Question

Please Use your keyboard (Don't use handwriting)

MGT 211

I need new and unique answers, please. (Use your own words, don't copy and paste)

subject is human resources management

Case Study

Imagine you’re the VP of Human resources for a Fortunate 100 company. You’ve spent your entire career attempting to enhance the workplace for employees to support their productive work in the organization. While you understand that bottom-line decisions often dominate many of the matters you have to address. You have worked hard to ensure that the employees were treated with respect and dignity in all interactions that affected them. You aligned the hiring process to serve the strategic needs of the organization, as well as implemented an effective performance management system. You truly believe in the progress you’ve made in helping the organization achieve its goals. You simply couldn’t imagine doing things differently. However, concern that the performance management process is becoming less effective because managers are inflating employee ratings has led 15 percent of all large organizations to adjust their performance management to what is frequently called “rank and yank”. Under such a system, managers are evaluated as 1, 2, 3 or 4, with 1 being the highest rating and 4 the lowest. In many cases, managers are required to give a 4 rating to the lowest 10 percent of employees each year. Those individuals receiving a rating of 4 for two consecutive years are often let go from the organization.
The intent behind this system is that the throughout the two year process, evaluators are to meet frequently with the four employees, counsel them and provide necessary development opportunities. Employees in organizations that employ such a performance management system often view this process unbearable. They view the performance management process as punitive, one in which the organization is attempting to rid itself of higher-paid older workers. In at least one case, Ford Motor Company employees have filed a lawsuit to stop this practice¬¬¬¬¬¬¬—and prevailed .Ford removed the punitive nature of its evaluation system—and focused it more on counselling and performance improvement of the lowest-rated employees rather than elimination from the organization.

Source: Textbook- DeCenzo, D. A., & Robbins, S. P. (2013). Human resource management

ASSIGNMENT QUESTIONS:
1.   What type of evaluation process would you say is being used in this case? Explain this evaluation process.[ Marks 2]
2.   What effect, if any, do you believe rank and yank evaluations have on managers? Do you see these effects as positive or negative? Defend your position.[ 3]
3.   What role does such a system have in distorting performance appraisals?[Marks 2.5]
4.   Write your suggestions/opinions to create better performance appraisal system in the Organization. [Marks 2.5]

__________

*************Please re-write this answer  I need new and unique answers, please. (Use your own words, don't copy and paste) *******************************************

1. What type of evaluation process would you say is being used in this case? Explain this evaluation process.

The selection process is directed more at the "Forced Selection" strategy. The performance evaluation process requires a more "force-fitting" approach to fit into a bell-curve distribution the performance evaluation scores. Another "Rank & Yank," approach which required managers to give a 4 percent to the lowest 10 percent of employees each year, came into practice for dealing with rating inflation. The outlined framework is all of the highest, medium-range and low performers being defined by the organisation. The machine is also incredibly rigid.

2. What effect, if any, do you believe rank and yank evaluations have on managers? Do you see these effects as positive or negative? Defend your position.

I think the result is really detrimental, so it's called punitive. The rating will be a feedback and contribute to solutions to a good strategy to address the challenges. The program doesn't concentrate hard on changing it-even if there is a 4 ranking for two years in a row. It only demonstrates what is possible.

3. What role does such a system have in distorting performance appraisals?

Employees started to see this as bullying–and the performance appraisals were more an barrier than an assist. It is a force-fit strategy that works more at segregating workers into poor, average, and high-performing performers. The success management framework no longer is a tool for feed forward. The "ordered" method is often very restrictive and gives little leeway when it comes to various skills or positions.

4. Write your suggestions/opinions to create better performance appraisal system in the Organization.

(i) Performance evaluations will certainly include a ranking framework–which can still involve the following:

(ii) Interactive discussions during the year

(iii) Continuous input processes Clear mechanism

(iv) Exchange as much details as practicable with staff on the performance evaluation mechanism.

(v) Making performance appraisal more unbiased, which tends to minimize the prejudice factor Counselling with workers who re-establish.

Answer 1

1) This evaluation process may be said to be a 'forced ranking' system, i.e., evaluators are compelled to engage in comparisons and rank the employees from the highest to the lowest performing by assigning them different ratings. The paragraph does not mention whether there are specific parameters upon which employee are to be rated. Hence, basis for evaluation could end up being subjective.

2) The managers may find themselves in a tricky and difficult situation, as they have to rank a few employees as being the least performing, even though they may be performing quite well. It may also end up promoting excessive competition among the employees. Furthermore, it may lead to rancor between the manager and the employee in case the latter is not rated well, thereby possibly spoiling their professional alliance. Output will suffer as a result.

3)The 'rank and yank' system can lead to subjective performance appraisals in the absence of specific parameters upon which the employees' performance is to be rated. More importantly, the system does not consider the actual performance of the employee but rather compares it against the other employees. This may lead to an employee, who is performing quite well as per the job demands, to be given a low rating just because the low rating has to be assigned to someone. The system can end up blindsiding the unique strengths and skill sets of different individuals and comparing them unjusty against one-another. It can build tension among the employees due to its nature.

4)i)Performance appraisal system can be constructive instead of punitive, which rates employees basis their own performance and not basis comparison with others

ii) Setting individualized goals for each employee and rating them based on their achievement of those goals

iii) For a more holistic feedback, the employee can engage in self-evaluation and evaluation can also be sought from the employee's juniors, colleagues, department head etc. (360 degree feedback)