Rewrite this:

Using references from both examples and knowledge of the evaluations that are used in my current organization, I was able to come up with my Performance Management Evaluation form.

All three instances encompass a broad array of assessment inquiries, permit employee remarks, compare the previous evaluation, have both the employee and evaluator sign, employ the graphic rating scale for performance ratings, incorporate employee information, and discuss future objectives. These are typical components in performance evaluations as they offer a comprehensive perspective on the employee's performance, advancement, and future goals.

My evaluation is meticulous and comprehensive. It encompasses clear instructions, thoroughly explains the grading point system, and provides ample space for evaluator's comments. Additionally, it includes an overall rating and is presented in a reader-friendly format, which can streamline and enhance the evaluation process. Furthermore, it allows for a comparison with the previous evaluation, facilitating the tracking of progress over time. With 16 evaluation questions, it strikes a suitable balance for a comprehensive evaluation.

Sample 1 also encompasses a wide range of evaluation questions (a total of 17) and is well-organized. However, it lacks instructions and provides vague information on the grading system, potentially leading to confusion or inconsistency in evaluations. Moreover, it does not allocate space for the evaluator to write comments, limiting the feedback provided. Notably, it includes a self-assessment by the employee, which can offer valuable insights into their self-perception and areas they believe require improvement.

Sample 2 is the briefest, consisting of only 6 evaluation questions, which may not offer a comprehensive overview of the employee's performance. It does provide ample space for evaluator's comments and includes an overall rating, which can provide a concise summary of the employee's performance. Nevertheless, it lacks instructions and provides vague information on the grading system, similar to Example 2. Since it is overall vague, it can result in ambiguity and inconsistency in evaluations.

The performance evaluation system I developed is designed to enhance and sustain employee performance through a thorough assessment of their skills, capabilities, and performance across various domains. The rating criteria are explicitly outlined, ranging from "Below Performance Standards" to "Outstanding," enabling a transparent evaluation of an employee's performance level. This framework not only offers a clear indication of an employee's performance but also serves as a reference point for enhancement, motivating employees to progress within the rating scale.

The evaluation encompasses a broad spectrum of areas, including attendance, punctuality, job proficiency, decision-making, and eagerness to learn. This comprehensive approach ensures that all facets of an employee's performance are taken into account, rather than solely focusing on their output or efficiency.

The system promotes feedback and growth by prompting evaluators to evaluate an employee's willingness to enhance and acquire new skills. This fosters a culture of continuous improvement, encouraging employees to consistently strive for excellence.

By soliciting specific details about notable achievements, the system acknowledges and rewards exceptional performance, fostering a sense of accomplishment and drive among employees to maintain high standards.

The incorporation of an individual performance and development plan offers a structured pathway for improvement. Employees can clearly identify the steps needed to enhance their performance and progress within the rating system.

By enabling employees to share feedback on their performance evaluation, the system promotes open communication and ensures that employees feel valued. This can lead to increased job satisfaction and enhanced performance.

Regarding performance maintenance, the system establishes a clear framework and expectations for employees to adhere to, while also providing regular feedback to help them identify areas of strength and areas needing improvement.

In terms of performance enhancement, the system emphasizes continuous learning and development, while also acknowledging and rewarding outstanding performance to inspire and motivate employees.

There are two motivational theories being used in the performance evaluation form that I created.They are the Expectancy Theory and the Self-Determination Theory.

The Expectancy Theory, proposed by Victor Vroom, suggests that individuals are motivated to perform if they believe that their effort will lead to good performance, that good performance will lead to a desirable outcome, and that the outcome will satisfy an important need (Vroom, 1964). In the context of the performance evaluation form, the rating parameters (BPS, NI, NH, HS, OS) serve as the outcomes that employees can expect based on their performance. The various questions in the form evaluate the employees' efforts and performance in different areas. The overall rating then reflects the outcome of their performance. This can motivate employees to improve their performance, as they know that their efforts can lead to a higher rating.

The Expectancy Theory suggests that individuals are motivated to perform if they believe that their efforts will result in a desirable outcome. In the context of this performance evaluation form, the rating parameters (BPS, NI, NH, HS, OS) serve as the outcomes that the team member (TM) can expect based on their performance. The higher the rating, the better the performance is perceived, which can motivate the TM to improve their performance. The evaluation criteria (attendance, communication, decision making, etc.) represent the performance efforts that the TM needs to put in to achieve the desired outcomes. The TM is expected to understand that better performance in these areas will result in a higher rating.

Step-by-step explanation: a. The TM performs tasks and behaves in certain ways (effort). b. The TM's performance and behavior are evaluated using the criteria listed in the form. c. Based on the evaluation, the TM is given a rating (performance outcome). d. The TM is motivated to improve their performance to achieve a higher rating (desirable outcome).

The Self-Determination theory, proposed by Deci and Ryan, suggests that individuals are motivated to act based on their innate needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000). The performance evaluation form seems to address these needs in several ways. The questions about job skills and knowledge, decision making, and willingness to improve and learn new skills relate to the need for competence. The questions about organizing work, multi-tasking, and individual performance and development plan relate to the need for autonomy. The questions about communication and interaction with others, co-worker and teamwork collaboration, and employee feedback regarding performance assessment relate to the need for relatedness. By addressing these needs, the form can motivate employees to improve their performance.

This theory posits that individuals are motivated to grow and achieve personal fulfillment when their needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness are met. In the context of this performance evaluation form, the questions about job skills and knowledge, decision making, and willingness to improve and learn new skills are related to competence. Questions about individual performance and development plan, and employee feedback regarding performance assessment are related to autonomy. Questions about communication and interaction with others, and co-worker and teamwork collaboration are related to relatedness.

Step-by-step explanation: a. The TM's needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness are met when they perform well in the areas evaluated in the form. b. The TM feels a sense of personal fulfillment and growth, which motivates them to continue performing well and improving. c. The TM's motivation leads to better performance, which is reflected in their rating.