Page 223

AD ALTA

JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH

In the survey, we outlined the important aspects that we want to
focus on in the future and can be addressed by further research.

Based on the results of the survey, which found that the
subjectivity of ratings for all categories of staff appears to be the
most significant issue. The question remains how to solve this
problem? Can we deal with all categories in the same way or do
different approaches be chosen? One of the options is the more
rigorous preparation and training of the assessors, respectively.
Expanding the number of evaluators for non-interested persons
(eg personnel, employee representatives, etc.). As a further
option, it appears to increase the use of the 360 ° employee
rating method.

Another identified shortcoming in the category of technical and
administrative staff is that staff evaluation results are not linked
to other subsystems, that is to the remuneration system and
career growth of employees. In this context, questions about the
importance of staff evaluation are taken into consideration - is
evaluation worthwhile without further follow-up? What does the
career development system of employees depend on?

Survey results also point to the problem of setting measurable
criteria for the category of managers and technical and
administrative staff. The question is: What indicators do
businesses focus on when assessing these groups of employees?
Is it sufficient to measure performance to evaluate only financial
indicators? The solution can be to use MBO, MBC, KPI, and
BSC performance evaluation systems, which are mainly
described in the RLZ theory, but their practice has not yet fully
implemented.

To shape behavior, it is necessary to introduce an effective
evaluation of employees who will not assess their behavior from
the past, by denouncing what was wrong (past we will not
change), but focusing on the future, learning from the errors and
evaluating the potential of the employee and the possibilities of
his development, by agreeing, for example, the motivation
objectives to be achieved by the employee in the next period,
discussing the support he needs from the supervisor.

In the past, staff ratings lacked standardization, leading to a high
degree of subjectivism. At present, human resource assessment
is becoming a means to help drive the MBO goals. It becomes an
integral part of managing people and joins with other levels of
HRM. It serves as a basis for the formation of remuneration as a
starting point for development as well as a tool for maintaining
(securing) the individual effort (motivation) of the employee, or
for the inclusion of the employee in the program of career
development and succession planning.

6 Conclusion

The Performance Management System ensures not only
consistency and goal communication, but also employee
performance appraisal, commitment to motivation and
development with expected performance, and feedback on the
effectiveness of the entire system.

The main goal of Employee Performance Assessment should be
to create a comprehensive image of the employee, his strengths
and weaknesses, the possibilities for further development as well
as the results of his work and his future perspectives in the
organization. It should form the basis for the development of an
employee's career, conditional on specific activities, especially
in the field of education, or to create a forum for discussion
about moving to another job position that would correspond
more to the employee's duties. In case of a negative evaluation,
inform and talk to the employee about the consequences. The
outcome of the evaluation should be linked to other motivational
tools.

Regular assessment of staff performance and positive approach
to management and employees should be part of building and
maintaining corporate culture. Corporate culture as a basis for all
actions and decisions must be transformed into everyday

business process and operations (Vaňová & Gyurák Bábeľová,
2014).

Employee performance increase, will be not succeed if there is
wrong corporate culture, in the business, if (Team of authors,
2009):



we do not have clearly defined corporate objectives and
strategy,



we frequently change corporate strategy and objectives,



we do not have clearly discussed strategy and objectives of
the enterprise also with employees,



we have implemented multistage and confusing
organizational structure,



we have a tenuous flow of relevant information,



we have applied only authoritative control that commands
and shows only the failures of employees, we have in the
enterprise groups and individuals who do not respect
generally accepted rules and standards.

References

Ashkenas, R. (2010). Sila jednoduchosti: Ako zefektívniť
chod firmy a

zjednodušiť jej činnosť, Eastone Boooks,

2010, Bratislava

Čambal, M., Cagáňová, D., & Šujanová, J. (2012). The
industrial enterprise performance increase through the
competency model application. In Proceedings of the 4th
European Conferences on Intellectual Capital, Helsinki,
Finland (pp. 118-126).

Daszynska-Zygadlo, K., Slonski, T., & Zawadzki, B.
(2016). The Market Value of CSR Performance Across
Sectors. Engineering Economics, 27(2), 230-238. http://d
x.doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.27.2.13480

Ďurišová, J., & Čambál, M. (2015). Impact of
multiculturalism on the industrial enterprises
management. Procedia Economics and Finance, 34, 663-
669. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)01683-4

Gyurák Babeľová, Z., Kučerová, M., & Homokyová, M.
(2015). Enterprise Performance and Workforce
Performance Measurements in Industrial Enterprises in
Slovakia. Procedia Economics and Finance, 34, 376-381.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)01643-3

Hitka, M., Vetráková, M., Balážová, Ž., & Danihelová, Z.
(2015). Corporate Culture as a Tool for Competitiveness
Improvement. Procedia Economics and Finance, 34, 27-
34. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)01597-X

ISO 9004:2009: Managing for the Sustained Success of an
Organization - A Quality Management Approach.

Kachaňáková, A. a kol. (2007). Riadenie ľudských
zdrojov. 1. vyd. Bratislava : Sprint, 2007. 205 s.

Kaplan, R.S. & Norton, D.P. (2005) Balanced scorecard,

Strategický systém měření výkonnosti podniku,
Management Press, Praha.

10.

Kocianová R., (2015). Psychological and Personnel
Aspects of Age Management - Management of Employees'
Age Structure. Conference: Psychologie Prace a
Organizace 2015. Pages: 146-155 . WOS:0003805627
00014

11.

Kocmanova, A., Simanaviciene, Z., & Docekalova, M. P.
(2015). Predictive Model for Measuring Sustainability of
Manufacturing Companies. Engineering Economics, 26(4),
442-451. http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.26.4.11480

12.

Koltnerová, K., Chlpeková, A., & Samáková, J. (2013).
Personnel Planning Reflecting the Requirements of
Sustainable Performance of Industrial Enterprises.
In ECMLG2013-Proceedings For the 9th European
Conference on Management Leadership and Governance:
ECMLG 2013 (p. 136). Academic Conferences Limited.
WOS:000343656100018

13.

Krahn, H. J., & Galambos, N. L. (2014). Work values and
beliefs of ‘Generation X’and ‘Generation Y’. Journal of
Youth Studies, 17(1), 92-112.

http://dx.doi.org/10

.1080/13676261.2013.815701

14.

Movius, H. & Susskind, L. (2010) Firmy, ktoré víťazia,
Eastone Boooks, Bratislava.

- 223 -