Running head: PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Performance Evaluation Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation 1 2 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Performance Evaluation Introduction The success of any organization is depended on performance management, which is a crucial element in the human resources of any company. According to DeNisi & Murphy (2017), performance management information assists the administration of an organization to make informed decisions based on the progress and history of the organization. Also, company operations decisions impact is evaluated through performance management. Organizations should strategize to enhance performance appraisal that is not affected by any intentional and unintentional distortion since poor performance management exposes any company to failure. The essay identifies and outlines the approaches that the organization should focus on to enhance performance management and improve on the competitive streak. Intentional Rating Distortion Factors Impartiality and disinterest form the basis of an effective performance management system. Organizations always want a system that recognizes and rewards top performers and give them opportunities to grow their skills. In contrast, low performers are given a chance to through advice and the necessary motivation to improve their performance. Unfortunately, in most cases, this never happens. Employee performance is not an easy task to carry out, but one strategy utilized by well-established organizations is performance rating. There can be a better way to evaluate employee abilities than depend on their peers, subordinates, and supervisors. Unfortunately, companies are affected by a greater number of rater biases that impact ratings. Biases twist employee’s ratings either too high or too low. Eventually, it becomes challenging to getting a true estimate of employee performance when an organization fails to take into account PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 3 rater biases. Therefore, human resource personnel needs to have an understanding of rater biases. Such knowledge avoids decision-making errors and enhances an organization’s capability to utilize performance rating fully. As mentioned in the case, all the Principals are involved in the evaluation of the engineers, and this multiple source evaluation and feedback helped check favoritism and promoted a merit-based culture. However, owing to the situation of massive hiring and 75% of them being from a principal's alma mater and him being heavily involved is a question of conflicting interests. There are multiple rating distortions that may arise out of this situation. These may arise from both Demetri and the other principals. People are normally geared up to put emphasis on single attributes that are standing out. If it is a positive quality, it will affect ratings of other qualities or attributes, and this is a halo effect (Schaerer et al., 2018). The halo effect bias is a single positive rating that leads raters to inflate other ratings. In employee rating data, it is essential to carefully consider evidence of the halo effect. Demetri may fall for an unintentional halo effect where he may have an overall positive perception of the engineers from his institute and might tend to rate them higher by default without getting into details. This may also tend to overshadow poor performances to some extent. Demetri was active in pushing the hiring initiative, and there are nine of the new engineers from his university eventually. So if it’s in the intentional rating distortion, he may want to have a better relationship with the colleagues, so the new engineers from the same institute may advance this point. In addition, as a new Principal of the firm, the new subordinates from the same institute can minimize conflicts with him so that he can control them more easily. This is a discrimination form that impacts negatively and may cause a major challenge. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 4 As Javidmehr& Ebrahimpour (2015), state that when the halo effect makes a rater think of an employee as a perfect angel, the horns effect makes a rater view them as devils. The horn's effect is a trend where a single negative character causes raters to give low ratings on everything. It is challenging to make sound decisions with the horn effect, just like a halo effect. On the other hand, other principals may have a horn rater effect, where they associate these engineers with Demetri more than them as individual employees. This is the opposite of the halo effect and may cause the principals to have a negative perception of such employees even if they are contributing more. A type of intentional bias that may creep in is the leniency bias where Demetri may rate these engineers leniently compared to other principals. Intentional bias is a question of integrity and should be dealt with from a disciplinary standpoint. In the unintentional rating distortion, the result of the new engineers is from the same institution with Demetri, and it leads to suspicion of other Principals. Then it may cause the other principals to feel Demetri is untrusted. Minimizing Intentional Rating Distortion The training programs that could minimize the factors are; training on unintentional rater biases before getting involved in a performance evaluation. Also, training on conflict of interests as in the case of Demetri; ideally, he should declare it to be a conflict of interest and let the other principals take charge of this situation. Sensitivity training to avoid intentional/unintentional stereotyping of individuals from similar backgrounds. Besides, training all managers on best performance management practices like smart goals, objective evaluation, among others. Soft skills training can improve communication. Once the communication skills of the employees are improved, it will avoid misunderstanding of each other. So the discontented will be eliminated. 5 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Team training can help the organization become more united. If the firm is united, the problem of this situation will be solved. Conclusion In conclusion, my advice is to use both soft skills training and team training. Because it can not only improve the communication skills of the employees but also enhance the team solidification. Once the team became united, and have excellent communication, the problem of rating distortion will be solved. Employee performance is crucial, and depending on employees to evaluate and rate one another is a treasured puzzle. An organization should not let rater predisposition and bias prevent it from utilizing this crucial information. A careful review of employee rating data is the best way to counteract rater bias. As a result, a company can avoid the use of inaccurate data to make the wrong decisions about worker performance. 6 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION References DeNisi, A. S., & Murphy, K. R. (2017). Performance appraisal and performance management: 100 years of progress?. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 421. Javidmehr, M., & Ebrahimpour, M. (2015). Performance appraisal bias and errors: The influences and consequences. International Journal of Organizational Leadership, 4, 286-302. Schaerer, M., Kern, M., Berger, G., Medvec, V., & Swaab, R. I. (2018). The illusion of transparency in performance appraisals: When and why accuracy motivation explains unintentional feedback inflation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 144, 171-186.
Purchase answer to see full attachment