However, in our practice, that is often happening oppositely - the whole process just seems dissimulative, and it reflects negatively on the work of employees. Particularly, the work evaluation in a number of companies is introduced only as a tool and the main reason for the reduction of staff, and very few companies can be proud on awarding of employees` performance at the end of the year.
Marina Veselinovic, Manager of Human Resources in an Australian company for evaluation of the quality of production and getting the ISO standards, says that evaluation of work performance and the dependence of earnings from these assessments are part of the traditional management, which is based on a hierarchical, authoritarian system that gives managers control over the "stick and carrot."
"Evaluation of employees is useful because it allows them to receive feedback about how the year has been successful in their work, and thanks to that, they can reduce the number of mistakes they make and the time they spend unconstructive and thus become more productive, more motivated and more dedicated to enterprise costumers. At least, in our company and in most of European ones, the whole system is designed as an opportunity to be with the employees led discussion on his work performance, to set goals for next year, to recognise the developmental needs of the employee and consider career opportunities that the company has. Of course, if employee does not accomplish the objectives of working performance, shows no interest, desire for change, progress and teaching him to thank for cooperation. This kind of work and its evaluation, so far, proved to be good and profitable for the company and its employees," Veselinovic explains.
According to her, in private companies there aren`t many stories about it, because you have work and success - on the one side, and inactivity and failure - on the other side, and there`s no dilemma.
"Of course, such a mode and operation is a problem in companies in which the status of employees, of itself, a permanent solution, a measure of success in neither asked nor valued, and therefore, individual responsibility isn`t argued," added Veselinovic.
According to lawyer Irena Zlatkovic, the whole procedure should be standardised, through which to achieve objectivity, as for all the same criteria apply to all who go through the same process, and it provides attractive, the validity and legality of all proceedings.
"This process is designed for the company legal protection in case of claims of employees, because of discrimination or illegal termination," says Zlatkovic.
Olivera Milivojevic, Manager of NISAL, emphasises that, as a rule, the assessment of the employee has two components - one is a textual, and showed a description of the success achieved, and the other is numeric and showed the evaluation of performance, and from the assessment depends on salary increase for the next year or change the status of the employee.
"Management is the one who sets the lower limit below which productivity can not fall, but an employee to set the upper limit that will go out," emphasised Milivojevic.
However, as long as there are good reasons for evaluation, and its proponents and opponents agree about that, in the end, objectivity throughout the proceedings based on the assumption that the perception that immediate manager or head of subordinate labour success - accurate, comprehensive, free from any influence, but this isn`t, often, the case in practice.
Frequently, employees are trying to complete for the vision and evaluation manager, a limited number of raises, in a variety of manipulative ways. Therefore, in many cases, that are going to evaluate the working performance, in the end, aren`t related to real employee`s success.
Zoran Tolevic, who recently proclaimed as surplus in his company (and, on the basis bad estimation of his work), is prepared to sue the company. He thinks that work evaluation is personally motivated evaluation and almost in every case a result of boss`s revenge because of disagreements.
"Specifically, in my case, it`s arrogance of my superior and his own revenge. Lack of motivation and capacity for collective work and further needlessness for my engagement - which are cited as reasons for the termination of my employment - are pure nonsense and hard manipulation of facts. Because, on the basis of which he (his boss) considered relevant to assessing one`s work, when he came to their working place by political engagement, and needlessness job was invented because of the job for which I was engaged, he hired a part time external collaborator. After all, the union is on my side," believes Tolevic.
As the rate of his work states that, in the last six years, its roster with no results and that productivity was minimal, he interpreted it as a hunt and a poor evaluation of management, because in his company has many employees who, in his words, have less performance, and they`re not separated by anything.
The absence of real insight into their own performance is often among the employees in Serbia. Experts believe that the loss of jobs, as well as the continuous evaluation, creates an unrealistic picture of one own values in relation to the others, as well as frequent comparisons with others and their results, but not with the standards set by the management.
Nevertheless, the evaluation is only knocking on doors of certain Serbian companies, especially those with state or government share, which has caused strong reactions by unions and employees. Unrealistic evaluation, nepotism and manipulation of the reasons are most frequently cited as an argument against such a profile. On the other hand, the companies, as the main argument, emphasise their extremely poor financial balances.
* CEV magazine is an online publication of the Centre for European Values (Photo: European Union, 2010)
