Chapter 10 Performance Appraisal and Career Management Closing Case: Counting Seconds, Measuring Scans Case Summary Meijer is a family-owned discounting chain which recently installed a new performance-measurement system for its checkout operators. Meijer established a minimum baseline performance metrics for the job based on the number of units a person should reasonably be able to scan and bag in a specified amount of time. A timer is activated when the checkout operator scans a customer’s first item and stops only after it scans the customer’s last item. The operator’s scores are averaged across a shift after the system adjusts the score for the kinds of items being purchased and how customers pay for it. The minimum performance expectation at Meijer is 95 percent of the standard. Interviews with the Meijer cashiers suggests that the new system causes them to work faster, but they feel more stressed. Feedback from the customers suggests that the new system is great, but also feel that elderly people feel rushed at checkout that they don’t want to visit twice. The Meijer system, developed by Accenture, may be the wave of future. Case Questions 1. How would you feel about working under the Meijer system? Employees working under the Meijer system might feel stressed while operating the checkout counter as they have to move fast. Since the set standard is 95 percent, any operator performing below the standard would be either demoted to a lower-paying position or fired. 2. What other kinds of jobs might be amenable to this sort of performance-measurement technology? Jobs which would not need any artistic or creative thinking approach to be performed are amenable to this sort of performance-measurement technology. Manufacturing products on the assembly line could be considered as one such job. The following items appear on the in-text Instructor Prep Cards. These notes and suggested talking points should help instructors conduct these exercises with the students. Discussion Questions 1. Identify and briefly describe the basic steps in performance appraisal. The typical performance appraisal process includes several basic steps: • Establish job duties • Establish and communicate performance standards • Inspect/observe performance • Document/record observed performance • Rate performance 2. What are the basic goals of performance appraisal? A basic goal of any appraisal system is to provide a valid and reliable measure of employee performance along all relevant dimensions. Documentation is another important goal of the appraisal process. However, the ultimate goal for any organization using performance appraisals is to improve performance on the job. The goal also relies on the organization’s ability to make decisions about things such as raises and promotions on the basis of performance on the job. 3. Summarize the roles of the organization, the rater, and the ratee in performance appraisal. The organization, primarily through the work of its human resource (HR) function, develops the general performance appraisal process for its managers and employees to use, also determines the timing of the performance appraisals, and is also responsible for ensuring that clear and specific performance standards are available to managers. The rater plays the largest role in the appraisal process. Raters have to help develop and learn clear performance standards. As performance information is acquired about a rate, the rater has to compare the information acquired with these standards as a way to evaluate the ratee’s performance. When making these decisions, the rater must consider the context in which the performance occurs so that any extenuating conditions can be taken into consideration. The rater’s task is to collect information about the ratee’s behaviors over the appraisal period and translate that information into ratings. After ratings have been completed, the rater must then communicate the results and consequences of the appraisal to the ratee. Finally, the rater is ultimately responsible for preparing the employee to perform at desired levels. The ratee should have a clear and unbiased view of his or her own performance, which may require the ratee to acquire information about the performance of co-workers and gain an understanding about how his or her behavior affects performance. This approach should also allow the ratee to be more receptive to feedback from the rater, which in turn makes it more likely that the ratee will change his or her behavior in response to that feedback. 4. Who are the most common raters in the performance appraisal process? By far the most common rater is the supervisor. Other raters include peers, subordinates, customers, and the employees themselves. The most common raters in the performance appraisal process typically include: 1. Immediate Supervisors/Managers: They have direct oversight of the employee's work and are often the primary raters. 2. Peers/Co-workers: Colleagues who work closely with the employee can provide valuable insights into their performance and behaviors. 3. Subordinates: In cases where the employee is a supervisor, their subordinates may provide feedback on their leadership and management skills. 4. Self-assessment: Employees evaluate their own performance, providing a self-reflection that can be compared with the assessments of others. 5. Customers/Clients: In roles where interactions with customers or clients are significant, their feedback can be valuable in assessing performance. 6. 360-Degree Feedback: This involves gathering feedback from all these sources to provide a comprehensive view of the employee's performance. Each rater provides a unique perspective on the employee's performance, helping to create a more holistic view that can lead to more effective performance evaluations. 