By Brian A. Crawford
There is perhaps no more important area of documentation and record keeping in fire service human resource management than performance evaluations or appraisals. Performance evaluations are used for a number of reasons and can have a significant impact on salary administration, performance feedback, promotions, training, and identifying an individual’s strengths and weaknesses.1 Traditionally, supervisors use performance evaluations as a necessary tool in evaluating a newly hired or promoted member’s progress through a working test period or until the member becomes certified. Today, this same documentation, although still valued as critical criteria in the evaluation of a subordinate’s work progress and ethic, is being used to provide backup information for management decisions when raises, transfers, or corrective actions are called into question. One reason some organizations, including fire departments, fail in their performance appraisal programs is that they often select evaluation criteria indiscriminately, evaluate based on personality, and are very poor record keepers.2
When a captain is evaluating a firefighter, the first documentation he writes should not be on the day the performance appraisal is due. In any performance evaluation, the importance of properly documenting an individual’s knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) in the appraisal of his duties is paramount. Supervisors more accurately portray a subordinate’s performance when proper record keeping and documentation are enlisted soon after witnessing an act that is appraisal criteria. This means supervisors should keep a concurrent written record of their subordinates’ KSAs as related to the job description. Certain dimensions of job performance are easier to evaluate than others; those most accurately measured are those where the evaluator had proper documentation to support the rating.3
Fire departments and other public sector organizations are generally viewed as having a more complex set of evaluation objectives and criteria enforced through political and formal mechanisms. Additionally, these same agencies may have vague and intangible goals that make it difficult to quantify or measure the data outcome. Considering this and the complexities, multiplicity, and even constraints that government agencies have to contend with, record keeping is not just necessary to assess employee performance—it is essential.4
Some of the more recent performance appraisal and evaluation models deal with critical incidents and a clear pattern for storing or recording such information. In this case, the term “critical incidents” does not necessarily refer to actions performed at an emergency scene but rather the necessary KSAs to complete defined tasks found in an employee’s job description. The use of a critical incident when evaluating a firefighter or officer simply constitutes the difference in whether he is doing a job effectively or ineffectively.5
It is important that a trained observer evaluate critical incidents involving the person being evaluated. In the fire service, this almost always means the direct supervisor. In the case of a rookie firefighter, this may be a driver or company officer. In the case of a company or chief officer, this would require a supervisor or individual trained to a level adequate to evaluate the incident. It is equally important that critical incidents be recorded as soon as possible after they occur. In many cases, supervisors make a note of the incident as it happened and document a more detailed account of the subordinate’s action after returning to the station. The greatest advantage (and appeal) of this type of evaluation is that it allows the supervisor to look strictly at the subordinated job performance and not personality. (5)
The most obvious advantage in keeping prior written documentation supporting a performance evaluation is that it provides a “hard copy” of referenced information that might be forgotten by the unaided evaluator. The way a fire officer or department chooses to use such data is equally important. Data used to score an evaluation according to tasks and KSAs provide the most accurate rating; data used to score an evaluation according to the individual (personality) often result in the halo effect or too high a rating. A combination of the task and individual yields the least accurate rating of all. Unfortunately, when given a choice, most evaluators choose the individual format over the more accurate task.6 This may be because individual or personal evaluating is often more of an overall feeling that does not require a great deal of thought or time. On the other hand, evaluating KSAs takes time and requires thought because they are specific and measurable: “Did John use the 10 proper steps when repacking the 13/4-inch handline, and was the outcome satisfactory?”
Performance evaluations used in the fire service share four common factors with those used in other organizations:
- Documentation. Decisions based on evaluations can be backed up by properly documented performance appraisals. This can also include additional documentation in the form of a journal, notes, diaries, and training records that can be attached to the appraisal.
- Comparison of two individuals. This is a comparison of the performance levels of individuals. (1) An employee’s performance is compared with others in the same job to evaluate candidates on some objective basis. (4) Often, how an individual is evaluated is relevant to the individual with whom he is being compared. In most cases, it is either a former shining example, which can place a hardship on the person being evaluated, or the last person through the process. To avoid this common pitfall in performance evaluating and to ensure equal treatment, establish a uniform standard or benchmark, and review it each time a comparison is made.
- System maintenance. The entire human resource or personnel system is evaluated using performance evaluations. Question those areas where it appears there is an overall or widespread and consistent deficiency regarding the need for future training. A call for increased or additional medical education in basic training might be recommended if an across-the-board unsatisfactory rating for new firefighter EMT skills is found.
