Continuous, instant evaluation systems, such as 360-degree performance reviews, are a way to track employee performance using feedback from everyone who interacts with them. The benefits of this system are based on the idea that if employees are aware of being constantly monitored, their job performance will increase. “The Circle” by Dave Eggers (2013) perfectly captures the continuous, instantaneous rating system through their “PartiRank” and “Customer Experience” ratings, and is a technique for achieving their fundamental organizational goal that everyone “ may see, and I judge one another” (The Circle, p. 395). The first step in critically answering this essay question is to consider the conditions that have allowed this culture of performativity and the use of performance appraisal systems to become an organizational and cultural norm. The second section of this essay will examine the effects of performance appraisal systems on organizational cultures; increased employee dependence on the organization for validation and “self-actualization” (Maslow, 1943), a reduced sense of individual “real” self, and increased toxic competition among employees. The final section of this essay will examine the cultural impacts of performance appraisal systems on wider society and how technological advancements have enabled this for younger generations. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”? Get an original essay To fully understand the cultural impacts of continuous and snapshot rating systems in performance management, we must first consider the context in which this toxic managerial discourse has its foundations and has been allowed to cultivate. This sociocultural shift, best described as the “life turn” (Heelas, 2002), included an increased focus of an individual's priorities on the “self” and a shift in the perceived meaning of humanity; “to actualize” – a phrase first coined by Maslow in 1943. Nietzsche first noticed these structural changes in society in the late 19th century, long before the change had taken on its full extent . It was only after his death, and when the effects of society's "turn to life" were fully manifested, that we were able to understand the importance of his ideas. The emphasis on “self-actualization” as the primary goal of an individual's life created a series of ripple effects that anchored its place in Western culture. Organizations in particular attempted to capitalize on employees' desire to thrive by creating early versions of the modern language of human resource management (HRM). This romantic language has paradoxically been provoked and at the same time given birth to the “personal work ethic” (Heelas, 2002) which dominates 21st century management systems. With the increasing emphasis on a "strong" organizational culture – a resource that theorists have linked to business performance – managers have been able to subtly encourage employees' views to align with those of the organization and motivate them to find “meaning through work” (Berger, 1972). Combined with employees' newly developed desire to find themselves through work, the organizational context in which people existed gave way to aggressive performance management evaluation systems. The transition to the era of performativity means the “end of the era of knowledge” according to Serres (2012) due to the reduction in the need to memorize information, it being easily accessible online. This further increases the pressure on 21st century employees to “perform,” since their success is no longer measured by their abilities to retain information. The way The Circle presents this is in the anger Mae Holland faces from her superiors when they realize she has not shown interest in extracurricular activities; "Do you think that your passions are unimportant? (Le Cercle, p.187). Management thus uses the language of HRM as a means of forcing self-realization from employees in the workplace, as as an accepted aspect of organizational culture My theory is that attempts to encourage "employee empowerment" through the language of HRM and the increased use of performance management systems are a form of mass control. , cleverly disguised as self-management The cultural impacts of this paradoxically toxic philosophy, where the boundaries between work and private life are blurred, will now be discussed using The Circle as a reference guide. the use of instantaneous and continuous performance appraisal systems, is the increased dependence of employees on their workplace for validation and as a key tool for self-actualization. Ironically, this reduces an employee's self-perception and ability to think independently or controversially. In this sense, the relationship that an employee has with his employing organization could be compared to the relationship between a child and a narcissistic parent. A child raised by a narcissistic parent is not trusted to do anything without the judgment and insensitive comments of the parent, to an extent detrimental to the child's self-confidence and emotional development. The separation between child and parent fades when the child begins to live solely for parental validation, thus becoming a mirror version of the parent. This form of social action often leaves an internal void in individuality and a complete dependence on an external source of validation. Performance management systems, such as 360-degree reviews or The Circle's PartiRank system, reflect this concept in the working lives of adults. Mae is constantly and instantly evaluated based on her customer experience and PartiRank performance; she is constantly aware – and obsessed – of people's opinions of her. Gradually, throughout the novel, she learns which behaviors are rewarded with higher rankings (and increased dedication to the organization) and thus transforms herself into a very specific type of person, perpetual of the culture of performativity and “governmentality” (Foucault, 1978). . While fear in a relationship between the child and a narcissistic parent can encompass violence or physical abuse, the resulting fear in the relationship between the employee and the organization is a metaphysical form of punishment; the fear of bad grades and societal exclusion. Mae's blind devotion to the organization is further demonstrated at the end of the novel; Once exposed to the Circle's lack of ethics, she does not hesitate to denounce the traitor and continue to achieve her organizational – and simultaneously personal – goals. The conditional and circumstantial love shown to children of narcissistic parents is a result of the idea that unconditional love only creates "selfish and demanding" children (Hendrick, 2016), but does notdoes not take into account the impact this has on the child in the long term. term. In The Circle, Mae's performance and journey toward self-realization involves devoting all of her attention to the organization, thereby diminishing her self-esteem. Furthermore, the resulting blur between employees' professional and private lives is masked by the attractive prospect of flexible working, even though this could arguably be just a means of enabling 24-hour monitoring. 