magazine, 90% of fortune
500 companies use a form of 360 degree feedback and include several sources in their appraisal
method (Vokotich, 2012).
Further, there are several ways to ensure that the appraisal is done correctly in order to
yield optimal results for the company and volunteer. One of these is to make sure that the
organization is fitting for this type of appraisal. A 360 model will typically be ideal for
volunteers because it creates a very open line of communication. However, to be sure, there are
several qualities that are imperative before a 360 degree feedback model can be useful, to include
trust between individuals, respect for one another, and a cohesive culture. These characteristics
will all typically be present when volunteers are involved. Trust between individuals is
important because they have to know that the information provided is confidential. Respect is
key because if communication is to occur and be taken seriously, respect needs to be present
between the volunteer and the supervisor. Cohesiveness is also an important element because it
fosters unity and a combined sense of responsibility to help improve the organization (Vukotich,
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 7
2012). With everyone working together for the benefit of the organization, in this case BARC, it
has the best chance for thriving.
There are several different techniques that can be used when creating the 360 degree
feedback model. In the case of the animal volunteers, the most helpful technique is the
questionnaire portion that should always be included, regardless of what other components are
present. The questionnaire provides the specific results that the volunteers are looking for while
also making it very easy for the supervisor to engage the volunteer in communication. Most of
the specific fundamentals for this appraisal model are universal as several of the components
would be included no matter what organization they were being used for. However, since
volunteers are being evaluated, a few key differences should be noted. First, it is important to
look at what motivated the volunteer. Encouraging them to do their best is important, but it is
imperative to remember that they are simply volunteers and could leave at any point, which
would be detrimental to the BARC organization. Most volunteers are motivated by one of the
following six reasons: values, understanding, ego enhancement, career goals, social
improvement, and ego protection. The more of these motivators that are met, the more likely the
volunteer is going to continue to volunteer for the organization (Warner, Newland & Green,
2011). Knowing what encourages the volunteers to keep giving of their time and skills is
imperative for any supervisor. During the appraisal process, each of these factors needs to be
included if at all possible. Encourage the volunteer by informing them what good their position
has accomplished to satisfy the values motivator. For understanding, volunteers hope to learn
about the specific job or organization, the one motivator that encourages learning. If there are
things that the volunteer could be doing better, deliver this information in a way that shows how
it will be used in the future. Ego enhancement can be similar to values in terms of feedback.
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 8
Simply remind the volunteer that they are a valuable asset to the organization. Career goals are
another factor that lends itself to constructive feedback because employees want to know how to
make themselves as prepared as possible for future employment. Social improvement can be
used to improve job synergy as the supervisor points out the benefits of working as a team.
Finally, ego protectiveness can be used to the advantage of the supervisor by pointing out to the
volunteer how helpful the volunteer will be in the future. When all of the above information is
understood and utilized, the appraisal process can be helpful and unintimidating. This process of
evaluation leads to open communication and can show the volunteer areas for improvement
without underestimating the value of the volunteer and their contributions to the organization.
Refer to Appendix A as a 360 degree feedback model reference.
Another performance appraisal technique that could prove successful in evaluating the
performance of animal adoption associates is the weighted behavioral checklist. The weighted
behavioral checklist is a performance appraisal method which provides a list of performance
related statements that are weighted. The checklist will be created by management such as, HR
Managers or supervisors who are familiar with the job that is being appraised. Management will
collaborate and create the weighted checklist based on observations and data collected from
critical incidents. Management will also determine the weight and importance of each job related
behavior. Weighted checklists can be used to monitor change of performance within an
organization. The checklist can also be used to determine if training, coaching, or job placement
is necessary.
