人力資源管理外文翻譯

1、<p><b>　　英文文獻原文：</b></p><p>　　Performance Appraisal as a Guide for Training and Development:</p><p>　　A Research Note on the Iowa Performance Evaluation System</p><p&

2、gt;　　By Dennis Daley owa State University</p><p>　　This 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

3、in that it excludes 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 a

4、nd in enhancing or developing perceived strengths. The findings reported here are based on a 1981 monitoring of the performa</p><p>　　As civil service reform has been instituted in one jurisdiction after ano

5、ther 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 importance a

6、nd seriousness has, in turn, led to a renewed interest in the study of the actual workings of performance appraisal systems.</p><p>　　The uses to which performance appraisal can be put are myriad. The recent

7、 Civil Service Reform 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

8、 supervisors "use the results of performance appraisal as. a basis for training, rewarding, reassigning, promoting, reducing in grade, retaining, and removing employees." Performance appraisal systems can al<

9、;/p><p>　　The economic recessions of the 1970s and 1980s have placed significant restraints on these uses, however. The imposition of hiring freezes, the diminishment of promotional opportunities, the advent of

10、 reductions-in-force, and the near abandonment of merit pay provisions by financially strapped governmental entities have contributed to the loss of enthusiasm for performance appraisal in many quarters. Under such circu

11、mstances, performance appraisal一limited in its use to the more negative function</p><p>　　In their search to salvage something positive from amidst these circumstances personnel specialists have alighted upo

12、n the use of performance appraisal as a guide for employee training and development. This offers them the opportunity of providing public employees with a service that employees view as beneficial. Although public employ

13、ees have shown little confidence in specific performance appraisal systems or in the managerial abilities of those responsible for their implementation (McGregor, </p><p>　　This, of course, still poses a sig

14、nificant problem to a multipurpose system such as that found in the State of Iowa. Disenchantment or distrust with one aspect of the performance appraisal system may significantly contribute to the weakening of the entir

15、e evaluation system.</p><p>　　THE IOWA PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEM</p><p>　　In all public service systems employees are evaluated periodically; most often this is done informally. The introduc

16、tion of formal systems of performance appraisal, usually in addition to continued informal assessment, is a relatively recent event. Formal systems of performance appraisal are designed to provide a systematic and object

17、ive measure of individual job performance and/or potential for development.</p><p>　　Although the use of formal performance appraisal in Iowa can be traced back at least to the early 1950s (limited, for the

18、most part, to such rudimentary methods as the essay or graphic rating scale), these occurred within a fragmented setting. Individual departments and agencies retained descretion over the choice of such personnel practice

19、s until well into the 1960s.</p><p>　　Under Governor Harold Hughes (1963一1969) a number of efforts were undertaken to</p><p>　　strengthen the executive. Among these reforms was the creation of t

20、he State Merit System of Personnel Administration, 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 mer

21、it systems outside its jurisdiction and of patronage appointments.</p><p>　　The executive reform movement was continued throughout the lengthy service of Governor Robert Ray (1969-1983). Strong executive sup

22、port was placed behind the development of the personnel system. Governor Ray unsuccessfully advocated expanding the IMED jurisdiction through the elimination of the existing coverage exemptions and by integrating the sep

23、arate merit systems into an executive personnel department. Notwithstanding the somewhat 1imited success of recent Iowa governors, the basis for a pr</p><p>　　One reflection of this basis is the fact that th

24、e use of a statewide 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

25、.Since appraisal-by-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

26、, that the l</p><p>　　The Iowa performance evaluation system is an ideal-typical descriptive example of the appraisal-by-objectives technique. The introduction of this approach in 1977 was accompained by a s

27、eries of training sessions (Burke, 1977) and supported with supervisory and employee handbooks. However, training for new supervisors and periodic "refresher courses" appear to have been given a low priority in

28、 Iowa, as is generally the case in public sector personnel systems. Iowa's use of appraisal-by-objectives</p><p>　　The Iowa performance evaluation process is initiated with joint completion of "Sect

29、ion A:Responsibilities and Standards/Results Expected" (also referred to as the "job description")by the supervisor and employee. This is the first of three sections included in the performante appraisal f

30、orm/process. Section A is completed at the beginning of the annual appraisal period while sections B and C are written up at its conclusion. The employee is to be given prior notice of the conference and supplied</p&g

