CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1   PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Performance evolution has been describe as an act of determining the performance ability and subsequently rating of the employee to a particular standard. Performance evaluation has been defined by various authors in their own various ways.

Robert and John (1997) defined performance evaluation as the process of evaluating how well employees do  their jobs compared  with  a set of standards and communicating that information to those employees.

Armstrong (2006), defined performance evaluation as the formal assessment and rating of individuals by their managers as usually an annual review meeting. 

“Performance evaluation is the improvement of the performance of individuals leading to improvement in performance or organization as a whole” (Mullens 1999).

Lyyord and Leslie (2004). Defined performance evaluation as the process of determining and communicating to an employee how he or she is performing on the job and ideally, establishing a plan of improvement.   

Debra (2001), defined performance evaluation as the appraisal of a person’s performance in an organization.

Performance evaluation is a system of assessing employee to know their level of productivity in an organization.

Performance evaluation is operational, short to medium term and concerned only with the individual and their performance and development.

The five key elements of the performance evaluation are;

2.2   HOW TO PERFORM A PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 
Evaluation is often looked upon as something which affect only the person evaluation, but it is also a  significant influence upon the evaluation. One of its greater benefits is to encourage each manager to be more analytical and constructive thinking about his employee.

It may force  him to face up to some of his prejudices and personal dislike and to realize (under the pressure of having to record them  on paper and ban them up) that certain of his judging may be in formal unreasonable  or unfair.

One issue is what the managers basis comparison will be as he evaluate  performance of his personal.  There are at least three different  approaches. Each main work may be judged against some obstruct standard of perfect in which case, it is difficult to understand the meaning of perfect.
Secondly, each person can be compared with others in his department which means that the man whose work is poor but is making process on perhaps achieve a higher evaluation than the already on top notch worker. In the typical situation, a manager usually uses a sit of all make bases of comparisons which he evaluates, because of find it necessary to do so to give the whole picture and to be fair. The top-notch workers is recognized, but he is the poor worker.

Performance system relates to the assessment of staff or managerial performance and not to that manual workers.

There are two main categories of evaluating according to Wagne Casio (l994).

Informal evaluation:  is the motioning assessment of an individual’s performance by his managers in the normal cause of work. This kind of assessment is of and adhere nature and is as much determined by initiative feelings as by factual evidence of results.

It is natural by product by the day to day relationship between manager and subordinate.          

1.     Determine performance Requirement:  This first step of process can also be named identifying criteria for performance.

Administrators must determine what skills output and accomplishments will be evaluated during each performance evaluation. 
2.     Choose an evaluation method
Several methods may be used to evaluate performance. No one method is best for all organizations. The method of performance should  be carefully chosen because the supervision most often it become the focal point of involvement between the supervisor and the employee. 
3.     Training the supervisor and launching evaluation programme 
A political step in performance evaluation is training of supervisor so that they do not cannot errors  during performance evaluation. Such errors may result in changes of decimation loss of employee’s morale an productivity or inaccurate between the supervisor and the employee.

4.     Discussing method with employer:       For effective performance appraiser system the appraisee should be given the opportunity to participate and supervisors should with employee the method that will be used. This discussion should specify which areas of performance are evaluated, how often, do the evaluation take make and it significance to the employees. 
5.     Stating the role of appraisers: the appraise are required to observe and recall performance fill up the necessary form objective and justifying there rating to the appraisee. 
6.     Discussing appraisal with employees: supervisors should discuss the evaluation with their employee allowing them to discuss areas of agreement and disagreement. 
7.     Implementing Evaluation system: For successful implementation of elation programmed the following guide should be followed. 
i.      Reward the appraiser for the accuracy thoroughness objectivity and promptness in completing the evaluation.
ii.     performance is simply a judgment and information process decumbent, which is neither  completing infallible.

2.3   PURPOSE OF PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
On of the major reasons for employee evaluation is to obtain information for promotion, demotion, transfer, pay increase training and development.                                   

An evaluation gives a n employee a feedback as to how management perceives his contribution to the organization. An employee perceives that he/she is poorly evaluated, it could affect his moral, increase absenteeism rate and tiredness and consequently his over all productivity, this is the reason why employee evaluation is expected to be done in spirit of objectivity honesty and fair nay.