One should be reminded that critical incidents can be defined as, narrative descriptions of
important events that occur on the job and how employees behave in those situations (Marrelli,
2005). According to Marrelli, critical incidents can be collected through focus groups, individual
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 9
interviews, surveys, performance records, and work diaries. The critical incidents data can
provide a glimpse into a company. The purpose of collecting critical incidents is to determine the
needs of the job which can result in better training specific to the job, to get a better
understanding of the functions of a job, and sharing organizational knowledge. Company goals
also rise from collecting critical incidents. Overall, identifying critical incidents serves as the
foundation for many factors which can leads to a successful organization. The weighted
behavioral checklist method uses a large list of critical incidents about effective and ineffective
job behaviors and a subject-matter expert weight the incidents. Subject-matter experts (SMEs)
write examples of performance at various effectiveness levels. These incidents are then sorted
into dimensional categories, and a given incident “survives” to later stages of the process if the
vast majority of SMEs classify it into the same dimension (Kline & Sulsky, 2009). Using the
weighted behavioral checklist method, managers or supervisors will set up a checklist for each
position. Weighted behavioral checklist formats look like behavioral dimension scales in that
behavioral statements differing in performance level are arranged randomly on the form. Unlike
behavioral dimension scales, weighted checklist raters merely indicate whether they have
observed each job behavior (Banks & Roberson, 1985).
Typically, a checklist will be constructed for a specific position in an organization. If a
task analysis has been completed for a particular position, the tasks most implemental involved
in completing the main functions of the job should be recorded. These tasks can then be
implemented into the checklist format, typically with a simple yes/no answering system
according to Herfst, Van Oudenhoven, & Timmerman, (2008). The performance appraisal will
then be based on the results of these, and feedback can then be given accordingly. One of the
positive aspects of this form of appraisal is that you can specifically see which tasks an employee
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 10
is succeeding in and which they are struggling in, so when the time for appraisal comes around
you can specifically tell the employee where they are performing well and where they are
performing poorly. The feedback given to the employees can now be very specific, and if aid is
needed in a particular area it can be addressed specifically. This appraisal method is easy to use
and it is easy to train supervisors to appraise, while being both inexpensive and requiring very
little time. With that information in mind, it is still important to remember that weighted
checklists are still relatively low in reliability and validity when compared to other forms of
appraisal, and in a court of law, they are significantly more difficult to defend. Other
disadvantages to this approach include possible biased ratings when distinguishing positive and
negative questions and biased weights associated with the questions. It also may become difficult
for the manager to assemble, analyze and weigh a number of statements about the employee’s
characteristics, contributions and behaviors. Refer to Appendix B for a sample weighted
behavioral checklist in regards to animal adoption associates.
Lastly, we will examine the behaviorally anchored rating scale (BARS) approach to
performance appraisal. BARS use the behavior-focused approach with concentration on
behaviors, competencies, and skills to assess what the employee does (Grote, 1996). BARS
differ from other appraisal methods in that they focus on behaviors deemed as integral to the
completion of a job task rather than a characteristic of the employee. BARS, developed in 1963
by psychologists Patricia Smith and Lorne Kendall of the National League of Nursing, was
uniquely designed to appraise a specific job (Grote, 1996). Development of BARS evaluations
requires an in-depth understanding of each position’s key tasks, along with an understanding of
the full range of behaviors displayed by individuals in carrying out such tasks. In this
behaviorally based approach, a scale is created that lists effective and ineffective behaviors that
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 11
an employee may exhibit. The creation of the scale is done by managers who compile these lists
through a task analysis of the employee’s position. The behaviors are highly specific which is
helpful to managers when giving an evaluation. Once these methods are completed, employees
are often brought in to contribute to the content of the appraisal. The opinions of an incumbent
are extremely valuable. Once getting the input from the employees, managers ideally have an
accurate list that encompasses all of the major behaviors necessary to complete a task
successfully and productively. The rater will rate these behaviors for each employee then anchor
each behavior to points on a rating scale, which indicates whether the behavior is exceptional,
excellent, fully competent, or unsatisfactory. Jacobs, Kafry and Zedeck (1980) state that BARS
has the potential to identify the strengths and weaknesses for every employee which is very
useful in appraisal.