31、t;<p>　　Eight to ten major responsibilities (four to five is the norm) are to be selected and， written down in a results-oriented format with specific standards by which the achievement of these results are to be

32、measured. These individual responsibilities are weighted through the use of an additive formula which factors in the time spent on each task and the evaluation of its importance or the consequence of error (a five point

33、Likert-type scale is used for both). The overall employee rating is the wei</p><p>　　In the event that these responsibilities need to be subject to modification due to changing circumstances, a new Section A

34、 would be prepared by the supervisor and employee. During the course of the evaluation period the supervisor is also encouraged to use a "critical incident" approach. Both formal (with written copy inserted int

35、o the employee's file) and informal communications between employees and supervisors are encouraged. For negative incidents it is important that a record of corrective </p><p>　　At the end of the evaluat

36、ion period, again following advanced notice, the employee and supervisor meet to discuss the employee's job performance in light of the responsibilities outlined in the employee's Section A. Worksheets are used a

37、t this meeting with a formal evaluation prepared only afterward. At this appraisal interview the supervisor discusses "SectionB: Performance Review/Rating" with the employee. Employees are also given the opport

38、unity to formally comment on the final evaluation for</p><p>　　"Section C: Summary of Total Job Performance and Future Performance Plans" is also completed at this time. Basically, this is an essay

39、 evaluation. The supervisor is provided the opportunity to list the employee's "areas of strength and those "areas needing improvement." In the latter instances "training and developmental plans&

40、quot; for correcting these are supposed to be filed.</p><p>　　DATA COLLECTION</p><p>　　In conjunction with its implementation efforts the Iowa Merit Employment Department engaged in a two-year m

41、onitoring of its appraisal-by-objectives evaluation system. The results of this monitoring project, involving the sampling of performance appraisals submitted in between July 1978 and December 1979, were reported to stat

42、e officials in January 1980.The first monitoring project led to a number of minor changes in the performance evaluation system. For most part these modifications represented</p><p>　　This study is based on t

43、he results of a second monitoring project conducted by the IMED.The questions addressed in this study were, in part, raised by the first monitoring project.While the first monitoring focused primarily on the basic or gen

44、eral implementation of the performance evaluation system (i.e., was there compliance with the mandated requirements?), the second is more concerned with how well it is working. The format used here is that of "actio

45、n research" or "troubleshooting" (Starlin</p><p>　　DATA ANALYSIS</p><p>　　The primary results assessing how well Iowa's performance appraisal system is working are reported el

46、sewhere (Daley, 1983). This paper focuses only on those aspects related to the specification of training and development plans.</p><p>　　Because Iowa employs a multipurpose approach in the use of performance

47、 appraisals it is hardly surprising that there are many instances, 43 percent of those monitored, in which no training and development are specified. This, however, poses the task of somehow separating the cases in which

48、 training plans should most definitely be present.</p><p>　　A supervisor may choose to list training and development plans for three reasons. First,unrelated to any individual strengths or weaknesses, he may

49、 choose to use this performance appraisal section as a memo or reminder of a training activity which all employees are routinely given. The inclusion of such activities in an "official" performance appraisal ma

50、y serve to provide added political weight in order to insure their being performed; it is all to easy amidst the pressing, day-to-day concerns </p><p>　　Second, supervisors may choose to promote employee dev

51、elopment. They may either pickup on some strength an individual already possesses or for which he may have an aptitude and attempt to polish, refine, or enhance those skills. While this is not an automatic relationship,

52、not all "strengths" would require additional or follow-up training, it is important for both organizational and individual well-being. Obviously, such activities benefit the organization by increasing its admin

53、istrative or tec</p><p>　　Finally, training plans should be specified in those instances in which a supervisor notes that an employee "needs improvement." As such remarks may become the basis for a

54、n adverse personnel action (reassignment, reduction in grade, removal, etc.) it is legally incumbent that the state demonstrate that it has made a good faith effort to correct such deficienties. Due process demands that

55、public employees not be dealt with a "star chamber" fashion.An employee cannot be expected to correct inadequ</p><p>　　In monitoring Iowa's performance appraisals room was allowed to record up

56、to three "strengths" and "areas needing improvement" for each employee. Supervisors tended to list employee strengths twice as often as they detailed areas needing improvement (1223 to 506),and as one

57、 would expect there is a pronounced tendency to note both strengths and areas needing improvement vis-a-vis individual employees (58 percent of the monitored appraisals combine both strengths and areas needing improvemen