5. Identify and critique the basic methods for performance appraisal. Ranking Methods: The simple ranking method involves having the manager just rank-order, from top to bottom or best to worst, each member of a particular work group or department. The paired-comparison method involves comparing each individual employee with every other individual employee, one at a time. The forced-distribution method involves grouping employees into predefined frequencies of performance ratings. Those frequencies are determined by the organization in advance and are imposed on the rater. Advantages of this system are it results in a normal distribution of performance ratings, and it ensures control over how much money is spent on merit pay. Disadvantages of this system are that the distribution that is being imposed may have no relationship to the true distribution of performance in the work group, and it forces the rater to make distinctions that might not really be meaningful. Rating Methods: A graphic rating scale consists of a statement or question about some aspect of an individual’s job performance. Following that statement or question is a series of answers; the rater must select the one that fits best. For example, one common set of responses to graphic rating scale is strongly agree to strongly disagree. Advantages are that graphic rating scales are easy to develop, and a wide array of performance dimensions can be tapped with various rating scales on the same form. Specific dimensions should be based on job analysis, but instead organizations tend to measure performance relative to general traits or behaviors so that the instrument can be used with all or most employees. Disadvantages are that managers may commit distributional errors (i.e., leniency, severity, or central tendency) and halo error, and may also attribute too much precision and objectivity to the resulting summated ratings. The critical incident method is simply an example or instance of especially good or poor performance on the part of the employee. Organizations that rely on this method often require raters to recall such instances on the job and then describe what the employee did (or did not do) that led to success or failure. Thus, this technique provides rich information for feedback to the employee and defines performance in fairly clear behavioral terms. An advantage of critical incident method, is that it allows managers to provide individual employees with precise examples of behaviors that are believed to be both effective and less effective performance. On the other hand, the critical incident method requires considerable time and effort on the part of managers because they must maintain a log or diary of these incidents. In addition, the method may make it difficult to compare one person with another. Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) represent a combination of the graphic rating scale and the critical incident method. They specify performance dimensions based on behavioral anchors associated with different levels of performance along the scale. Developing BARS is a complicated and often expensive process. A BARS system has the significant advantage of dramatically increasing reliability by providing specific behavioral examples to reflect effective and less effective behaviors. Because the managers themselves develop the scales, they tend to be more committed to using them effectively, and the process of developing the scales helps raters develop clearer ideas about what constitutes good performance on the job. The process of developing a truly effective BARS is extremely expensive and time consuming, and so these scales are rarely used in their pure form. Instead, some modified BARS procedures are often adopted in an attempt to reap some of the benefits without incurring the costs. Like a BARS, a Behavioral Observation Scale (BOS) is developed from critical incidents. Rather than using only a sample of behaviors that reflect effective or ineffective behavior, a BOS uses substantially more of the behaviors to define specifically all the measures necessary for effective performance. A second difference between a BOS and a BARS is that a BOS allows managers to rate the frequency with which the individual employee has exhibited each behavior during the rating period. Although the BOS approach is an improvement over the limitations of the BARS approach, it takes even more time and can be even more expensive to develop. In a goal-based, or a management-by-objectives (MBO), system a subordinate meets with his or her manager, and together they set goals for the subordinate for a coming period of time, often one year. These goals are usually quantifiable, are objective, and almost always written down. During the year, the manager and the subordinate meet periodically to review the subordinate’s performance relative to attaining the goals. At the end of the year, a more formal meeting is scheduled. During that meeting, the actual degree of goal attainment is assessed. Goal-based systems are often seen as the best alternative available for rating performance, but care must be taken when these systems are used. Specifically, the kinds of behaviors specified in the goal-setting process are exactly what the employee will tend to focus on, so it is critical that the organization really wants to encourage these particular behaviors. 6. How might feedback interviews and meetings be conducted most effectively? Managers should provide feedback on a regular basis, rather than just annually, and should focus on various characteristics of effective and less effective performance. The individual should appraise his or her own performance in advance of an appraisal interview; this will help sensitize the employee to particular performance areas and will increase the efficiency of the process. Managers should encourage participation and two-way communication during performance feedback interviews. The manager should try to balance positive and negative feedback, rather than just dwelling on negative aspects of performance. The manager should take a developmental and problem-solving orientation to the process, rather than focusing on employee shortcomings. The performance appraisal interview should conclude with a future-oriented discussion of what will happen next, including setting goals, discussing potential rewards, establishing probationary periods, or developing training strategies. 