LOLA’S PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
QUESTION 1: Evidence that this case provides for formulating and implementing a systematic approach to performance appraisal
For performance appraisal to be successful the following should be put into consideration; Measures and standards-this involves strategic thinking, job knowledge, setting standards writing and setting objectives and identifying competencies. Communicate expectations-this will involve verbal communication, listening, negotiating and reaching agreement. Plan-this involves planning, decision making, problem solving organizing and budgeting. Monitor assists and control-this involves problem solving, coaching, counseling, instructing, training and giving feedback. Appraise- this involves observing, recalling, judgment and data analysis. Feedback-this involves listening, empathy, planning, negotiating, conflict resolution and reaching consensus. This case provides evidence that the employees should know exactly what is expected of them (Gomez-Mejia et al 1998).
The purpose of performance evaluation is to give a better understanding of personal strengths and weaknesses of an employee against what is expected of them, identify areas where the employee can develop, establish areas of agreement between the employee and the supervisors, improve communication and provide the employee with an opportunity to reflect on their abilities and capacities and foster individual goal setting. They are also essential for the employee to understand in detail the culture and values that the organization holds dear. The end result of this is a employee who is highly committed and loyal to the organization (Gomez-Mejia et al 1998).
QUESTION2: Whether I think that Lola’s evaluation was valid and reliable and whether Frank had a stereotypical mind while when filling out the evaluation.
I think that Lola’s evaluation was not valid and reliable. This is because it is evident from the case that the performance evaluation had delayed for a long duration. This could result to Regency Effect where by Rating is influenced by the most recent behavior ignoring the commonly demonstrated behaviors during the entire appraisal period (Gomez-Mejia et al 1998).
I also think that Frank had a stereotypical mind when filling out the evaluation. This is evident because from the case we can see that he was not in good terms with Lola. The evaluation was also based on Horn Effect: This is where by Lola’s performance is completely appraised on the basis of a weakness to which she is perceived to have. This is likely to result in a rating which is lower than would otherwise be. Her sexual conversation with Frank could have driven Him to rate her low. Another bias which is evident from this case is personal bias as illustrated by how her supervisor feels about each of the employees working under his supervision. This has an enormous impact on the rating of their performances. From this case, Frank shared with Sue about the performance of Lola and this could have affected his rating (Gomez-Mejia et al 1998).
In my view, this measure was not reliable since reliability is a measure of consistency and given that there were factors beyond the control of Lola, then this indicates that the measure could not be relied upon as to give a clear performance measure. The timing for performance measure is also essential so that employees are evaluated in time to avoid bias (Gomez-Mejia et al 1998).
QUESTION3: WHAT IN THE CASE INDICATES THE PROBLEM WITH THE SUPERVISOR’S EVALUATION?
The case cites that the greatest weakness with Frank was that he lacked administrative follow-through. Lola asserts that her poor performance was due to factors beyond her control. The failure of system should not be associated to employees .There is no chance given to Lola to explain this and thus there is no listening, negotiating and empathy which are key in evaluation process (Gomez-Mejia et al 1998).
Feedback is an important component of performance appraisal. Positive feedback will be acceptable to most employees. Negative feedback however needs some skill to ensure that it is not met with resentment and resistance. The employee should be handled delicately to ensure that such a negative feedback does not affect them and the organization negatively both in the short run and long run (Gomez-Mejia et al 1998).
Question 4: HOW LOLA, HER SUPERVISOR AND HUMAN RESOURCE COMMUNICATE BETWEEN EACH OTHER AND WHETHER PERFORMANCE INTERVIEW SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE FORMALLY ESTABLISHED AND CONDUCTED.
There is poor communication between Lola and the supervisor and the human resource. This communication can be made more formal. Lola’s inability to perform is seen through her discussion with Sue .This implies that the performance evaluation lacked proper communication which involves listening, negotiating, empathy, conflict resolution and reaching an agreement. This organization can improve this by: Forming a team of people to conduct the appraisal. Having more than one person ensures a variety of views, and the team can monitor its members, making sure personal opinions do not affect the job appraisal. Discussing and deciding the criteria for assessment before the actual appraisal. The employer or supervisor should take into consideration the employee's job description and instructions he may have regarding the job. senior manager, to discuss job performance. A one-on-one conversation will not intimidate an employee in the same way as a group interview. Compare the employee's job description to her specific goals, job description and tasks. A discussion on whether the expectation have been met should follow and this should be done through an open discussion which should offer the employee a chance to share her own views and perhaps question objectively her rating in the appraisal if necessary. They should how a positive, constructive attitude by presenting negative concerns as opportunities for growth or improvement, rather than failure. This will make Lola and other workers to be acceptable of criticism. (Gomez-Mejia et al 1998).
This should be done repeatedly with the employee and the team and as a result will provide other alternatives ways of doing things (Gomez-Mejia et al 1998).
QUESTION 5: HOW LOLA’S ACCUSATION OF SEXUAL HARRASSMENT CAN AFFECT HER PERSONAL WORK PERFORMANCE AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
The accusation can lead to victimization by her supervisors thus interfering with the flow of information and good communication which is essential in any organization. This will lower her morale and self esteem her performance will go down. When there is a poor performance appraisal in an organization; Employees become hesitant to work supervisors and may reject the opinions of supervisors and their manager's opinions and input. Employees will have on record ore grievances which are related to issues of performance. Employees don't keep their manager informed and avoid talking to their superiors. Employees will go to extreme lengths to conceal their performance difficulties (Gomez-Mejia et al 1998).
References
Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Balkin, D. B., and Cardy, R. L. (1998). Managing human resources (2nd ed.). Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.