58、t).</p><p>　　A count of the number of listed strengths and areas needing improvement was made use of (zero to three for each variable) in analyzing this data. While this fails to measure the importance or si

59、gnificance of each strength or area needing improvement, it was felt that in some way the number of such instances would be related to or a rough indicator of the overall seriousness underlying the specification or train

60、ing plans (i.e., as the number of instances increased so would the need for a training</p><p>　　Furthermore, training plans were judged not only as to their existence but also as to whether they were deemed

61、to represent a "poor" or "good" relationship between the plan and the listed strengths and areas needing improvement. The nature of this relationship may also be interpreted in terms of partial or ful

62、l compliance. "Good" plans would be seen as following-up on the listed strengths and/or areas needing improvement and, hence, as complying with the personnel system's intention to use perfo</p><p

63、>　　In addition to the above analysis the count of strengths and areas needing improvement were also compared to the rounded performance ratings given to each individual. It was felt that there should be evidence here,

64、 too, albeit tangential in nature, of a relationship; those employees garnering more mentions of strengths and/or of fewer areas needing improvement should possess higher ratings.</p><p><b>　　譯文正文：<

65、/b></p><p>　　激勵是人力資源管理的核心。</p><p>　　在企業生產經營管理中，人力資源是企業各種經濟資源中具有思想、感情、最求和能動性的亦喜愛那個經濟資源，也是企業這一有機體的靈魂，因此，人力資源是比其它生產經營資源更為重要的一項資源，它不僅影響和決定了企業其他生產經營經濟資源的價值和使用狀況，而且其本省就是企業實力幾家質量的重要組成部分之一，由于人力資源在企業生

66、產經營經濟資源中的地位和作用，所以企業管理工作成效的極致或者說要達到的理想境界的目標應該是：企業內的每一個員工都能將企業的整體利益放在首位，并為企業的目標、利益甘愿貢獻自己的一切。職工的這樣一種思想和精神狀態在宣誓中師很難以體現的，但卻是企業家、管理者孜孜以求和所要挑戰的極限，要趨近這樣的一種狀態，只有通過企業內部的有效激勵。因此，企業管理工作的重中之重是人力資源管理。</p><p>　　與傳統勞動人事管理不同

67、，現代人力資源管理的主要特征表現在“戰略性”層面上：（1）在戰略指導思想上，現代人力資源管理是“以人為本”的管理；（2）在戰略目標上，現代人力資源管理是為了“獲取競爭優勢”的目標管理；（3）在戰略范圍上，現代人力資源管理是“全員參加”的民主管理；（4）在戰略措施上，現代人力資源管理是運用“系統化科學方法和人文藝術”的權變管理。與非人力資源管理相比較，人力資源管理是通過“激勵”來實現的，它是人力資源管理的核心。所謂“激勵”，就是從滿足人的

68、多層次、多元化需要出發，針對不同員工設定績效標準和獎勵值，一最大限度地激發員工工作積極性和創造性去實現組織的目標。一個企業的人力資源利用效果如何，是由許多復雜因素耦合作用的結果，但其中管理的激勵作用是最重要的因素之一。</p><p>　　人力資源不同于其他非人力資源的根本特征就是，它依附于員工的人體而存在，與員工個人須臾不可分離，其他人或組織要使用人力資源，都要經由它的天然所有這個人的“積極主動”配合才能實現。

69、因此，人力資源管理工作能否“以人為本”，有效激發員工的積極性，最大限度地發揮員工的主觀能動性和創造性，就成為決定企業生產經營績效優劣的關鍵因素和企業人力資源管理成功與否的核心問題。</p><p>　　激勵管理有管理激勵和制度性激勵兩種體系。</p><p>　　所謂管理激勵主要指在企業人力資源管理過程中，管理者面對的是一個個活生生的現實的個體，所以對人力資源的日常維持和激勵使用就必須因人

70、而異，區別對待。這就要求管理主體有高潮的“運動人”的技能和技巧，能綜合運用政治學、社會學、心理學甚至人體功效學所有“人學”知識和技術，有效地“支配別人去干事”，即激發每個員工的積極性使之最大限度地運用其人力資源，為企業生產經營做貢獻。它是企業的一種非對稱人際關系，強調管理者的“領袖權威”知人善任、“體察民情”、“為民做主”等等?？傊?，是以某種科學性的、行政性的、不對等的程序和方式來體現，進而實現激勵所內涵的民主性質的人本化要求。但是另一