7. What is a career? A career is the set of experiences and activities in which a person engages related to his or her job and livelihood over the course of a working life. It includes the various specific jobs that a person performs, the kinds of responsibilities and activities that make up those jobs, movements and transitions between jobs, and an individual’s overall assessment of and feelings of satisfaction with these various components of her or his career. 8. Compare and contrast the traditional and emerging models of careers. Which model are you most comfortable with? Why? The traditional model of career involves four stages. Exploration is the first traditional career stage, and during this period in people’s lives, they try to identify the kind of work they are interested in doing. This period of a typical person’s career starts in mid- to late teens and lasts through the mid- to late twenties. An individual’s coursework in school and his or her first jobs play an important role in the exploration stage of career development. The establishment stage is the next stage in a typical career. During this period, the individual begins to create a meaningful and relevant role in the organization for herself in the organization. There is considerable range in terms of age and time in this stage, but it generally encompasses an individual’s late twenties through mid- to late thirties. The maintenance stage is the next stage in a typical career. During this period, the individual begins to reach a level in the organization that optimizes his talents or capabilities. Individuals in the maintenance stage must often devote extra effort to learning new job skills and remaining current in their professional skills and abilities. They are also frequently called on to fill mentoring roles in which they help newcomers to the organization get their feet on the ground and launch their own careers. Finally, the fourth stage of a typical career is the disengagement stage. During this period, the individual gradually begins to pull away from her work in the organization, her priorities change, and work may become less important to her. Of course, in the contemporary era of downsizing and layoffs, sometimes people go through these four stages of career development in a relatively short period of time. Many experts agree that even though the traditional model of careers summarized above still has conceptual value, new perspectives on careers are better reflections of today’s realities. Some experts, for instance, argue that one should think about career ages (how long someone has been on a job) rather than career stages or even chronological age. At the beginning of each new career, though, the employee begins a process of exploration, trial, and establishment, followed by another period of exploration. The second level of exploration in turn is likely to take the person away from the current career and into a new one where the process begins again. Today’s students are probably more comfortable with the emerging career stage model, as they do not have the expectations of staying with one organization throughout their careers. Students may cite the excitement and challenge aspects of career change. They may also be pragmatic, citing the recent history of organizations in downsizing efforts. 9. If you will soon enter a new career, what issues are you most concerned about? How might an employer help you deal with these issues? If I were entering a new career, I might be concerned about several issues, such as: 1. Learning Curve: Adjusting to new tasks, responsibilities, and the overall work environment. 2. Job Fit: Ensuring that the new role aligns with my skills, interests, and career goals. 3. Work-Life Balance: Managing work demands with personal life and ensuring a healthy balance. 4. Job Security: Concerns about the stability and longevity of the new position. 5. Professional Development: Opportunities for growth, learning, and advancement within the new career path. An employer can help address these concerns by: 1. Onboarding and Training Programs: Providing thorough onboarding and training to ease the transition into the new role. 2. Career Path Planning: Offering clear paths for career progression and development within the organization. 3. Mentorship and Support: Assigning a mentor or coach to provide guidance and support in the new role. 4. Work-Life Balance Initiatives: Implementing policies and programs that promote work-life balance, such as flexible work arrangements. 5. Open Communication: Encouraging open communication and feedback to address any concerns or issues that may arise. 6. Job Security Measures: Providing a clear understanding of the company's stability and future prospects, as well as offering benefits that enhance job security. By addressing these concerns, an employer can help new employees feel more confident and supported in their new career, leading to greater job satisfaction and retention. 10. Would you like to have an international assignment as part of your career? What issues and concerns might you have about such a possibility? However, if I were to consider the idea of an international assignment, I might have concerns such as: 1. Cultural Adaptation: Adjusting to a new culture, language, and work environment could be challenging. 2. Work-Life Balance: Balancing work demands with personal life, especially when far away from friends and family. 3. Logistics and Practicalities: Dealing with logistical issues such as visas, housing, healthcare, and transportation in a foreign country. 4. Career Progression: Ensuring that the international assignment aligns with my long-term career goals and offers opportunities for growth and advancement. 5. Safety and Security: Concerns about safety and security in a foreign country, especially in unfamiliar surroundings. 