"Performance Management System (PMS) is the process of identifying, measuring, managing and developing the performance of human resources in the organization." A system that measures worker performance that we use to improve individual performance (2010 SHRM Curriculum Guide for full list). Beer and Ruh (1976) had coined the term performance management in 1976 and subsequently recognized it as a distinctive approach in the mid-1980s. The primary reason for the development of this system is that managers realized that a more continuous and integrated approach was needed to manage and reward performance (2010 SHRM Curriculum Guide for full list). To effectively deal with pressures and changes in the current environment, organizations are looking for effective management techniques (De-Waal, 2007). Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Aguinis, (2009) defines “Performance management is an ongoing process in which the performance of identifying, measuring and developing the performance of individuals and aligning performance with the strategic objectives of the organization”. Management and Performance appraisals get confused every now and then, but the latter is only a part of the former. Performance appraisal is basically the evaluation of employees employees, providing them with valuable feedback and producing a progressive effect on future performance (Bohlander & Snell, 2010, In many countries around the world, managerialism has been an important neoliberal method considered the most suitable for the efficient and effective management of organizations). public sector, including schools (Simkins, 200; Tabulawa, 2003). Rooted in the dawn of managerialism, governments have adopted performance management from the private sector to make workers such as teachers “more efficient, more effective, and more accountable” (Down, Hogan, & Chadbourne, 1999, p. 11). Overall PMS is a reform designed to ensure that organisations, units and individuals work effectively and efficiently” (Storey, 2002, p.321). Hopen (2004) defines PMS as a daily management system that confirms that an organization achieves its vision, becomes a high-performance company, and creates success for all. The key features of this reform, as further indicated by Hopen (2004), are that it should focus on the allocation of work, allowing work to be carried out as planned and evaluating performance. When PMS was adopted in the public sector by the private sector, public education systems were included Neoliberal policies promoted the application of private sector practices in schools to make them more efficient and accountable for their performance (Dawn, Chadounne and Hogan, 2000). The aim of PMS was to restructure and re-culturalize the school along the lines of business management with the intention of increasing the responsibility and productivity of teachers' work (Down, Chadbourne, & Hogan, 2000). According to Ingram and McDonnell (1996) measuring employee performance is a mandatory task as it allows the company to have a record of current organizational activity in order to judge their progress and help refocus strategy. The performance review provides insight into past performance and allows you to make plans for the future. Armstrong (1991) found that performance managementit allows people to approach and discuss their work with their managers and supervisors in a peaceful atmosphere. Indeed, providing people with feedback on their performance will have a positive effect on their future performance (Taylor & Pierce, 1999, Van Dyne et al., 2000). Performance management has long been observed as one of the most critical areas of human resources. development and human resources management (Cardy & Dobbins, 1994). The challenge is to establish an effective performance management system that eliminates negative meanings and generates positive ones for the individual and the organization (Lawler, 1994, Nankervis, AR and Compton, RL 2006). This also helps to further develop development and improvement plans for employees (Armstrong, 2003). There is a high PMS failure rate and most of them occur during the implementation phase. According to McCunn (1998), as cited by Bourne et al. (2002), the PMS implementation failure rate was approximately 70%. The failure rate has also decreased over the years. In more recent literature it is stated that the failure rate decreases to 56% (de Waal & Counet, 2009). This is a good sign as most PMSs are still poorly implemented. Typically, performance management strategies involve "managing" teachers' "performance" by providing them with professional development support and feedback from an evaluation of their work (Chadbourne, November 2000). However, despite the official rhetoric of professional development contained in policy, there is little evidence that performance management systems of this type are effective in improving teachers' learning and their ability to improve their classroom practice (Chief Inspector of Her Majesty's Schools, 1996; Practical studies of teacher evaluation and performance management show that the impact of evaluation on teaching and learning has not been large (Chadbourne, November 2000). The literature on teacher evaluation shows that it can be very complex and involve a range of factors that can hinder or support teacher effectiveness (Malongwa, 1995:153; Bartlett, 2000:26; Campbell, Kyriakides, Muijs, & Robinson, 2003 : 356). Teacher evaluation is receiving attention around the world as governments place greater importance on critically examining educational provision to ensure that it is relevant and appropriate to the needs of young people (Pedzani Monyatsi, Teachers' perceptions of the effectiveness of teacher evaluation in Botswana, 2006). Therefore, teacher evaluation is of great importance since its main objective is to improve individual performance and motivation (Bartlett, 2000:25; Danielson, 2001:12; Donaldson & Stobbe, 2000; Lam, 2001:161; Painter, 2001:61; Wanzare, 2002:213 mine 4). Given the above, it should, however, be understood that quality education can only be achieved through an evaluation system based on the improvement of individual performance, which in turn leads to better working relationships and career development of the individual ( Everard & Morris, 1996:79). Individual performance can be improved through the identification of one's strengths and weaknesses, which is a key purpose of assessment. Goddard and Emerson (1995:11 mio 5) further argue that the basis of assessment is the belief that educators wish to improve their performance in order to improve students' education. It is important to treat evaluation as an ongoing cooperative intervention between supervisor and subordinate, a shared responsibility, and not an annual “confrontation” (Howard & McColskey, 2001:49; Monyatsi,, 2003).