From a practical point of view, the performance appraisal of small and medium-sized state-owned enterprises is a difficult point in human resource management. Compared with large and medium-sized state-owned enterprises, the management level of small and medium-sized state-owned enterprises is weaker, and the implementation of performance appraisal is more difficult. Moreover, with the evolution of modern management, the traditional performance appraisal has gradually risen to performance management. This step-by-step process from scratch and from existence to perfection often depends on the promotion of the third party.
C State-owned enterprise is a subsidiary of national super-class construction enterprise, mainly engaged in highway and bridge construction, with an annual output value of more than 400 million yuan. The construction sites are all over a province, cities and counties, and many bridges built by the company won the national high-quality gold award (Luban Award) and the national high-quality silver award. As a link and process in modern human resource management, performance appraisal has been paid more and more attention, and enterprises have followed suit and implemented it. C state-owned enterprises designed a performance system by themselves, but it was implemented for two quarters. Even though the company has numerous honors, the project team gave Company C a "state-owned enterprise among state-owned enterprises".
Indeed, effective employee performance appraisal can comprehensively and objectively evaluate employees' work attitude, work ability and work performance in a certain period of time, encourage employees to improve their work enthusiasm and quality through measures such as rewarding diligence and punishing laziness, and eliminating the fittest, and ultimately improve the production efficiency and economic benefits of enterprises. However, not all performance appraisal systems can guarantee this. Based on the introduction and implementation experience of C state-owned enterprise performance appraisal system, the project team believes that to really do a good job in performance appraisal, it is necessary to tailor the scheme according to the actual situation of small and medium-sized state-owned enterprises, and the scheme design should be operable rather than blindly copied, otherwise it will not achieve the expected results, but will produce more contradictions and crises.
First, the implementation of performance appraisal of small and medium-sized state-owned enterprises, some of the main problems
1, poor personnel quality
The human resource management level of small and medium-sized state-owned enterprises stays at the personnel level, which is often closely related to the level of human resource workers in enterprises. It is obviously unrealistic to expect them to establish and improve the scientific performance management system of enterprises, and in the process of designing and introducing performance appraisal with the help of third parties, their role is more just operators. C state-owned enterprises used to hold employee mobilization meetings according to procedures every time they conducted performance appraisal, preaching the importance, necessity and various benefits of appraisal, but they still couldn't do it. As a result, during the interview process, many employees' dissatisfaction with performance appraisal can be seen everywhere.
From the perspective of employees of small and medium-sized state-owned enterprises, there is still a lot of resistance, thinking that performance appraisal is to deduct wages and smash rice bowls, with the aim of layoffs. These employees have been working in state-owned enterprises for a long time, or have been engaged in a certain job for a long time. They are accustomed to step by step, muddling along and lacking enthusiasm. Therefore, once we pay attention to work performance, we will lack confidence, complain repeatedly, and even encourage employees to oppose performance appraisal or deliberately delay, which will cause great obstacles to the appraisal.
2. Insufficient job analysis.
The implementation of performance appraisal must have certain foundation and premise guarantee. In the process of enterprise human resource management and development, job analysis, that is, clarifying the responsibilities of departments and posts and the quality requirements of posts for employees, is the basis of all human resource management and development work. Only by clarifying the post responsibilities can we evaluate the actual work behaviors of all work teams and employees in the enterprise and judge the degree of conformity between their behaviors and the duty norms required by the enterprise, which can be used as the measurement standard and assessment basis of performance.
At present, in the small and medium-sized state-owned enterprises, the job analysis of most enterprises has not been effectively carried out, and many enterprises do not even have simple job descriptions. Most of the job responsibilities of working groups and personnel in enterprises are vague, which is a drawback of state-owned enterprises for many years, and it is naturally difficult to measure the quality of employees' work completion. C the basis of state-owned enterprises is simply to describe the responsibilities of each post in a simple and rough way according to the requirements of the three-standard integrated management system.
3. The index setting is unreasonable.
C a set of performance appraisal system once launched by state-owned enterprises is said to have been turned out by the person in charge of the personnel department in two days at the weekend, which is more efficient than the project team, hehe, but the quality is not flattering. In terms of indicators, the system pays attention to the evaluation of subjective non-quantitative indicators, but lacks the evaluation of objective quantifiable indicators. The evaluation of qualitative assessment indicators is subjective, and there is no specific and applicable detailed grade standard description. For example, among the departmental assessment indicators, there are service quality, work efficiency and so on. These assessment indicators are generally divided into "very satisfied", "good", "satisfied", "average" and "very dissatisfied". But how to apply these grades clearly and accurately, such as how to define "satisfactory" and "fair", can make employees feel at ease. There is a lack of five clear qualitative descriptions for multi-dimensional evaluation. Examiners often score according to their own impressions and subjective judgments, and even some examiners will add some personal preference factors.
This is also the fundamental reason why this performance appraisal scheme is full of water and employees complain and have high opinions. This problem is a common problem in the performance appraisal of small and medium-sized state-owned enterprises.
The key to performance appraisal is "performance" and "efficiency", that is, the performance and effect of employees. However, the performance appraisal of small and medium-sized state-owned enterprises tends to avoid the important and make great efforts on work attitude and work ability, while the practical and quantifiable work achievement of work performance is simply taken over, not to mention KPI, which is a microcosm of the long-standing institutional contradiction of state-owned enterprises.
4. Serious human emotions
The problem of personnel relations is often another gap that many small and medium-sized state-owned enterprises can hardly cross. The traditional atmosphere and "pot rice" thought of state-owned enterprises still exist. Some supervisors and even senior leaders do not attach importance to performance appraisal, and do not regard performance appraisal as an important task, but simply deal with it. The reason is that they don't really understand the important role of assessment, don't realize that performance assessment is a comprehensive system management project and its great role, and simply think that performance assessment is a simple job evaluation, which will not bring benefits and profits to enterprises and will waste time.
In addition, some leaders are unwilling to strictly implement the performance appraisal policy in order to stabilize the relationship between superiors and subordinates, take care of personal feelings, or for other reasons; C most of the managers of some state-owned enterprises are technicians and constructors, lacking refined management consciousness and unwilling to spend energy on assessment. Because everyone doesn't want to offend people and cause trouble, and the mutual affection phenomenon is serious, the assessment is more casual and unwilling to carry out strict assessment. Eventually, people at all levels don't pay attention to the assessment work, and the assessment results can't reflect the work performance and can't be linked to wages, which eventually becomes a mere formality.
The above are some typical problems found by the project team in the implementation of performance appraisal of C state-owned enterprises, which may also be common problems in the implementation of performance appraisal of small and medium-sized state-owned enterprises at present. If these problems are not handled well, it will be difficult to carry out performance appraisal. Even if it is carried out reluctantly, it will not produce good results and even complain.
According to the data of an authoritative survey organization in the United States, 70% of the performance appraisal implemented by enterprises has been proved to be invalid. Therefore, the project team believes that once an enterprise wants to conduct performance appraisal, it must do it well and cannot play with form. Of course, management needs to be improved in practice and exploration, and performance appraisal needs to be improved in practical application.