Essay on Case Application: Appraising the Secretaries at Sweetwater U

An appraisal is one of the most commonly used methods of formal assessment and is used to evaluate and assess the performance of an employee against agreed targets and objectives, with the aim of improving employee performance. Where an employee has been able to achieve their targets, the appraisal can be used to recognise successes. This often helps to increase an employee’s confidence and motivation and can lead to better organisational performance. Many organisations will use the outcomes of an appraisal to identify potential candidates for promotions or even an increase in pay. At the same time, an appraisal meeting may include discussions on underperformance, identifying why this has occurred and how this can be avoided in the future.

An effective performance appraisal system supports our desire to create a productive, motivated, accountable, reliable, creative, dedicated, and happy workforce.

Week 3 Knowledge Check Study Guide Concepts Mastery Requirements of Effective Appraisal Systems 1 2 3 100% 4 5 6 100% 7 8 9 100% 10 11 12 100% 13 14 15 Performance-Appraisal Legalities Questions 100% Methods of Appraising Employee Performance Score: 15 / 15 Elements of Effective Performance Feedback

The processes demonstrates a commitment to people within the business by showing them that they are valued members of the company and their success is important to the entire organization.

Performance appraisal systems play an important part in the process of performance management (Cascio, 2006) and toward ensuring consistency and fairness; this proposal recommends Kudler Fine Foods to use of the current performance appraisal system for evaluating individuals within the sales team.

The major downside of this appraisal system is that it is often generic, routine and repetitive. For example, the appraisal forms used to rate performance has remained unchanged for over a decade such that the appraised

For this assignment I will referencing the Arizona Department of Corrections rating system, and touching on the current evaluation process and discussing options to improve on the process. I work in the department of corrections and the evaluation system currently implemented is the managing, accountability, and performance (MAP). This system is far from perfect, and very susceptible to subjective evaluations. Most employees do not agree with the evaluations they receive and for the most part this is due to the supervisors not putting in the required effort to properly evaluate each employee. It is not uncommon for a supervisor to rate all of their subordinates exactly the same, regardless if one employee excels and the other shows little to no interest. Supervisors often justify their vanilla evaluations by stating that the evaluations do not have any effect on your employment, since pay raises are not based from the appraisal. As you can imagine this method does little to raise the moral of the motivated hard working staff, and in my opinion needs to be revamped. I would prefer an evaluation based more on objective performance and behavioral observations.

An effective performance appraisal system strives for as much precision in defining and measuring performance dimensions as is feasible. Some of the major problems with the Darby appraisal system are:

In a conclusion, strengths of the negotiated performance appraisal are its ability to promote candid two-way communication between the supervisor and the person being appraised and to help the latter take more responsibility for improving performance. In contrast, in this case, the supervisor acts more as a judge of employee performance than as a coach. By so doing, unfortunately, the focus is on blame rather than on helping the employee assume responsibility for improvement.

Cook, S., & Macaulay, S. (2007). How an integrated approach to performance appraisal and the

In relations to Dr. Carl Jones and Dean Smith’s merit processes, the university has a policy to provide pay increases based on merit. To meet that objective, Dr. Jones has created a robust systems of metrics to evaluate his staff based on specific criteria. Dr. Jones process includes a weighted point system with 40 percent based on teaching, 40 percent based on research and 20 percent based on service. As chair of his department, Dr. Jones provided his recommendations for salary increases based on his detailed criteria to the Dean who approved them.

Performance evaluations should focus on the individual’s job performance and not the individual. The four managers all have the same goal when it comes to their perspectives on performance appraisals and that is, they want to do what is best for their subordinates to motivate them to perform in their department’s best interest. Tom has a top priority to provide true and accurate feedback so employees know exactly where they stand. While I agree that evaluations definitely need to have a base of accuracy, I like Max’s view that most of good management is psychology. To know to act to do what is in the individual’s and department’s best interest, a manager needs to understanding people’s strengths and faults, and know how to motivate and reward employees. If that means a little fine-tuning, then so be it. Lynne, on the other hand, contaminated one of her workers evaluations by considering the individuals personal issues and inflated her rating to encourage and support her. Personally I don’t think it should have been a consideration in the evaluation however, supporting and encouraging the employee in other ways may be a more

“Performance appraisals can enhance employee performance as well as advance the mission and goals of an organization. There are many advantages of performance appraisals if they are applied fairly, consistently and objectively. Performance appraisals not applied fairly can be counterproductive and even destructive to

There are five areas in corporate appraisal. There are categorized senior management, corporate culture, corporate publics, corporate resources and review of past performance (Jain,S.C. et all, 2012). After performing the corporate appraisal, Louis discovered that the cost were excessive, lose touch with the customers, organization structure was too decentralized and bureaucratic and stayed with their old strategy for too long therefore caused IBM to be losing out in the current competitive market (Jain,S.C. et all, 2012).

Firstly, the old system was prone to central tendency error. It had 13 rating levels and lacked a described evaluation criteria. As one can understand, if the rating scale is large and the different levels are not sufficiently explained, the evaluators will be more likely to evaluate less accurately. In the case, one can read that managers gave almost to everyone a B or a C,