The creation and use of a formal BARS procedure has significant advantages. Perhaps the
most significant positive aspect of BARS is that there is little room for judgment of employee’s
performance, as the method is more objective. Therefore, it has a high degree of rater/ratee
acceptability and people feel that the system is fair (Grote, 1996). Jacobs et al. (1980) also state
that BARS have a high level of interpretability, meaning that everyone will likely observe
behaviors in a similar manner, making training and evaluations easily comparable between
raters. BARS also demonstrate high validity and reliability, making this technique more likely to
withstand scrutiny in a court of law. BARS provoke good discussion and produces immediate
performance improvements partly because employees and employers work together when
creating the behaviors that will be assessed. This way, employees know exactly what is going to
be used in their appraisal. It also helps to encourage conversation between the manager and the
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 12
subordinate, while the specific behaviors listed make it simple for managers to point out how to
improve behavior.
However, like most approaches, this too has disadvantages. Few performance appraisal
systems decide to use a formal BARS procedure partly because they are time consuming, costly,
and result in some rating error. Not only will the task analysis need to be complete, but the time
has to be taken by the managers to categorize functions and rate their effectiveness. During the
year, the manager is required to keep detailed logs for each employee. The generated logs are
necessary to keep track of critical incidents for each employee that the manager will be
evaluating. Also, it becomes difficult to create anchors for middle ground performance.
Generating examples of performance that is simply acceptable, neither good nor bad, is
sometimes impossible (Grote, 1996). It is also difficult to develop job dimensions that are
complete and contain no overlap. Extensive managerial training also poses as a disadvantage as
managers must become skilled at making fine behavioral observations, judgments, and opinions
(Grote, 1996).
In regards to BARC Humane Society and other nonprofit organizations, measuring
performance becomes increasingly complex. Nonprofit managers are confronted with sorting
through an array of options and selecting measures and methods that will meet both their own
need for useful management information as well as the expectations of funders, watchdogs, and
regulators (Worth, 2012). There continues to be a debate both about the appropriate methods to
be applied and the emphasis that should be given to efforts to measure results. For example, one
concern centers on the fact that the wide array of proposed standards and lack of a vocabulary or
process that is universally acceptable of stable (Worth, 2012). Others argue that nonprofits could
reach a condition of analysis paralysis, consumed with measurement to the preclusion of action.
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 13
Nonprofit managers must be committed to performance measurement but should not become
overly focused on it to the determent of delivering their mission’s programs. However, failure to
measure performance is the antithesis of managing and is unacceptable in the environment in
which nonprofit organizations exist today (Worth, 2012).
The implementation of BARS would be particularly useful when evaluating the
performance of animal adoption associates. As previously mentioned, BARS is behaviorally
based. Because the BARS system is totally focused on employee performance, it ideally removes
all uncertainty regarding the meaning of each numerical rating. Volunteers need specific
feedback to yield the best results which makes choosing BARS a simple decision. BARS is also
fully individualized. From the standpoint of consistency within a company, BARS is designed
and applied individually and uniquely for every position. BARC adoption associates need clearly
defined performance expectations and by using a unique scale per position, volunteers will not
be evaluated based on the same behavioral expectations as other members of the BARC team,
such as the volunteer coordinator. With an understanding of the specific performance
expectations and standards of excellence, employees can much more easily take steps to improve
their performance, and they’re more likely to do so as a result. Using a defined list of functions
and tasks specific to animal adoption associates, a sample of six functions were used in the
creation of a sample BARS that can be found in Appendix C.
