rewriting work

MEMORANDUM

TO: “CEO Smith” CEOSmith@mail.com

From:

Date:

Subject: Performance Appraisal Issues

Cc:

After reviewing Susan’s notes and researching the status on the various projects you have requested updates on, I have put together a proposal for three separate performance appraisal systems that apply to Megan Pearce as well as the organization as a whole. After careful consideration of Susan’s notes, it is clear that Megan is not completing projects as assigned. She is delinquent in the completion of employee training as well as the implementation of employee development programs. She has also shown a lack of motivation in recent history and has been known to use company time to conduct personal business.

Management by Objectives:

Management by Objectives (MBO) is an approach that allows employees and managers to set attainable goals together for an agreed upon review period (Ivorschi, 2012). This approach focuses on the bulk of involvement by both managers and subordinates to ensure everyone is in line with Blossoms Up! objectives. A large part of this approach involves setting clear goals outcomes with specific deadlines and relying on these measures to assess at what level these goals have been met (Gomez-Mejia, Balkin, & Cardy, 2016). In Megan’s case, we would meet to set smaller goals for the projects she is delinquent on to ensure she can complete these projects. Due to Megan’s delinquency in her performance, it would not be advisable to offer direct rewards or incentives for her progress at this time. Instead, it would be important to indicate to Megan that her completion of these goals will ensure she is not placed on further disciplinary action.

Self-review:

Self-review is an approach that allows employees to have input on the appraisal process. Self-review is an important assessment as it allows the performer to take an active role in the evaluation process, which can engage the employee in his or her performance management. This approach would be a good way for Megan to appraise herself and look at how she is performing and ideally become re-engaged and have a renewed sense of motivation (Kromrei, 2015). It is my opinion that while Megan could benefit from self-appraisal, this should not be the only performance appraisal method used. This method can have a large bias, as performers tend to be overconfident in personal abilities, resulting in an inaccurate self-assessment.

360-degree Feedback:

360-degree feedback refers to the appraisal of an employee by means of self-review, peer review, and subordinate review. This appraisal system can ensure an accurate measure of performance by offering perspectives from multiple individuals in the organization, rather than relying solely on the appraisal of the employee or a supervisor. One concern with this system is that Megan is pregnant which can result in rater bias either consciously or unconsciously (Gomez-Mejia, Balkin, & Cardy, 2016). In this case, it is possible that those individuals asked to rate her performance may be more lenient in their appraisals due to her pregnancy which could skew the rating in her favor, making this system ineffective. Another important factor to consider is the possibility that each rater will rate differently based on his or her interaction with the employee. While this would be an effective tool at gathering a full view of the employee’s performance, these ratings should not be used to determine pay raises or promotions (DeNisi, 2007).

Recommendation

My recommendation is to continue to monitor Megan’s performance and implement the objectives-based appraisal system, MBO. Megan has shown a real lack of motivation and work ethic in recent months and has let personal circumstances affect her performance. By addressing her delinquency on particular projects with specific and achievable goals, Megan could be successful in turning around her performance and her department as needed. While she has had performance issues, it is important to keep in mind that Megan’s increased fatigue and frequent breaks are not opportunities that Blossoms Up! is looking to address as performance issues. Under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, Blossoms Up! is required to provide reasonable accommodations to pregnant employees in a similar manner provided to any other employee with a medical condition (U.S. equal employment opportunity commission, 2017).

References

DeNisi, A. S. (2007). 360-Degree Feedback. In S. G. Rogelberg (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 809-812). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Reference. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/ps/i.do?p=GVRL&sw=w&u=uphoenix_uopx&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CCX3470600327&asid=a75310b8d01e921de83dcc4e84138b3b

Gomez-Mejia, L.R., Balkin, D., & Cardy, R. (2016). Managing human resources (8th ed.). Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Ivorschi, R. (2012, 4). Basis for promoting performance and efficiency growht of public entities, management by objectives. Revista Română de Statistică, 60(4), 39-48.

Kromrei, H. (2015). Enhancing the Annual Performance Appraisal Process: Reducing Biases and Engaging Employees Through Self-Assessment. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 28(2), 53-64. doi:10.1002/piq.21192

U.S. equal employment opportunity commission. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/pregnancy.cfm