These post replies need to be substantial and constructive in nature. They should add to the content
of the post and evaluate/analyze that post answer. including one scholarly peer-reviewed reference.
Minimum 100 words.
Judgmental and Mechanical Methods of Assigning Overall Performance Score
Performance of employees need to be evaluated for better work productivity and quality.
Accurate performance appraisals have improved job performance at workplaces (Chaponda,
2014). The annual evaluation of performance leads to employee motivation. Performance
appraisal rating methods can be positive or negative on work performance and employee
motivation (Chaponda, 2014). It is important to use consistent and accurate rating method
that reflect employee’s performance. Here is a comparison between judgmental and
mechanical rating methods of David Kuhn case study.
The judgmental measurement of employee performance is about an individual who could be
a manger or supervisor who knows the work of another and able to judge his work
(Gatewood, Field & Barrick, 2015). In judgmental rating the performance of employee is
subjective and prone to bias. The services are measured in numbers to assume the
performance of an employee. Stewart & Lusk (1994), mentioned that “If the cues available to
judges are poor predictors, then more accurate measurement of them might not improve
judgment”. (p. 7).
Kuhn’s performance score is showing weights of many competencies in which many of them
are omitted. The computation process of this performance scoring lack comprehensiveness,
validity and reliability since not all competencies information are available and no
explanation is made for each competency. Cognitive information reflects the task information
in terms of how a weigh of competencies and their reliability (Stewart & Lusk, 1994). Using
judgmental method here is not easy to analyze each weight of competency and finalize the
required score per competency. It will negatively affect the employee’s motivation, job
satisfaction and future performance. Also, it will affect the organization negatively in terms
of work productivity and quality.
The mechanical method of rating is clear in computation process and information given about
each competency scoring is clear. There are many factors to consider using the mechanical
method over the judgmental method which include comprehensiveness, clarity and reliability
(Aguinis, 2013). Using mechanical method of rating is reliable and accurate to reflect the
performance of an employee (Aguinis, 2013). Less bias is noticed in mechanical method
compared to judgmental method. The scoring system of mechanical method will give a clear
computation process of performance scores with the availability to add any comments
(Aguinis, 2013). Indeed, employees will be motivated if the appraisal process is based on
accurate and current job descriptions (Chaponda, 2014). Mechanical method of rating can
have a direct positive impact on the employees’ motivation to give their best at work
(Chaponda, 2014). Therefore, it will improve work productivity and quality of an
organization.
It is best to use mechanical method of rating rather than judgmental method in Kuhn’s case. It
is more reliable, accurate and comprehensive method that reflect the performance. For an
organization to be successful, it is important to evaluate their employees efficiently and
accurately using clear rating system. The positive employees’ performance is the success of
any organization (Chaponda, 2014).
References:
Aguinis, H. (2013). Performance management (3rd ed.). The Effect of Performance Appraisal
on Employee Motivation: A Survey of Slum Based Non-Governmental Organizations in
Nairobi (Doctoral dissertation, United States International University-Africa).
Gatewood, R., et al. (2015). Human resource selection (8th ed.). Boston: Cengage Learning.
Stewart, T. R., et al. (1994). Seven components of judgmental forecasting skill: Implications
for research and the improvement of forecasts. Journal of Forecasting, 13(7), 579–
599. https://doi.org/10.1002/for.3980130703
These post replies need to be substantial and constructive in nature. They should add to the content
of the post and evaluate/analyze that post answer. including one scholarly peer-reviewed reference.
Minimum 100 words.
It is necessary to evaluate the performance of employees to improve the quality and
productivity of the work. Accurate performance evaluations have a positive impact on
workplace productivity (Chaponda, 2014). Employee motivation is increased as a result of
conducting annual performance reviews. Methods of judging performance can have a
beneficial or negative impact on work output and motivation (Chaponda, 2014). When
evaluating an employee’s performance, make sure to adopt a grading system that is both
consistent and accurate.
In this case study, the two rating methods used by David Kuhn are contrasted:
judgmental and mechanical. Employee performance is judged on the basis of how well a
manager or supervisor knows another’s job and can appraise it. Employee performance is rated
in a subjective and arbitrary manner using judgmental criteria. The services are counted in
order to estimate an employee’s output, and more accurate measurement of them might not
improve judgment if the cues provided to judges, are poor predictors.
When looking at Kuhn’s overall performance, it’s clear that several of his essential
talents are under-weighted. Since not all competencies information is given and no explanation
is made for each competency, the computation process for this performance ranking lacks
comprehensiveness, validity, and reliability. In terms of how competencies are weighted and
their dependability, cognitive information represents the information about the task (Stewart &
Lusk, 1994). It’s difficult to determine the required score for each competency when using the
judgmental method. It will have a detrimental impact on the employee’s motivation, job
happiness, and ability to perform well in the future. It will also have a harmful impact on the
organization’s productivity and quality of work. The computation process makes the
mechanical rating technique clear, and the information provided on the competency ranking is
straightforward as well.