- Comparison of one individual’s skills. This is where an individual’s general strengths and weaknesses are identified (1), such as having good interpersonal communications skills but a poor work ethic. Refining and exploiting an individual’s strengths while minimizing the weaknesses should be the cornerstone of any performance appraisal program.
As already mentioned, when gathering information for performance evaluations, written documentation is essential for a more accurate recall and rating; however, some factors could potentially skew the overall evaluation when interpreting these results:
- The period of time between the event and its documentation leads to inaccuracies. As time goes by, critical details of an observation for evaluation purposes are lost from our short-term memory, leaving just an overall impression of the episode. The time frame in documenting detailed task information is more important in evaluating some positions than others. Firefighters, for instance, are generally more task-oriented in the performance of their duties than a chief officer. Generally, the firefighter is evaluated on the performance of his duties as they occur, whereas a chief officer often is evaluated based on a future outcome of his current performance.
- Inexperienced and untrained evaluators lead to errors. In the fire service, an inexperienced evaluator is usually a result of personnel simply not receiving the proper training for assessing the criteria in an appraisal. How many departments offer formal training in performance evaluations and task assessment? Additionally, the reporting supervisor may not have the ability to evaluate a subordinate because of his own inexperience when dealing with situations that may be out of his scope of expertise. This was seen frequently when fire services across the country were assuming emergency medical service (EMS) provider roles. Some departments instituted EMS supervisors and other measures to ensure that personnel adhered to proper procedures at the scene of a medical emergency.
- Span of control and the number of personnel the supervisor is responsible for evaluating. (6) If one person in your department was responsible for a disproportionately large number of performance evaluations, it would be difficult for him to observe every subordinate’s performance and then recall it later without some inaccuracy.
For decades, performance appraisals have served as the fire administration’s tool in documenting an individual employee’s task and overall job performance. This documentation should provide not only feedback concerning employee past practices but also the supervisor’s future expectations of the subordinate. Most employees are satisfied and accepting of traditional appraisals in determining such items as who should receive pay increases, awards, and promotions, as long as they are able to participate in the evaluation process and view it as being fair. The best way to show the appraisal was fairly evaluated is to provide adequate documentation to support your findings. For supervisors, advanced record keeping and employee data are two of the most important elements in maintaining a consistent and fair evaluation process. (4)
Including subordinates in performance evaluations will help them buy into and believe in the system. Include them before the evaluation period by holding sessions to set challenging but attainable goals, discuss expectations, and evaluate the subordinates’ self-appraisal. (4) After an appraisal is completed, the subordinate and the supervisor should share feedback—discussing each criterion in the appraisal to identify and correct deficiencies through training, provide further encouragement, and set higher expectations for those areas of efficiency.
It is clear that to provide a more accurate account of an individual’s performance when filing an official evaluation or appraisal, information is more accurate and easier to recall when it is initially documented in an organized way. Because evaluators have a tendency to rate high when the information is unorganized—for example, if the information was recorded during a fireground operation—the documentation should immediately follow the incident.7 This will give the evaluator and department a better opportunity to evaluate the true testing of the individual’s KSAs. It will give the person being evaluated a sense of fairness when decisions are made regarding promotions, raises, transfers, training, and corrective action. And finally, it will give the department a viable document if those actions are called into question.
Endnotes
1. Cleveland, J.N.; K.R. Murphy; and R.E. Williams, “Multiple uses of performance appraisals: Prevalence and correlates,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 1998, 74(1), 130-135.
2. Obert, O. “Make performance appraisals relevant.” Organizational Behavior and Industrial Psychology. Edited by Kenneth N. Wealey and Gary A. Yuke. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 1975.
3. Viswesvaran, C. and D.S. Ones, “Comparative analysis of the reliability of job performance ratings,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 1996, 81(5), 557-574.
4. Huber, V.L., “An analysis of performance appraisals in the public sector: A review and recommendations,” Public Personnel Management Journal, 1983, 12, 258-267.
5. Casio, W.F. Applied psychology in human resource management (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1998.
6. DeNisi, A. S.; T. Robbins; and T.P. Cafferty, “Organization of information used in performance appraisals: Role of diary keeping,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 1989, 74(1), 124-129.
7. DuBrin, A.J. Essentials of management (5th ed.). New York: South-West College Publishing, 2000.
BRIAN A. CRAWFORD is a chief administrative officer with the Shreveport (LA) Fire Department. He is an 18-year department veteran, having served previously as a firefighter/paramedic, EMS administrative officer, and training officer. Crawford has a master of arts degree in industrial/organizational psychology from Louisiana Tech University and a bachelor of science degree in organizational management from Wiley College of Marshall, Texas. He is enrolled in the National Fire Academy’s Executive Fire Officer Program.
