When applying for a vacancy in a firm, the applicants are not always aware of what qualities and skills they are expected to possess. While searching for candidates, the smartest firms estimate their prior achievements and deeply weigh personality traits to find the most relevant workers. Irrespective of business, sex, age or salary, all perfect workers share some mutual traits. These comprise, but are not restricted to persons who own a distinct set of skills and abilities. The following paper seeks to analyze the traits the employees should have, types of biases during employee appraisal, and how a firm can achieve top level of training.
First, employees should be ambitious. This is compelled by the need to realize individual potential and advance self, the firm and society. The candidate should be asked to explain his or her major career objectives in five or ten years. The hiring team needs to make follow-up queries that would authenticate the applicant’s initial answer, which might be an interrogating 101 response. This trick demonstrates the real intentions of the applicant and shows if the contender plans to surpass the firm or just collect a salary. Similarly, responsibility is another trait that the applicant should depict (Manasa & Reddy, 2009).
The right candidate should be significant and independent. The recruiting team should ask the applicant to tell about a split-second verdict that he or she made on the previous job, why he or she made that verdict and what effects it had. The candidate should also be required by the interviewer to give an instance he or she made a fault and fell short of consequence. The first query will expose if the applicant holds critical thinking or responds with sentiment (Manasa & Reddy, 2009). During the applicant’s retort to the second query, the interviewer would be able to learn if the candidate takes responsibility for circumstances, justifies the problem, or bounces responsibility. If the applicant cannot think of a period he or she made a mistake, it demonstrates that the person is unable admit his mistake and unwilling to learn.
Further, perseverance is another trait that the firm should search among the employees. The applicants should be able to maintain attention and focused tenacity in spite of difficulties. The candidate should display fortitude and take a lasting view. The interviewer should ask the candidate to explain one instance when he or she met any obstacle (Abu-Doleh & Weir, 2007). Additionally, the candidate should give an instance he or she had to solve a complicated issue that needed several steps to take. These questions will depict if the contender has the capability to bear expeditions and lessen hindrances along the way (Abu-Doleh & Weir, 2007). The firm should aim at hiring people who are irresistible because they offer sturdy, reliable force until a result is attained.
Limited time Offer
However, the hiring team should avoid candidates who are always complaining. This kind of workers always disparage their bosses, clients and their fellow work mates as they will not be able to embrace firms’ unity (Abu-Doleh & Weir, 2007). The hiring team should also avoid applicants who are lazy and irresponsible, for example, those who are continually late for the job, miss targets and use most of their work time browsing the internet. When they fail to finish their tasks, they make vindications and even shift responsibility for their mistakes on others. They display little concern for the accomplishment of their duties and do not show interest in prosperity of the company.
Biases can impact workers’ performance appraisals in extremely negative ways. An upright supervisor should be impartial about the performance of their staff (Abu-Doleh & Weir, 2007). In order to have an effectual workplace, it is imperative that supervisors circumvent any bias in worker performance appraisals. There are several types of biases that may arise during employees’ appraisal, and these include the following.
The first type is recency bias. This is one of the complicated types of biases that may inhibit with an effectual performance appraisal. When bosses are under the influence of this bias, they tend to under- or overvalue short term proceedings to the disadvantage of the worker’s enduring performance (Abu-Doleh & Weir, 2007). Most performance appraisals have established period of times, so deteriorating to take into justification the whole performance appraisal period can cause unsuccessful and untrue performance appraisals.
The halo outcome is unevenly defined as when a boss values a specific positive trait of a worker to the disadvantage of impartiality during a performance appraisal. The boss in query may disregard other glitches with the worker since he is stellar in one field (Manasa & Reddy, 2009). Nonetheless, this keeps the staff from knowing about liabilities in other fields, which hinders them from developing, as well as lessening their value to the firm. The central tendency bias entails the supervisor grouping most of his staff into central level ranks while having some excesses in the bottom and top. This bias destructively distresses performance appraisals by not tackling all of the problems and contributions of workers (Abu-Doleh & Weir, 2007). This type of bias should be circumvented for effectual development in the workstation.
Benefit from Our Service: Save 25% Along with the first order offer - 15% discount, you save extra 10% since we provide 300 words/page instead of 275 words/page
In order for the supervisor to eliminate biases during employee appraisal, he or she should assess workers documents to get a comprehensive picture of previous performance, contact workers’ administrators in other departments when it is hard to put together work account and performance for enduring workers. Additionally, the supervisor should make a note of inconsistencies in previous performance assessments that may composite future performance matters.
Related Management essays