24/7 monitoring of employee performance. This is exemplified by the "transparency" of The Circle, where Mae is supposed to broadcast each of her experiences onto a camera for millions of viewers to see at any time. Ultimately, performance management is what led to Mae Holland's loss of individuality and freedom of thought due to the subtle bullying of organizational culture, turning her into a blind follower through direct use of rating systems. In this sense, it is the ultimate product of The Circle, than any tangible product or service, insofar as it perpetuates the culture of performativity and life in the “society of the spectacle” (Debord, 1984) . Another impact on organizational culture of instant and continuous performance appraisal systems is increased competition among employees, due to performance pressure. Due to the increasing reliance on self-management in large organizations, employees can often overwork themselves to appear more dedicated or loyal than their colleagues. This toxic competition is further perpetuated by management's use of HRM language to incentivize employees to reach their human potential; Mae is told directly in The Circle, “we see you as a fully knowable human being with unlimited potential” (The Circle, p. 180) while surrounded by seemingly motivating words like “Dream.” Participate. Innovate." (Le Cercle, p.1). By entrusting employees with the responsibility to reach their potential under the guise of human resource management expressions such as "investing in yourself" (Warren Buffet, 2008), they intelligently reward the employee for the empowerment he deems necessary for self-realization, while slyly removing any clear parameters on what good performance is With this increasing ambiguity of what is considered “good performance”. and the simultaneous denial of human limits in exchange for “unlimited fullness” (Costea, Watt, Amiridis, 2015), employees have no choice but to devote all their efforts to achieving the infinite goal of. achieve more or better performance, putting oneself under “immense pressure to succeed and be satisfied” (FT.com, 2017). Recognition is neither possible nor achievable in our capitalist society, which is why employees exist in a dog-eat-dog world where coworker failure is met with a smug smirk. This toxic cultural impact is visible in the real world of recruitment, with Barclay's HR department insisting that they expect perfection in everything you do; something true to the idea that organizations have unrealistic expectations about the physical and psychological capabilities of their employees. Ignorance of human limitations in HRM practices increases internal pressure on employees, which in today's cut-throat graduate market can have fatal consequences, as the death of Moritz Erhardt shows. He “internalized an overwhelming culture of performance” (Costea, Amiridis, Watt, 2015) with the aim of being perceived as more efficient thanhis peers, which ultimately contributed to his tragic death. The pressure placed on him – and, more poignantly, the pressure he placed on himself – was enabled and encouraged by the competitive conditions of his work environment and the culture of performativity that surrounded him. Similarly, throughout The Circle, the relationship between Mae and her childhood best friend Annie develops into one of jealousy and malice by the end of the book, where they no longer share an affinity or care. more of one another; “Mae cursed Annie…her smug sense of entitlement” (The Circle, p.355). The expectations they place on themselves are so unattainable that the only way to succeed is to be comparatively better than your peers, which leads to an isolated and bitter work environment. Managers are largely responsible for perpetuating this competitive culture of performativity, as they create a space where employees feel central to the workplace through training, feedback and the possibility of flourishing. But again, it could simply be a method of mobilizing employees through the romantic language of HRM. Employees might almost feel obligated to dedicate their lives to an organization while HRM makes them feel indebted to providing a space where they can seemingly flourish. This is the sad irony of the culture of performativity in that employees enter the work sphere expecting to focus on their individual career development, but end up entrenched in an ever-obligatory relationship with their organization where more is always expected of them. Ultimately, this allows the culture of competitive performativity to manifest in the workspace, with employees constantly able to compare their performance or grades to those of their colleagues. The dominant cultural impacts of performance appraisal systems can further be observed in the pervasive performativity of society, not exclusive to the world of work. This is the “culture of spectacle” theorized by Thrift (2002); with performance in all aspects of life as a determinant of an individual's success. The “social credit system” in China is a concrete and frightening example; citizens' credit scores depend on the personal ratings they receive from the public (Collective Evolution, 2017). The combined use of HRM language and performance appraisal systems has therefore become the embodiment of consumerism and capitalism in Western societies. Performativity via performance assessment systems has also infiltrated many students’ college experience. The language of HRM and performativity is now commonplace in universities, presumably to prepare undergraduates to become the “fast stuff” (Thrift, 2002) that they are expected to be in the graduate recruitment market. One of the most widely accepted and used performance evaluation systems among undergraduates is LinkedIn; everyone can see your skills, your online CV and what others have approved as your strengths/weaknesses. This absolute freedom when it comes to personal information resembles the emphasis on “transparency” in The Circle, meaning that students are consequently transformed into ideal employees from an even earlier age. Another societal impact of performance appraisal systems is the increased use of social media as a contemporary performance tool. rating system and the resulting reduction in consumer rationality. Some people now measure their personal success by.