Awang Anwaruddin1


In this globalization era, where strategic change and technology development happen so fluctuated and unpredictable, the management of civil servants needs such a specific and accommodative strategic. Through Law Number 43 Year 1999 on the Personnel Policy, the heads of institutions in the central and local government has got an access to manage the civil servants professionally, including the evaluation of their performance. It is declared in the law that the performance evaluatuon for civil servants should be effectively, accurately, flexibly and implemented. However, the on-going evaluation method does not fully accomodate the rules, especially in adapting the progress of the professionalism era. Besides, the method is often implemented ineffectively by the rating officials. This article attempts at discussing such malpractices and biases in the process of performance evaluation for the civil service. By the end of the article, a chapter on the future-oriented evaluation is presented as the alternative instrument to the performance evaluation method, esecially when an employee is focused on a future performance or position in his institution.


How to Cite
Anwaruddin1, A. (2019). PENGEMBANGAN MODEL PENILAIAN KINERJA PEGAWAI. Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi: Media Pengembangan Ilmu Dan Praktek Administrasi, 3(4), 01.



Bernardin, H. John and Joyce EA Russel. 1998. Human Resource Management: An Experiental

Approach. Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Byars, Lloyd L. and Leslie W. Rue. 2000. Human Resource Management. Boston: McGraw-


Campbell, Donald J. and Cynthia Lee. Self-Appraisal in Performance Evaluation: Development

versus Evaluation. Academy of Management Review. Vol. 13. 1998.

Davis, Keith and W. Newstorm. 1985. Human Behavior at Work: Organizational. Boston:


Dessler, Gary. 2002. Human Resource Management. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall International


Dharma, Agus. 2001. Manajemen Prestasi Kerja. Jakarta: Rajawali.

Jiayuan Yu and Kevin R. Murphy, Modesty Bias in Self-Ratings of Performance Test of the

Cultural Relativity Hypothesis. Personnel Psychology. Vol. 46. 1993.

London, Manuel and Arthur J. Wohlers. Agreement between Subordinate and Self-Ratings in

Upward Feedback. Personnel Psychology. Vol. 44. 1991.

Mangkunegara, A.A. Anwar Prabu. 2001. Manajemen Sumberdaya Manusia Organisasi.

Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.

Moravec, Milan. 1981. How Performance Appraisal Can Tie Communication to Productivity,

Personnel Administrator. January 1981.

Nasution, M.A. 1996. Metode Penelitian Naturalistik – Kualitatif . Bandung: Tarsito.

Nawawi, H. Hadari. 1997. Metode Penelitian Bidang Sosial. Yogyakarta: Gajah Mada

University Press.

Osborne, David and Peter Plastrik. 1997. Banishing Bureaucracy,. Reading: Addison-Wesley

Publishing Company.

Simamora, Henry. 1985. Manajemen Sumberdaya Manusia - Edisi ke-2. Yogyakarta: Bagian

Penerbitan STIE YKPN.

Strauss, George & Leonard R. Sayle. 2000. Personnel: The Human Problems of Management.

New Jersey: Prentice-Hall International Inc.

Umar, Husein. 1998. Riset Sumber Daya Manusia dalam Organisasi. Jakarta: Gramedia.

Werther, Jr, William B & Heinz Weihrich. 1975. Refining MBO Through Negotiations. MSU

Business Topic. Summer 1975.

Werther, Jr, William B & Keith Davis. 1966. Human Resources and Personnel Management.

USA: McGraw-Hill, Inc.