Implementing a performance appraisal system for volunteers can be an extremely
difficult task. For companies that use volunteers, especially nonprofit organizations such as
BARC, efficiency is of most importance. If an appraisal is done correctly, efficiency is
obtainable with the added benefit of increasing the esteem of the volunteer. Several techniques
for performance appraisal have been discussed, to include 360 degree feedback model, weighted
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 14
behavioral checklist, and behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS). All of discussed measures
include components that make them ideal for working with volunteers. Additionally, these
appraisal methods are helpful because they show the volunteer how they can improve, but they
also show how important the tasks are that the volunteer has helped to accomplish. The 360
degree feedback model, weighted behavioral checklist, and behaviorally anchored rating scales
all share several key factors that makes them valuable to give feedback to volunteers. All three
methods show several key areas of importance, some of which stress to the volunteer what needs
to be focused on and what tasks or functions are the most important to the success of the
organization. The appraisal types discussed are also excellent promoters of communication. The
open communication between the supervisor and the volunteer is important because areas that
need to be improved can be discussed and it also gives the supervisor the freedom to encourage
and thank the volunteer. In short, the three appraisal methods in question can be used to
maximize the benefits for both the organization and the volunteer.
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 15
References
Banks, C. G., & Roberson, L. (1985). Performance appraisers as test developers. The Academy of
Management Review, 10, 128-142. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/258219.pdf?acceptTC=true
Byrne, Z. S., Pitts, V. E., Wilson, C. M., & Steiner, Z. J. (2012). Trusting the fair supervisor: The
role of supervisory support in performance appraisals. Human Resource Management
Journal, 22(2), 129-147. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-8583.2012.00193.x
Fletcher, C. (2001). Performance appraisal and management: The developing research agenda.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 473-487. doi:
10.1348/096317901167488
Grote, R. C. (2011). How to be good at performance appraisals: Simple, effective, done right.
Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Grote, R. C. (1996). The complete guide to performance appraisal. New York, NY: AMACO
Herfst, S. L., van Oudenhoven, J., & Timmerman, M. E. (2008). Intercultural effectiveness
training in three western immigrant countries: A cross-cultural evaluation of critical
incidents. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32(1), 67-80.
doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2007.10.001
Jacobs, R., Kafry, D., & Zedeck, S. (1980). Expectations of behaviorally anchored rating scales.
Personnel Psychology, 33(3), 595-640. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1980.tb00486.x.
Knile, T. J. B., & Sulsky, L. M. (2009). Measurement and assessment issues in performance
appraisal. Canadian Psychology, 50(3), 161-171. doi: 10.1037/a0015668
Lepsinger, R., & Lucia, A. (2009). The art and science of 360 degree feedback, 2nd ed. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 16
hl=en&lr=&id=q0avI10BDH8C&oi=fnd&pg=PA95&dq=creatinga360degreefeedbacksy
stem&ots=oKoV2Cex7N&sig=aVaSonSRNLtZznNv7KHpctgpi-U
Marrelli, A. F. (2005). The performance technologist's toolbox: Critical incidents. Performance
Improvement, 44(10), 40-44. doi: 10.1002/pfi.4140440210
Performance appraisal methods. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.explorehr.org/articles/Performance_Appraisal/Performance_Appraisal_Meth
ods.html
Pichler, S. (2012). The social context of performance appraisal and appraisal reactions: A meta‐
analysis. Human Resource Management, 51(5), 709-732. doi: 10.1002/hrm.21499
Selden, S., & Sowa, J. E. (2011). Performance management and appraisal in human service
organizations: Management and staff perspectives. Public Personnel Management, 40(3),
251-264. doi: 10.1037/t01805-000
Vukotich, G. (2012). The 360 process: Planning for action. OD Practitioner, 42(3), 24-29.
Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=96d64314-
5637-414d-838a-accaa7adb82c%40sessionmgr112&vid=4&hid=107
Warner, S., Newland, B., & Green, B. (2011). More than motivation: Reconsidering volunteer
management tools. Journal of Sport Management, 25(5), 391-407. Retrieved from
http://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/20113376689.html
Weighted checklist (2010). Retrieved from http://www.humanresources.hrvinet.com/weighted-
checklist/
Worth, M. J. (2012). Nonprofit management: Principles and practice, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 17
Appendix A
360 degree feedback evaluates a volunteer from all sides. The evaluation should be completed by the volunteer, the
volunteer's manager/supervisors, the volunteer's subordinates, and the volunteer's peers. Provide feedback by
thoughtfully and accurately filling in the information below.
