http://www.collingwoodsearch.co.uk/our-insights/recruiting-retaining-talent/to-appraise-or-not-to-appraise-this-appears-to-be-the-current-question/ In my experience performance appraisals are effective or ineffective dependant upon the line-manager conducting the appraisal. To enhance engagement, motivation, morale and performance employees should not leave the meeting feeling deflated and under-valued. Yes, difficult conversations, where required, need to take place but this should be done constructively with examples of how performance can be developed and improved, and finished on a positive outlook.
Ask major stakeholders why they conduct performance reviews and what they hope the system will deliver, and you’ll be surprised by the variety of answers: quantifying performance—identifying high, medium, and low performers identifying developmental needs to increase capabilities and performance for the future ensuring that people are being rewarded on the right comparative basis assessing turnover risks and encouraging the “right” people to stay. This creates confusion, which is a problem. Clarifying the purpose of performance management is the key to a healthy performance culture. The primary purpose is to align individual contributors with organization strategy. If your organization has different purposes, it should communicate those intentions clearly to all stakeholders and ensure that the process supports the intent. If everyone understands performance management’s primary purpose, it’s far easier to debug and clarify your current performance management process.