Abstract:
When man sees himself in the mirror when he gets up in he morning, he evaluates the quality of his night’s sleep by the way his eyes look spritely or dull. When he gets to the breakfast table, he chooses between a toast, a bowl of cereals or a hearty meal of rice and sausage, evaluating the degree of the hunger pangs felt. When he drives off to work, he makes a mental order of how he will go about his office day based on recall cues of yesterday’s work outcome. The minute he steps in his office, he scans the work environment for surface cues that the work day has indeed began: Is the secretary about her work or is she still in the washroom fixing her hair? Is the clerk dutifully typing the report I sent him or is he still busy with the other guys discussing last night's games? Does the boos’s silence mean I messed up in yesterday's meeting? Is the rumor of palakasan system true or a myth created by disgruntled, sourgraping employees? People evaluate things they hear, see, feel, taste and do. These perceptions of people are based on personal constructs and are critical to maintenance, enhancement and damage of interpersonal relationships. The basic proposition in this study is that the appraisal process was generally acceptable to employees but was acknowledged to create interpersonal supervisor-subordinates strains and interpersonal strains among peers. The study determined how exactly was interpersonal relationships positively or negatively affected by performance appraisal through the administration of questionnaires to (population sample of available employees for questioning) as well as an interview of one supervisory personnel. How employees viewed the legitimacy or validity of one’s performance appraisal were derived from the attitude/views expressed by the respondents’ on variables of inquiry: performance appraisal itself and interpersonal relationships. At least ten variables affecting performance appraisal and interpersonal relationships were identified. From data gathered, employees shared common agreement on the importance of performance appraisal to the organization and to one’s self. Employees likewise shared a great degree of common need to be adequately provided feedback and were disheartened with the present feedback system. It was found out in the study that employees would normally forego confrontational meetings with the agent of the appraisal process (the evaluator) but remedied the situation with subtlety. Manifestations ranged from venting discomfort to superiors and peers (nagpaparinig ng hindi Maganda), customers and the job itself (nagtatamad). Organizational Communications is concerned with performance appraisal because the appraisal system is a rich source of information on how a particular organization takes his: (1) organizational goals and missions seriously; (2) employees’ needs seriously. The theories in the field of organizational communications show how the organization communicates both.