6. Social Integration: Building a social network and support system in a new country can be daunting. Employers can help alleviate these concerns by providing support such as cultural training, assistance with logistics, access to healthcare services, regular check-ins, and networking opportunities. Ethical Dilemmas in HR Management Scenario summary A marketing executive, of a major corporation, needs to hire a new staff member to fill a position that has been just created. The marketing executive asked the human resource department to help identify three possible candidates from inside the organization. The marketing executive met with each of these people and thoroughly reviewed their educational backgrounds, experience, performance appraisals, career path, and other qualifications and eliminated one person because of lack of fit. The marketing executive now faces a complicated decision between the two because he or she sees them as relatively equal in terms of potential. The real problem, however, is diversity and equal opportunity. One candidate is an African-American female. The marketing executive is personally committed to equal opportunity for minorities and has a reputation for helping members of protected classes whenever appropriate. The candidate has received appraisals consistently in the range of 3.8–4.2 on the firm’s 5-point scales. But because the marketing executive knows that her boss rates everyone on the low side—in his or her opinion, about 0.4 below where others would rate them. The other candidate is white male. This individual’s performance appraisal have been in the range of 4.0–4.4 range, and the marketing executive knows the candidate’s boss and believes that these scores are accurate as his boss always does a fair, objective, and equitable job in her performance appraisals. The marketing executive has the authority to make this decision, but wants to make sure he or she can defend it in the event that the individual not selected questions how and why he or she chose the other individual for the position. Questions 1. What are the ethical issues in this situation? An issue is whether the marketing manager has the authority to disregard another manager’s performance appraisal ratings and hire the African-American female, even though her ratings are somewhat lower than the white male’s ratings. A related issue is whether the marketing manager is subjectively interpreting the performance appraisal information to fit his or her approach to equal opportunity and diversity. 2. What are the basic arguments for and against selecting each candidate? For the African-American female: • She has potential equal to that of the white male. • She would increase diversity because she is a member of a protected class. • She has received consistently high performance ratings from a boss who is known to give tough appraisals. For the white male: • He has potential equal to that of the African-American female. • He has received consistently high performance ratings, and his ratings are on average higher than those of the African-American female. • He may be the better person for the job, although the marketing manager would rather hire a minority group member. 3. What do you think most managers would do? What would you do? Most managers would likely assess the potential benefits and challenges of an international assignment for both the employee and the organization. They would consider the employee's skills, interests, and career goals, as well as the strategic objectives of the organization. Managers would also provide support and resources to help the employee succeed in the assignment, such as cultural training, language support, and logistical assistance. I would help identify potential issues and suggest strategies to address them, taking into account the needs and concerns of both the employee and the organization. Assignment Purpose: The purpose of this exercise is to help students develop insights into the process of developing performance-appraisal methods and systems. As background, conceptualize how performance appraisal works in a typical course such as the one students are taking now: the instructor is the rater, and the students are the rates. Instructors generally use some combination of exams, tests, papers, cases, and class participation as the basis for evaluation and then provide the formal appraisal in the form of a letter grade. Step 1: The instructor should ask students to form groups of four to five students. Step 2: Students working with their group members, develop three alternative methods that an instructor might use to evaluate the students’ performances. Students should try to match their methods to those discussed in the chapter whenever possible. Step 3: Student groups should evaluate each method they developed in terms of its potential usefulness. Identify the strengths and weaknesses of each method relative to the traditional system. Step 4: Students are asked to discuss and develop responses for the following. 1. What barriers might exist to the adoption of one of the new methods you developed? Barriers to the adoption of a new method can vary depending on the nature of the method and the context in which it is being introduced. Some common barriers include: 1. Resistance to Change: People may be comfortable with existing methods and resistant to change, especially if they perceive the new method as complex or disruptive. 2. Lack of Understanding: If the new method is not clearly understood or its benefits are not well-communicated, people may be hesitant to adopt it. 3. Resource Constraints: Adopting a new method may require additional resources such as time, money, or personnel, which can be a barrier for organizations with limited resources. 4. Compatibility Issues: The new method may not be compatible with existing systems, processes, or culture, making it difficult to integrate into the organization. 5. Lack of Leadership Support: Without support from organizational leaders, it can be challenging to drive adoption of a new method across the organization. 6. Competing Priorities: If there are other pressing priorities within the organization, the adoption of a new method may be deprioritized. 