71、方面經濟行為，即在既定的制度環境約束下追求自身利益最大化，是整個人類行為最基本、最普通、最具主導型因而也是最重要的規定性和表現形態。因此，人力資源管理的首要任務，就是遵從其天然所有者這種經濟行為屬性，按照“一視同仁”的公平原則，設計和建立統一的，規范的，具有可操作性的激勵制度。并在整個企業范圍內貫徹實施，而在所有的企業制度安排中，最根本、最核心的是產權制度。這就要求從企業所有權安排和公司治理結構高度確立人力資本的產權地位，保證其<

72、/p><p>　　當今世界，人力資源激勵管理模式具有東西方文化背景方面的適應性和差異性，西方文化強調“契約制度”，二東方文化注重“人倫綱?！?。東方文化背景下人力資源激勵管理的典型形態是日本模式。其基本特征。就是注重“管理激勵”，強調員工從業者主權，充分利用了人的“社會性”或“合群性”動機，通過終身雇傭、年序工資、內部晉升和開發培訓等，進行人力資源激勵管理。西方文化背景下人力資源激勵管理的典型形態是美國模式，與經濟學中

73、的制度激勵理論接近。其基本特點可以概括為：側重“制度激勵”，注重利用市場競爭機制，在企業內部專業化分工的基礎上，主要通過外部市場競爭壓力，對在職員工進行契約化制度管理。需要明確的是，在企業戰略層面上和操作實務中，制度激勵與管理激勵都必須統一納入人力資源管理這個本系統，將之有機結合起來，并整合為完整的企業激勵體系和運作機制。</p><p>　　國內企業在激勵管理上存在的問題。</p><p&g

74、t;　　目前，在部分企業中存在其內部員工缺乏積極性和工作主動性，人心渙散、產品缺乏市場競爭力、經營經濟效益水平低等等問題，究其原因，從根本上說一個重要的原因就是企業組織激勵工作不力。原因一方面是因為部分企業的領導者和管理者認識上的錯誤，僅僅把人力作為一種資源，使員工的積極性的發揮受到抑制。他們認為中國的勞動力處于過剩狀態，是一種可以隨意調用、處置的資源。在這一觀念的指導下，企業領導人僅把員工作為一種“取之不盡”的資源加以選擇和使用，并不

75、忠實對企業員工的再培訓和企業員工對企業忠誠度的建立，而是一味地強化所謂的監督和控制。這樣做的結果導致了員工對企業缺乏認同感，認為自己只是受雇于企業，給多少錢干多少活，相互間的信任程度非常低，難以充分發揮員工的潛力，調動員工積極性和創造性，企業內部缺乏激勵機制。另一方面是部分企業在激勵方式上存在誤區，主要體現愛一下兩方面：（1）過于集中在對經營者的獎勵上，對經營者的激勵雖然很重要，但遠遠不能解決企業的全部問題，萊賓斯坦等提出的X效率理論認

76、為，組織內部的效率取決于全體員工的努力水平，只有根據不同類型的員工不同的需要進行不同的激勵制度安排，才能達到不同的激勵效用，最終</p><p>　　企業員工激勵的措施。</p><p>　　激勵對管理特別是人力資源管理的重要性自不待言。通過激勵能把所有才能的、本企業所需要的人吸引過來；也可以使本企業員工最充分地發揮其才能和智慧；從而保持所從事工作的有效性和高效率。激勵不僅在于能使職工安心

77、，積極地工作，它還發揮使職工認同和接受本企業的目標和價值觀，對企業產生強烈的歸屬感。據美國哈佛大學的教授威廉·詹姆士研究，在缺乏激勵的環境中，人員的潛力只發揮出了一小部分，即20%—30%，剛剛能保住飯碗即止；而在良好的激勵機制環境中，同樣的人員即可發揮出潛力的80%—90%，由此可見，使每位員工始終處于良好的激勵環境中是人力資源開發和管理所追求的理想狀態。那么，如何才能正確有效地激發員工的時期呢？</p>&l

