Performance Management Analysis

Case Study: ValUShop ValUShop is a for-profit cable, satellite, and broadcast television network, headquartered in Dallas,

Texas.

Mission

The mission of ValUShop is to maximize sales, provide superior value to our customers, and deliver

exceptional customer service while bringing high-end retail brands to customers at an unbeatable price.

Vision

At ValUShop, we intend to provide customers with a superior shopping experience bringing high-end

brands directly to customers through cable, satellite, and broadcast television networks with easy online

or phone order options.

Background

Five years earlier, ValUShop implemented a performance management system for all employees. The

performance management system was designed for operational employees (e.g., call center operators,

shipping clerks, etc.). It was also used to evaluate support staff (e.g., administrative assistants, television

hosts, IT technicians, etc.) because there was no system specifically geared toward support staff.

Review of the Performance Management Process

As the newly hired HR Director for ValUShop, you have been tasked by the VP of HR to address the

performance issues across several departments within the organization. After meeting with each

department and members of the leadership team, you discover several performance problems and

organizational issues. Key management challenges that were identified include poor employee

performance; legal concerns related to hiring, promotion, and firing practices; and employee concerns

related to inequity in pay raises and promotion, unclear expectations and goals, performance measures

that frequently change, and lack of consistent communication from management. Before making any

recommendations, you review HR files and have created the following list of issues that have surfaced:

• A large percentage of managers did not meet deadlines to complete an annual appraisal on each employee.

• There was confusion among employees and managers about what exactly needed to be completed and when.

• Employees thought the appraisal process was a ‘waste of time’ and ‘unfair.’ • An HR representative thought the system was not designed appropriately for all employees. • Little attention was given to identifying training needs. Furthermore, when needs were identified,

there was no follow-up with appropriate actions.

• Appraisals were led by managers who had little knowledge of the employee’s job(s). • Performance meetings were a once a year, one-way process with no performance objectives

established before the meeting started.

• Performance review meetings are held annually with little or no documentation. • Feedback meetings are held on short notice or not at all. • Managers do not know what to talk about in one-on-one performance review meetings. • Job descriptions are out-of-date, making performance expectations ambiguous. • No documentation is recorded to support performance reviews. • Managers conducting performance reviews are not knowledgeable on the company’s expectations

for delivering feedback and documenting performance.

• Managers and employees are under-prepared for performance conversations. • Reviews are conducted randomly.

• Manager appraisers were not matched to employees they oversee.