Question

Please Use your keyboard (Don't use handwriting) Thank you..

please re-write my answer to be  unique answers, please. (Use your own words, don't copy and paste)

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.
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. What role does such a system have in distorting performance appraisals?
4. Write your suggestions/opinions to create better performance appraisal system in the Organization.

______________

please re-write my answer to be  unique answers, please. (Use your own words, don't copy and paste)

1.)The evaluation process employed here is called vitality curve. It has a negative effect on employee morale and potential, where the superiors start to rank from best to worst ranks the subordinate according to their merits. The relative position of each employee is expressed in terms of the numerical rank. The appraiser rates the employee from highest to the lowest, which is an easy method. However this method speaks only about the position ans says nothing about how much better or how worse an employee is in comparision to other employees.

2.) There are many consequences faced by the managers due to such evaluation some of them are as below:

Turning Promotion into Pay cuts: The employe may refuse promotions. If the employee get promoted, they might expect much better performance, if not his rating will be reduced, thus there will be reduction in compensation.

Encouraging Sabotage:They start adding excellent co worker with the existing employee to create the competition. This make difficult to improve the rating for the exisitng employees. Thus making difficult to arrive the rating, as everyone works equally.

Reduction in Productivity: The workforce is reduced, even if the workload is high and hiring managers are put in intense pressure of hiring new candidates. Due to which low calibre employees are hired, whcih affects the productivity.

This has a negative impact on the entity's growth. As this doesn't give oppurtunity for the employee. This destroy the morale of the employee. It leads to discrimination. It is said that rank-and-yank puts success or failure of the organization on the shoulders of the individual worker.

3.) This system is distorting performance appraisal in many ways. Few discussed below

• Mangers commit mistakes, while evaluating the performance, and this may show variations in the ranking.
• The employee's appraisal is completely, based on the positive quality, where as the negative factors are completely ignored. Even if the worker has failed to perform in one area, he is rated high, based on the performance in other area.
• There can be personal biases, as that the way the supervisor sees him, whether he like or dislikes him, has a tremendous effect on performance rating.
• There can be a spillover effect, where the employee who performed well in the past is assumed to perform well in the present and he is rated same as the past.
• Management can have a central tendency, where they rate all the employees as a average performer. They will neither rate them low nor high.

4.) The are many appraisal system, which are much better than this system, like Self Assessments, Peer Assessments, 360-Degree Appraisal and negotiated performance appraisal, which will encourage the employees to perform better. Any one of these methods can be applied, which can eliminate the consequences faced from earlier one. These methods may avoid the conflict between the employees and employer, as the individual performance is monitor, based on the achievements and completion of target set for the given period.

Answer 1

Give a thumbs up if you find the answer helpful.

(1)

The vitality curve method of evaluation is used in the given case. In this method, the appraiser ranks the employees from best to worst. The ranking is based on the merits. Though the method of evaluation is easy for the appraiser, it does not evaluate the employees in comparison with one another.

(2)

The consequences of the vitality curve evaluation method:

1. Fear of pay cuts: If an employee gets promoted using this method, better performance will be expected. If the employee fails to perform as per expectation, the pay will reduce. Due to the fear of pay cuts, the employee may refuse the promotions.

2. Encourage sabotage: The managers can hire an excellent employee. Such actions may result in the decreased motivation of other employees. The employees will find it challenging to meet the performance level of the newly hired excellent employee.

3. Reduced productivity: The evaluation of ranking the employees might reduce the workforce. This would create pressure on the remaining workers. The managers would hire low caliber employees due to pressure to hire people fast. Such decisions impact productivity as the existing employees do not get the opportunity and new employees do not have enough expertise.

(3)

How the evaluation process system distorts performance appraisals:

· Due to the manager’s mistakes, the variations in ranking may be observed.

· The evaluation system focuses on the positive side of the employee. If the employee fails in one area, this side might be ignored due to the other positive sides.

· The evaluation process can be distorted due to personal bias. The appraisers may rate the employees based on their likes and dislikes.

· In this evaluation process, better past performance can be considered to rate the present performance of employees. This ‘spillover effect’ might distort the performance appraisal.

· The central tendency, in which all the employees are ranked average, might be observed due to the inability or unwillingness of the manager.

(4)

The organization may adopt some better performance appraisal systems such as 360-degree appraisal. In 360-degree performance appraisal, the evaluation is done by different evaluators such as peers, customers, superiors, as well as self-assessment. Such a multi-rater evaluation reduces the chances of bias. Reduced bias will result in the most accurate performance appraisal. Apart from that, the organization may look for BARS (Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale) to evaluate the performance of employees.