Rate My Boss Application

The interaction of people at work is increasingly diverse where people are involved in the work having many reporting lines like a project team which has a matrix structure. So it is fair for such a person to be appraised by all these people than by his/her line manager only.

Therefore, even the result of the decision might be negative for the employees their reaction is likely to be positive. In this case, the management can deliver the perception of procedural justice to the employees to let them understand the reason of promotion and demotion in the station, or the reason that manager ignored the regulation when someone broke the rules.

The new system was solving a problem where a bulk employees were getting high rating when their department was failing to achieve production goals and time-to-market

First, I should have explain better during the performance appraisals and interviews the the merit increase was base on the percent of the employee base pay. However, sent that did not happen I would explain that the company merit increase was base on a percentage of the employee pay. An example is employee 1 made $40,000 a year and employee 2 made $50,000 a year they both get the same overall performance rating of 4.15. The company decides that for overall performance rating of 4.15, employees with that rating will get a five percent merit increase to their base salary. As a result, employee 1 merit increase would be $2,000 and employee 2 would be $2,500. Both employees receive the same five percent merit increase however, the merit increase was a percent that applied to the base salary causing the money increase to be different.

In my organization, performance is measured by different parameters for different departments. The performance of the sales department team is measured by the number of sales made and the amount of revenue generated. For cabin crew members, performance is weighed through a number of ways and primarily through frequent on-board appraisals. These appraisals are often conducted by senior cabin crew members and are measured against certain standard factors such as interaction with passengers and colleagues and general activities carried out on the flight. This appraisal system applies to all cabin crew members, however seniors in the company have an additional way through which they are appraised where junior cabin crew members have the equal opportunity to rate their seniors as well making the performance evaluation processes two- way. Another way performance is measured is through attendance. Points are deducted for absenteeism and lateness and anyone with a good track record of attendance is considered a good performer.

At the end of each performance year, employees will be evaluated on their performance for the previous year. The performance ratings will go from 1 being the lowest to 5 being the highest. How they rank for the year will determine bonuses, if any, as well as any increase to their base pay. The following table illustrates how the performance rating is distributed.

After reviewing Kohn and Cummings perspective on the issue I thought about it and think Kohn has a good point regarding the matter. I do believe if people are praised they will perform better, faster, and make better decisions for the company. I think there could be situations where the opposing side would apply. Some people are money driven and they only see the dollar sign and the amount they bring in yearly. These type of people could care less about praise, comments, or thoughts from others. So, with this type of person, I would agree the pay scale would be the number one factor and not the praise category. An example from me would be when I worked for a mortgage company and the lady who owned it was sweet and good as gold but was getting

I think the overall idea sound great but the performance appraisal system need to enforce at the same standard for all employees. If an employee is consistently performing and producing stellar result, there should be a type of incentive in place to award employees. This type of incentive motivates employees to do their very best to accomplish daily task at a higher level. I think adopting new labor-management procedures at a time when the United States is deeply involved with homeland

Performance Management Within the Workplace The basis of the mainstream of performance appraisals within the modern workplace is one person (a manager or executive) rating one more, an intrinsically individual process. There are distinction such as 360 degree appraisals that include the judgment of others such as clientele and peers/colleagues in the process but it is the action of one person transitory judgment upon another that is subjective in nature and the root cause of many of the problems encountered in the research associated with performance appraisals. Performance appraisals are of importance to the organisation, as they often provide the only measure of an individual's contribution and

On the other hand, poor performance, or mediocre performance may lead to negative appraisals and consequences, including job termination or withholding of bonuses, awards, and promotions. Performance appraisals are a systemic means of ensuring quality of work performance, and thus achieving the strategic objectives and advancing the goals of the organization. These performance appraisals, in order to be effective, must be applied in a uniform, objective, fair and consistent manner over time. In addition, the expectations of the performance appraisal must be clearly understood and agreed upon by the supervisor and the employee. Objectivity and fairness in the appraisal system build trust in the organization as well as high morale among employees.

There is a performance based appraisal system, also known as the merit system. This is how each employee is reviewed on their personal performances. This occurs with their supervisors twice a year. It was based on the ideas, cooperation, and dependability of the workers. They did consider the output of the worker as a separate entity to be reviewed. The audits are based on a 100 point system. Most of their

To conclude, we can say that the Performance Management System does not include fairness in what regards to performance. One can see that there is a lot of variation in employees’ performance but those differences are not being pointed and consequently there are no consequences in the compensation package of low,

Nevertheless, tying bonuses to performances requires a detailed area-specific planning and a controlling system which did not exist except for a few pilot areas within the company. There are also no specific performance-oriented guidelines for personnel appraisal systems. It is the decision of management in the different business areas to use individual goal

Performance appraisal process if made clear and transparent can help a lot to avert low morale in employees. Fair, trustworthy, and transparent processes for performances management and resource allocation help to meet people’s drive to defend.

However, the value of a fair determination of the employee, can take only by a number of factors, some of which is a very subjective evaluation for the moment, time and attendance, while others are very subjective, and instantly, attitude and personality. Human resources or personnel department records on the basis of accurate assessment of the objective factors, but no equipment, accurate measurement of subjective factors. Nevertheless, the evaluation of these factors must be done every employee has the advantage of in order to achieve full appreciation.