Appraising the Secretaries at City U
Do you think that the experts’ recommendations will be sufficient to get most of the administrators to fill out the rating forms properly? Why? Why not? What additional actions (if any) do you think will be necessary? While controversial, the recommendations would, in fact, encourage administrators to fill the forms out correctly. Using the more detailed form and not tying the performance ratings to salary increases would allow the managers to feel more free about rating the secretaries accurately. There would, however, need to be some strong training sessions (both for administrators and secretaries) to help them understand the new system.
Since all secretaries have traditionally received the same salary increases, and have been pleased with that, it would be advisable to consider lowering the maximum increase to an amount that could be given to all secretaries while staying within budget. Then all secretaries with a satisfactory rating or better would receive that increase. The experts recommended several things: 1. Change the form used to rate the secretaries and use a more clear and specific form : a sample graphic rating form. It is the most popular method that lists traits and performance values for each trait.
The administrator then has to check the score that best describes the performance for each trait. 2. The VP should not force the administrators to rate at least half their secretaries as something less than excellent. 3. The appraisal should not be linked to salary increases. Salary increases should be made on another basis than the performance appraisal. If the form used to rate the secretaries is changed, administrators will need an explanation and a training to fill in the new form. They must be familiar with the techniques and the new form.
They also need to understand and avoid problems related to appraisals. (Dessler & Huat, 2009) It is indeed a good idea to change the appraisal form. With the sample graphic rating is usefull when appraising performance on the actual job duties. In this case the administrator can assess how well the secretary exercised each duty. The old graphic rating scale with unclear standards can cause a lot of problems. It results in unfair appraisals because the traits and degrees of merit are ambiguous. To fix this problem, is to include more descriptive phrases as the experts recommended.
The VP should also consider the appraisal of the secretaries by someone else than the administrators. It could be a peer appraisal or even self-rating. 2 Do you think that the Vice President would be better off dropping graphic rating forms, substituting instead one of the other techniques we discussed in this chapter such as a ranking method? Why? Certainly other methods could be used. He has already had a taste of what would result if he went to a forced distribution or other ranking method. A BARS system might be best, but it could be costly to develop if the clerical staff has positions that are significantly different.
Ranking methods compare one employee to another, resulting in an ordering of employees in relation to one another. It results in an overall assessment of employees and is not specific to certain job components. Ranking is not the best options. Even if everyone performs well someone will still end up at the bottom. That is not fair and will not push the secretaries to do better. For the administrators it can be very difficult to make this kind of discriminations. (Performance Appraisal Methods) Forced distribution is a method of performance appraisal to rank employee but in order of forced distribution.
For example, the distribution requested with 10 or 20 percent in the top category, 70 or 80 percent in the middle, and 10 percent in the bottom. The advantages are that they force reluctant managers to make difficult decisions and identify the most and least talented secretaries. It sustains a high performance culture in which the workforce continuously improves. But there are also disadvantages. It can create a big and unhealthy competitiveness and besides discourage collaboration and teamwork. (Ngo) 3 What performance appraisal system would you develop for the secretaries if you were the Vice President?
Defend your answer. If the development costs are not too great, the BARS system would give the strongest solution to the current situation. The behavioral anchors would make it more difficult to just rate everyone at the top. It would also help to eliminate the different interpretations of what the rating scales mean. In my opinion, the BARS system is the best solution for the appraisal of the secretaries. The method bases evaluations on specific behaviors required for each individual position in an individual company.
It will not be easy to implement the BARS method. First an in-depth study must be done in order to describe and understand all the tasks performed by the secretaries. Second, you will have to know and understand the full range of behaviors an individual can have in carrying out these tasks. Then you will have to rate these behaviors. Finally, the result is a rating scale for each task. (Lloyd) The advantages are that it is behaviorally based and easy to use. Moreover it is individualized, it is designed uniquely for every position in the company.
Because it is action-oriented, employees can easily take steps to improve their performance. (Cocanougher & Ivancevich, 1978) Nevertheless, there are some drawbacks. The process of creating the BARS system is time-consuming and expensive. It also needs a high maintenance because jobs change over time. For the managers it is a lot of work, they need detailed information regarding the actions of their employees. (Cocanougher & Ivancevich, 1978) Despite the negative points, I think that the VP should implement this system in our case.