Food-Service-Manual-for-Health-Care-Institutions

An employee’s attitudes also affect overall performance but are difficult to rate. How an
employee behaves toward other employees and how well he or she accepts supervision provide
observable attitude indicators that can be rated.
The rating scale for each performance standard should follow the system developed by the
human resource department. In most systems, the rating scale is based on descriptive terms that
correspond to the points on a scale. Figure 8.3 lists examples of performance standards and
shows a commonly used rating scale.
Several errors often occur during the evaluation process. One is the halo effect, the tendency
on the part of certain supervisors to let very good or very poor performance in one task
affect the evaluation of other unrelated tasks. Some supervisors also make the mistake of consistently
giving too-lenient or too-severe ratings. Others tend to make the overall evaluation
task easier for themselves by giving everyone in similar jobs average ratings instead of ratings
based on individual performance. Another common problem is the recency error. Here, the
supervisor mistakenly judges a whole review period’s performance on the basis of the
employee’s most recent behavior. Because most employees are rated only once or twice a year,
much of the employee’s work performance could be misevaluated if only recent performance is
considered.
To avoid such problems, use of a rating scale based on descriptive gradations (such as those
given in Figure 8.3) is helpful. Scales based on general terms such as outstanding, superior,
average, and poor should be avoided because they make it too easy to give average ratings to
every employee’s performance on every standard. In addition, supervisors can avoid the natural
tendency to be influenced by recency error if they make evaluation an ongoing part of everyday
department management. Ongoing review is the basis for performance coaching, which is
covered later in this section. Notes on individual work performance and coaching sessions
could be made regularly—monthly, for example—and then used as the basis for a performance
evaluation at the end of the review period.
Figure 8.3. Excerpt from a Performance Evaluation Form for a Food Service Employee
Department:________________________________________________ Date:____________________
Job Title: ___________________________________________________ Evaluator:________________
Circle the number on the rating scale that most accurately describes this employee’s performance.
Performance Standard Rating
Almost
Always Always Sometimes Rarely Never
Accurately measures and/or weighs ingredients
according to instructions in recipes or on boxes.
Requisitions food, stores food items for next day,
4 3 2 1 0
checks and properly stores issues.
Pulls recipes, computer sheets, and menus for
4 3 2 1 0
next day’s work before going off duty. 4 3 2 1 0
Keeps work area clean and in sanitary condition.
Cooperates with fellow employees and willingly
4 3 2 1 0
assists where and when needed. 4 3 2 1 0
Reports to work on time and in uniform. 4 3 2 1 0
Human Resource Management
227