78、t;p>　　首先、堅持以人為本，尊重人性，樹立并貫徹“以員工為中心”的管理觀念。</p><p>　　“以人為本，尊重人性”作為現代管理理念，強調把管理的最終目的——提高企業經濟效益放在人的背后，管理行為不再是冰冷冷的命令型、強制型。而是貫徹著激勵、信任、關心、情感，體現著管理者對人性的高度理解和重視，管理者不能把員工視為單純的“經濟人”，以滿足其生存需要和物質利益作為管理契機，而是要注重員工的尊重，自我實

79、現等高層次精神需求，以提供創造性的工作，鼓勵個性的發揮來調動員工的積極性，在平等的引導和交流中，建立起企業的經營理念；將外部控制轉化為自我控制，使每個員工自發地形成對企業的忠誠感和責任感，進而使員工的個人價值實現和企業的生存發展歸為一途，如果企業不懂得以人為本，對人性缺乏基本的了解和尊重，忽視了人才的個人價值，使員工實現個人價值的需求長期得不到滿足甚至壓抑，就無法留住最好的人才，企業也將因此失去競爭力。為此，必須做到以下幾點：</

80、p><p>　　經常開展員工調查，盡可能了解員工所關心的事，尤其是與其工作相關的事，以贏得員工的支持和忠誠，并可引導員工的創新精神，吸引并留住員工，企業應致力于收集以下員工所期望的信息：工作中的公平性；組織學習；溝通；靈活性和關心度；顧客中心；信任和授權；管理的有效性；工作滿意程度，被支持的充分性，被安置角色的合適性，是否感覺到有價值。</p><p>　　著力于員工報酬、福利、工作條件的改善

81、以及靈活、便利性的優惠安排。企業應隨著時代的變化，除了注重傳統意義上的員工報酬、福利和工作條件的改善以外，還可以實施其他的優惠措施，如提供日托；在職大學學習；學費補助；縮短夏季工作時間；實施員工股票期權計劃；設置遠程辦公崗位等等。</p><p>　　其次、實施全面薪酬戰略，給員工以充分的激勵。</p><p>　　所謂“全面薪酬戰略”，即公司將支付給員工的薪酬分為“外在”和“內在”的兩大

82、類，兩者的結合即為“全面薪酬”，“外在的薪酬”主要指為員工提供可量化的貨幣性價值，比如，基本工資獎金、股票期權、退休金、醫療保險等等，“內在的薪酬”則是指那些給員工提供的不能以量化的貨幣形式表現的各種貨幣價值。比如，對工作的滿意度，為完成工作而提供個人便利工具，培訓的機會，吸引人的公司文化，良好的人際關系，相互配合的工作環境，以及公司對個人的表彰、謝意等，外在的薪酬和內在的薪酬各自具有不同的激勵功能。它們互相聯系，互為補充，構成完整的薪

83、酬體系，實踐證明，由于員工對企業的期望和需求是全面的，其中既包括物質需求，又包括精神需求，因而實施“全面薪酬”戰略，是員工激勵的有效模式。</p><p>　　第三、獎勵應公平、公正、杜絕獎勵“大鍋飯”</p><p>　　公平公正是激勵一個基本原則。如果不公平公正，獎不當獎，罰不當罰，不僅收不到預期的效果，反而會造成許多消極后果，要鐵面無私，不論親疏，不分遠近，一視同仁，以促進員工的積極

84、性沿著好的方向良性循環，就像美國管理學界提出的獎勵準則那樣。只有這樣做，才能增強企業的凝聚力和向心力。同時，獎勵分明是從古至今人們所信奉的基本管理原則。如果把獎金當成實際上的附加工資，當成是與個人表現無關的報酬，員工就覺得這是他們應得的，而不是努力的結果，這樣就不能激人上進。因此，聰明的管理者應盡一切可能把報酬和績效表彰結合起來，把它與對事業的忠誠，對事業的奉獻緊密結合起來，實際上，員工內心最不平衡的事是，自己干得好，有奉獻，卻與不干活

85、的人待遇一樣。這也常是員工與領導不滿意的原因，要把公司獎勵行為與員工利益掛鉤，保障個人創造價值越高，其收益越大，并通過獎勵創造公平的競爭環境，增加成績的可比性，促進群體向上。</p><p>　　綜上所述，企業在使用激勵管理時，應以人為本，注重和強化企業內部精神極力資源的挖掘和開發，提高職工報酬當中非物質報酬的程度，在判定和落實各項政策和規章制度的工作中，力求體現公平和公正性原則。不宜盲目地助長員工預期目標收益不