The use of a mechanical approach over the judgmental method has numerous
advantages, such as comprehensiveness, clarity, and realism(Aguinis et al., 2012). Mechanical
methods of grading are dependable and accurate in assessing an employee’s
performance(Aguinis et al., 2012). When comparing the mechanical method to the judgmental
method, there is less evidence of bias. The mechanical method’s scoring system will make the
computation of performance scores apparent, and any comments can be added at any
time(Aguinis et al., 2012). An accurate and up-to-date job description will help encourage staff
during the appraisal process (Chaponda, 2014).
Using a mechanical rating system might help motivate staff to do their best work
(Chaponda, 2014). As a result, it will improve an organization’s productivity and overall
quality. This is an example when mechanical methods of ranking are preferable to judgmental
methods. These measurements are more dependable than others because they reflect the entire
picture.
The success of an organization depends on having a clear rating system in place for
evaluating its personnel efficiently and effectively. An organization’s success depends on its
people doing well (Chaponda, 2014).
References
Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R. K., & Joo, H. (2012). Using performance management to win
the talent war. Business Horizons, 55(6), 609–616.
Chaponda, N. C. (2014). The Effect of Performance Appraisal on Employee Motivation: A
Survey of Slum Based Non-Governmental Organizations in Nairobi (Doctoral
dissertation, United States International University-Africa).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2012.05.007
Stewart, T. R., & Lusk, C. M. (1994). Seven Components of Judgmental Forecasting Skill:
Implications for Research and the Improvement of Forecasts. 13, 579–599.
Question
There are a variety of factors that can affect the overall performance rating of an
individual. Aguinis (2019) defined two methods—judgmental and mechanical—for
reaching an overall score, and states that the mechanical approach is preferable in
most cases, particularly if performance objectives are not weighted.
Review “Case Study 6-1: Judgmental and Mechanical Methods of Assigning Overall
Performance Score at The Daily Planet” at the end of Chapter 6 in the Performance
Management textbook.
•
•
First use the judgmental method to come up with Kuhn’s overall performance
score.
Next, compute Kuhn’s overall performance score using the weights in the table.
Is there a difference in the scores? What are the implications for the employee rated,
for the supervisor, and for the organization? Which method would you use and why?
In developing your initial response, be sure to draw from, explore, and cite credible
reference materials.
Answer
CASE STUDY 6-1
Judgmental and Mechanical Methods of Assigning
Overall Performance Score at The Daily Planet
T:
The form here shows performance ratings
obtained by David Kuhn, a hypothetical
reporter at a major newspaper in the United
States. First, use the judgmental method to come up
with his overall performance score. What is Kuhn's
overall performance score?
Second, the form below actually omitted weight
information for the various competencies. The
weights are the following:
Now, compute Kuhn's overall performance score
using the weights in the table. Is there a difference
between the score computed using a subjective,
rather than the mechanical method? If yes, what
are the implications of these differences for the
employee being rated, for the supervisor, and for
the organization?
Competency
Weight
.15
Productivity
Quality of work
50
25
Dependability and adherence to company values and
policies
Contribution to effectiveness of others/unit
10
Name: David Kuhn
Dept.: International
Job Title
Reporter
Supervisor
John DuBoss
from Jan 19
Performance Period:
to Dec 19
Job Description: Researches and writes news, features, analyses, human interest stories. Develops and cultivates news
sources and contacts. Completes assignments by deadlines, ensuring accuracy by verifying sources. Attends newsworthy
events and interviews key sources. Respects confidentiality as appropriate.
Does not
fully meet
Unacceptable standards
Fully meets
standards
Significantly
exceeds
standards
Outstanding
1
3
4
5
Productivity-Production is high relative to time and re-
sources consumed, develops expected number of sto-
ries and covers beat adequately to ensure stories are
detected as they break, stories are developed within
time frame that enables deadlines to be met and ap-
propriate reviews are performed as they are refined.
*Adapted from R. J. Greene, 2003, "Contributing to Organizational Success Through Effective Performance Appraisal," Alexandria,
VA, Society for Human Resource Management
192
Chapter 6 Performance Analytics
193
2
3
5
Quality of work-Work meets quality standards and
established editorial standards: stories are written
in clear and appropriate manner, are consistent with
editorial policy, and are fair and balanced, research
is thorough and encompasses all relevant sources,
which are verified to ensure accuracy, works with
editors to revise and improve content, develops and
maintains network of contacts who can provide early
notification of breaking stories.
Dependability and adherence to company values and
policies--Consistently meets deadlines, conforms to
attendance policies, adapts to work demands, con-
forms to established values and policies, adheres to
ethical standards of the paper and the profession re-
spects confidentiality as appropriate, behaves in man-
ner that enhances the image of the paper
Contribution to effectiveness of others/unit-Works
with others within and outside the unit in a manner that
improves their effectiveness, shares information and
resources, develops effective working relationships:
builds consensus, constructively manages conflict
contributes to the effectiveness of own unit/group and
the paper
2
3
4
3
4
Purchase answer to see full
attachment