1. Are you...
The volunteer The volunteer's manager/supervisor
The volunteer's peer
Other
Volunteer Information
2. Volunteer Information
First Name
Last Name
Department
3. Evaluation Date
Month Day Year
Knowledge and Skill
4. Rate this volunteer in the following areas
Consistently
exceeds
expectations
Frequently meets
and exceeds
expectations
Meets
expectations
Sometimes
meets
expectations
Rarely meets
expectations
Possesses knowledge to
perform job competently 1 2 3 4 5
Possesses skills needed
to perform job
competently 1 2 3 4 5
Pays attention to details 1 2 3 4 5
Looks for ways to
improve quality 1 2 3 4 5
Strives to learn and
improve 1 2 3 4 5
Takes on responsibilities 1 2 3 4 5
Capable of working 1 2 3 4 5
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 18
without constant
supervision
Job Performance
5. Rate this volunteer in the following areas
Consistently
exceeds
expectations
Frequently meets
and exceeds
expectations
Meets
expectations
Sometimes
meets
expectations
Rarely meets
expectations
Properly uses materials and
equipment. Applies
feedback to improve
performance
1 2 3 4 5
Handles unexpected
situations calmly and
efficiently 1 2 3 4 5
Demonstrates ability to
gather information and
develop solutions 1 2 3 4 5
Easily adapts to changes in
the workplace 1 2 3 4 5
Takes responsibility for
his/her actions 1 2 3 4 5
Can handle multiple tasks at
one time 1 2 3 4 5
Completes tasks correctly
and with accuracy 1 2 3 4 5
Follows company rules and
procedures 1 2 3 4 5
Demonstrates commitment
to safety 1 2 3 4 5
Working with Others
6. Rate this volunteer in the following areas
Consistently
exceeds
expectations
Frequently meets
and exceeds
expectations
Meets
expectations
Sometimes
meets
expectations
Rarely meets
expectations
Works well with others 1 2 3 4 5
Respects ideas and
contributions of
everyone 1 2 3 4 5
Fulfills commitments to
others 1 2 3 4 5
Is sensitive to needs and
capabilities of others 1 2 3 4 5
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 19
Takes responsibility for
his/her actions 1 2 3 4 5
Capable of working
without constant
supervision 1 2 3 4 5
Accepts and provides
constructive criticism 1 2 3 4 5
Shares knowledge and
team resources with
coworkers 1 2 3 4 5
Contributes an
appropriate amount of
work 1 2 3 4 5
7. Overall Performance
Please leave additional comments about the volunteer:
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 20
Appendix B
Weighted Behavioral Checklist:
Animal Adoption Employees
50% Provide Animal Care
30% Provide Outstanding Customer Service
10% Coordinate Adoption
10% Set Up and Take Down of Adoption Event
100 % TOTAL
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 21
Appendix C
EMPLOYEE EVALUATION: Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS)
Employee Name: Title: Evaluation for the period:
Supervisor: Title: Department:
RESPOND TO QUESTIONS FROM PATRONS AND PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT ANIMALS.
1- Unsatisfactory 2- Marginal 3- Meets
Expectati
ons
4- Exceeds
Expectation
s
5- Exceptional
Employee rarely responds
to inquiries from customers
and is unaware of the
proper chain of command
to find the answers for
customers. Does not smile
and never apologizes for
any inconvenience.
Employee attempts to
answer inquires but
often forgets the
proper chain of
command, forgets to
smile, and does not
apologize for any
inconvenience.
Employee answers
all inquiries by
following the
proper chain of
command.
Employee is friendly
and always responds
to customers with a
smile. Employee
goes above and
beyond to answer all
inquiries by
following the proper
chain of command.
Employee is friendly and
always responds to
customers with a smile.