7. Uncertainty about Outcomes: If the outcomes or benefits of the new method are uncertain, people may be reluctant to adopt it. Addressing these barriers requires a comprehensive approach that includes clear communication, training and support, addressing resource constraints, ensuring compatibility with existing systems, and securing leadership buy-in. 2. What limitations characterize the traditional system? Do any of your methods overcome these limitations? Traditional systems often have several limitations, including: 1. Subjectivity: Traditional systems are often subjective, relying heavily on the opinion of the evaluator rather than objective criteria. 2. Bias: There is a risk of bias in traditional systems, where evaluators may be influenced by personal preferences, stereotypes, or other factors unrelated to performance. 3. Inconsistency: Evaluations in traditional systems can be inconsistent across different evaluators or over time, leading to unfairness and inconsistency in feedback and ratings. 4. Lack of Feedback: Traditional systems may not provide enough feedback to employees, limiting their ability to improve and develop their skills. 5. Focus on Past Performance: Traditional systems often focus on past performance rather than future potential, which may not align with the organization's long-term goals. 6. Limited Scope: Traditional systems may have a limited scope, focusing only on performance within a specific role or department rather than considering broader contributions to the organization. Some of the methods I developed may help overcome these limitations. For example, methods that incorporate multi-rater feedback (such as 360-degree feedback) can provide a more comprehensive and balanced view of an employee's performance, reducing the impact of individual bias. Additionally, methods that emphasize clear, objective criteria for evaluation can help increase consistency and fairness in evaluations. Finally, methods that focus on continuous feedback and development can address the lack of feedback and focus on past performance seen in traditional systems. 3. At your school, do students evaluate instructors? If so, how might the current method be improved? Yes, at many schools, students evaluate instructors at the end of each course. However, the current methods of student evaluations of instructors (SEIs) have been criticized for various reasons, including: 1. Bias: There can be biases in student evaluations, such as gender bias or bias based on personality traits, that may not accurately reflect an instructor's effectiveness. 2. Limited Scope: SEIs often focus on aspects of teaching that are easily observable (e.g., clarity of presentation) but may not capture important aspects of effective teaching (e.g., ability to inspire critical thinking). 3. Timing: SEIs are typically conducted at the end of the course, which may not provide timely feedback for instructors to make improvements during the course. 4. Low Response Rates: Response rates to SEIs can be low, leading to potential biases in the feedback received. To improve the current method of student evaluations of instructors, several approaches could be considered: 1. Use of Multiple Measures: Instead of relying solely on SEIs, institutions could use a combination of measures, such as peer evaluations, self-assessments, and classroom observations, to provide a more comprehensive assessment of teaching effectiveness. 2. Incorporation of Student Learning Outcomes: SEIs could be revised to include questions about the extent to which students feel they achieved the learning outcomes of the course, providing a more direct measure of teaching effectiveness. 3. Anonymous Feedback: Ensuring that SEIs are conducted anonymously can help reduce bias in the feedback provided by students. 4. Mid-Course Feedback: Providing opportunities for mid-course feedback can allow instructors to make adjustments to their teaching while the course is still ongoing. 5. Training for Instructors: Providing instructors with training on how to interpret and respond to student feedback can help them make effective use of SEIs to improve their teaching. By implementing these strategies, institutions can improve the effectiveness and fairness of student evaluations of instructors, leading to better outcomes for both students and instructors. 4. Does 360-degree feedback have any relevance in the classroom? Yes, 360-degree feedback can have relevance in the classroom, particularly in the context of evaluating teaching effectiveness. In a traditional 360-degree feedback process, feedback is collected from multiple sources, including peers, supervisors, subordinates, and self-assessment. In the classroom, this could translate to collecting feedback from various stakeholders, such as students, colleagues, administrators, and even the instructor themselves. Here's how 360-degree feedback could be applied in the classroom: 1. Students: Students can provide feedback on various aspects of the instructor's teaching, including clarity of communication, organization of material, effectiveness of instructional methods, and responsiveness to student needs. 2. Peers: Colleagues who observe the instructor's teaching can provide valuable insights into their teaching style, classroom management techniques, and ability to collaborate with others. 3. Administrators: School administrators can provide feedback on the instructor's adherence to institutional policies and procedures, as well as their overall contribution to the school's educational objectives. 4. Self-assessment: Instructors can also evaluate their own teaching, reflecting on their strengths and areas for improvement. By collecting feedback from multiple sources, instructors can gain a more comprehensive understanding of their teaching effectiveness and identify areas for improvement. This can lead to more targeted professional development opportunities and ultimately, enhance the quality of teaching and learning in the classroom. Solution Manual for Human Resources Angelo Denisi, Ricky Griffin 978128586757
Download
Close
Close
