From the perspective of top-level design, the original intention of the implementation of performance appraisal is that in order to actively mobilize the enthusiasm of employees, optimize wage distribution and labor payment, improve the labor productivity of employees, and better practice China's distribution mode based on distribution according to work and the coexistence of multiple distribution methods.
Theoretically speaking, after the implementation of performance appraisal, through the realization of the production concept of "doing and not doing the same, doing more and doing less, doing good and doing bad differently", the production enthusiasm of employees should be mobilized, and the production efficiency should be further improved, but in some state-owned enterprises, performance appraisal is widely criticized by employees.
1.Some enterprise leaders have intensified internal conflicts among employees by solidifying the salary amount of performance appraisal.
Some business leaders regard performance appraisal as a kind of good news for their own management, and when they implement performance appraisal, they will allocate the performance appraisal quota to various departments at the lower levels.
They do not adjust the performance pay according to the actual production tasks of the department, but always keep the total performance salary unchanged. Regardless of whether the production tasks of the employees within the department increase or decrease, the performance salary can only eat each other, and the high one eats the low, so that in the long run, it will cause contradictions between employees and prevent employees from making trouble for themselves.
2.Grass-roots managers implement performance appraisal in violation of the law and formalism, which causes dissatisfaction among employees who want to work more and earn more money.
If you want to break the big pot of rice, let the hard-working employees get the corresponding remuneration rewards, and let the employees who mess with the life get the corresponding punishment, the implementation of performance appraisal is a good means.
However, in order to truly implement performance appraisal, it is necessary to subdivide various work tasks of the department into points, and then carry out unified settlement at the end of the month, which will become very troublesome if there is no certain organizational ability.
Some grassroots managers, when they hear the complex and difficult points, have a numb scalp and sweaty hands and feet, for the sake of simplicity. Simply waved his hand directly, and the performance appraisal was implemented on the surface, but in fact it was still the egalitarianism of the past, so that some employees who were full of hope for the implementation of performance appraisal came and went home in disappointment.
3.In the process of performance appraisal of some departments, the initiative is too strong, and the formulation of points is unreasonable, which leads to the disappointment of employees in performance appraisal.
If in the process of formulating performance appraisal, the department head does not combine the actual situation and forcibly adds personal wishes to the performance appraisal formulation clauses, such as setting high points for himself, for his own left and right hand work, and setting low points for the work projects of employees who participate in actual production work.
In this way, there is a great controversy in the actual implementation of the performance appraisal in the department, some employees who do not work, leave work, and get close to the department leaders earn high scores, while workers who work hard have low scores, which has caused dissatisfaction among employees.
4.Some departments are too proactive in implementing performance appraisals, resulting in uneven distribution of work.
In actual work, the department manager is responsible for arranging the specific work of the day or month, if there is a department with more people and less work, the department leaders will arrange more work for their henchmen when arranging the work, resulting in no work to be done by the employees who are estranged from them on weekdays, and finally at the end of the month, when the points are sorted out, the employees who send more work take more, and the employees who send less work take less, causing dissatisfaction in the hearts of the employees who take less money.
Moreover, if the henchmen with a lot of money take out some of the money and hand it over to the department managers, they will use this method to arbitrage their salaries and set up a small treasury, which will easily lead to new integrity risks.
All in all, the original intention of performance appraisal is good, and its purpose is to match the distribution of labor with the actual effort. However, due to the fact that in the process of implementation, there were some department heads who acted in violation of the yang and yin and replaced the objective facts with their own subjectivity, which led to the fact that it finally became a management system of "pigs and dogs do not love".
Another point is that after the implementation of performance appraisal, the big pot of rice is broken, so that employees have a feeling of going to work to earn wages, just like the relationship between employees and enterprises in the past, but with the implementation of performance appraisal, it has become a way to pay on delivery. Moreover, this paragraph should be adjusted accordingly according to the quality and completeness of the goods. Naturally, it will cause dissatisfaction among some employees.