Employee goes above
and beyond to answer all
inquiries by following
the proper chain of
command. Employee
apologizes for any
inconvenience if a
question is left
unanswered.
OPEN KENNELS UPON PATRON REQUEST.
1- Unsatisfactory 2- Marginal 3- Meets
Expectati
ons
4- Exceeds
Expectation
s
5- Exceptional
Employee does not
properly open kennels or
follow the correct
procedures to allow the
customer time with the
animal.
Employee opens
kennels but does not
ensure the care of the
animal when with the
customer.
Employee smiles
when greeting the
customer and
opens the kennels
upon request.
Employee always
smiles when greeting
the customer, opens
the kennels upon
request, and allows
the customer time
with the animal.
Employee always greets
the customer with a
smile when agreeing to
open the kennels.
Employee always
maintains the animal on
the leash and allows the
customer to take the
animal to a different area
for privacy.
ACCURATELY COMPLETE ADOPTION PAPERWORK.
1- Unsatisfactory 2- Marginal 3- Meets
Expectati
ons
4- Exceeds
Expectation
s
5- Exceptional
Employee makes careless
attempts to complete the
adoption paperwork
although packets are
always incomplete with
numerous errors present.
Employee often
makes costly errors
when completing the
adoption paperwork.
Employee properly
completes adoption
paperwork once an
adoption has been
finalized.
Employee properly
completes adoption
paperwork once an
adoption has been
finalized. The
employee double
checks the forms for
accuracy to ensure all
necessary signatures
are present.
Employee properly
completes adoption
paperwork once an
adoption has been
finalized. The employee
double checks the forms
for accuracy to ensure all
necessary signatures are
present. Employee
always remembers to
thank the new pet
owners for adopting
through BARC.
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL 22
MAKE COPIES OF ADOPTION FORMS WHEN NECESSARY.
1- Unsatisfactory 2- Marginal 3- Meets
Expectati
ons
4- Exceeds
Expectation
s
5- Exceptional
Employee does not obtain
copies of adoption forms in
a timely fashion and never
checks to see if copies are
needed.
Employee has allowed
forms to run out
before additional
copies can be made.
Does not promptly
restock adoption
forms.
Employee makes
copies of adoption
forms once being
notified to do so.
Employee promptly
makes copies of
adoption forms prior
to being notified to
do so.
Employee occasionally
audits the adoption
forms without being told
to do so. Additional
copies are always made
before they have the
chance to run low. The
employee does not
complain about the
administrative duty of
copying forms.
TAKE PICTURES SURING THE ADOPTION EVENT AND POST TO FACEBOOK PAGE.
1- Unsatisfactory 2- Marginal 3- Meets
Expectati
ons
4- Exceeds
Expectation
s
5- Exceptional
Employee never takes
pictures during the
adoption events to be
posted on the BARC
Facebook page.
Employee rarely
remembers to take
pictures and often
forgets to post them to
the BARC page.
Employee takes
few pictures but
remembers at the
end of the day to
post to Facebook.
Employee takes
pictures during the
event and posts to
Facebook throughout
the day.
Employee takes
numerous pictures
during the adoption
event and posts pictures
to the BARC Facebook
page throughout the
event with captions.
UPDATE THE BARC FACEBOOK PAGE AFTER AN ADOPTION.
1- Unsatisfactory 2- Marginal 3- Meets
Expectati
ons
4- Exceeds
Expectation
s
5- Exceptional
Employee never takes
pictures after an adoption to
be posted on the BARC
Facebook page.
Employee rarely
remembers to take
pictures of the newly
adopted animal and
often forgets to post
them to the page.
Previously taken
pictures of the
newly adopted
animal are posted
to Facebook.
Employee takes
pictures of the animal
after the adoption
and posts to
Facebook.
Employee ensures that
there are pictures of the
new dog owners with
their pet. These pictures
are uploaded to the
BARC Facebook page
without hesitation.
EMPLOYEE SIGNATURE SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE
Name:
Date:
Name:
Date: