員工激勵機制外文文獻翻譯

1、員工激勵機制外文文獻翻譯 員工激勵機制外文文獻翻譯 (含：英文原文及中文譯文 含：英文原文及中文譯文) 文獻出處 文獻出處： Public Personnel Management, 12(2):159-166.原文 原文 Performance Appraisal as a Guide for Training and Development: A Research Note on the Iowa Performance Evalu

2、ation SystemDennis DaleyIowa State UniversityThis paper examines one facet of performance appraisal-its use as a guide for the drafting of employee training and development plans. The scope is limited in that it excludes

3、 any consideration as to whether these plans are actually implemented. Our interest focuses only on the extent to which supervisors endeavor to assist employees in correcting or overcoming weaknesses and in enhancing or

4、developing perceived strengths. The findings reported here are based on a 1981 monitoring of the performance appraisal system used by the State of Iowa. As civil service reform has been instituted in one jurisdiction aft

5、er another in order to further assure objective, performance based personnel practices, performance appraisal has emerged as one of the key issues in the personnel management of the 1980s. This heightened sense of import

6、ance and seriousness has, in turn, led to a renewed interest in the study of the actual workings of performance appraisal systems. The uses to which performance appraisal can be put are myriad. The recent Civil Service R

7、eform Act of 1978 serves as a model in this respect. Here we find enunciated what may be taken as the typical orientation toward the uses of performance appraisal, recommending that personnel managers and supervisors “us

8、e the results of performance appraisal as. a basis for training, rewarding, reassigning, promoting, reducing in grade, retaining, and removing employees.“ Performance appraisal systems can also serve to validate personne

9、l testing and selection procedures, although such systems are themselves also subject to affirmative action validation requirements. departments and agencies retained descretion over the choice of such personnel practice

10、s until well into the 1960s. Under Governor Harold Hughes (1963 一 1969) a number of efforts were undertaken to strengthen the executive. Among these reforms was the creation of the State Merit System of Personnel Adminis

11、tration, administered by the Iowa Merit Employment Department, in 1967. Even so, there were numerous exemptions limiting the extent of its coverage, both in terms of separate merit systems outside its jurisdiction and of

12、 patronage appointments. The executive reform movement was continued throughout the lengthy service of Governor Robert Ray (1969-1983). Strong executive support was placed behind the development of the personnel system.

13、Governor Ray unsuccessfully advocated expanding the IMED jurisdiction through the elimination of the existing coverage exemptions and by integrating the separate merit systems into an executive personnel department. Notw

14、ithstanding the somewhat 1imited success of recent Iowa governors, the basis for a professionalized public service was established during those years. One reflection of this basis is the fact that the use of a statewide

15、appraisal-by-objectives system was inaugurated in 1977. The implementation of this system followed the introduction of the management-by-objectives concept among a number of the larger state agencies. Since appraisal-by-

16、objectives is a specific application or extension of the MBO approach, it was felt that by this means executive support for performance appraisal could be more readily obtained. It is known, of course, that the lack of m

17、anagerial support is a significant contributing factor in the failure of many performance appraisal systems. The Iowa performance evaluation system is an ideal-typical descriptive example of the appraisal-by-objectives t

18、echnique. The introduction of this approach in 1977 was accompained by a series of training sessions (Burke, 1977) and supported with supervisory and employee handbooks. However, training for new supervisors and periodic

19、 “refresher courses“ appear to have been given a low priority in Iowa, as is generally the case in public sector personnel systems. Iowa's use of appraisal-by-objectives is designed as a participatory system. Employe