ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR & LEADERSHIP 2 Organizational Behavior & Leadership Performance evaluation identifies with performance appraisals (PA). It is a periodicand systematic process that is used to assess the job performances on the individualemployees concerning productivity according to a preset organizational objectives andcriteria (Robbins & Judge, 2007). The areas of considerations identifies with futureimprovement potential, organizational citizenship behavior, task accomplishments,weaknesses and strong points among other aspects (DelPo, 2012). Performance evaluationdata is collected with judgmental evaluation, personnel evaluations and objective productionevaluation. Considering this case study, it has been noted that the engineer had previous exposurewith the aerospace industry. He is considered detail oriented, bright and hardworking. Theengineer is task oriented considering that he made vital changes to the middle sizedmanufacturing company that led to massive savings in costs resonating with energy andsafety hazards. Despite the current developments, it has been noted that the engineer isresented by the fellow co-workers. The engineer is not ready to be evaluated citing littleconfidence with the company’s system of approaching the evaluation processes. He arguesthat rating scales are defective focusing on relationships and personal traits (Robbins &Judge, 2007). The manager has been considering putting in place the 360 degree evaluation plan,but he is doubtful whether the stubborn engineer will accept. The engineer at most times paysless attention to the manager when he is addressing the coworkers. The 360 degree feedbackidentifies with multi-rater feedback, multi source assessment and multi source feedback. Thismodel incorporates the feedback particularly from the members of the employees. Thismeans that the manager considers the direct feedback from the teams within the employee’speers, subordinates, self evaluation and supervisors.
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR & LEADERSHIP 3 In some cases, evaluations from the external forces are considered resonating withsuppliers and customers and other influential stakeholders (Jensen, 2007), this maybeperformance by the application of traditional performance appraisal or by upward feedback(Robbins & Judge, 2007). The results obtained are used in setting developmental map andplan. This is critical in developing administrative decisions, particularly relating topromotions and pay. The manager noted with concerns that the engineer was characterizedwith medium rating on friendly aspects, low medium rating on workplace neatness and lowmedium rating on the attitude (DelPo, 2012). The company reflects on friendly rating, workplace neatness rating and attitude rating.It was noted that the friendly rating on the part of the engineer was low considering that hedid not respect the inputs of the other employees (Jensen, 2007). It has been noted that workfriendly environment gears at successful work relationships. This is critical in cultivatingtrust, diversity, mindfulness, interrelatedness, respect, varied interactions and effectivecommunication models. Rating on workplace neatness gears is critical in defining theimpression created by the leader in terms of work organization (Robbins & Judge, 2007).Research indicates that un-neat leaders display unreliability, inefficiency, undependability,incompetency and disorganized in nature (DelPo, 2012). This is despite the actual workoutput. Rating on attitude identifies with the negative and positive views of the work, people,events, things and the general outlook. Attitude correlates with emotions that define theability to perceive issues. Research indicates that friendly aspects, work neatness and attitudeare among the highly valued inputs in the organizational evaluations. Employees are evaluated on objectives set, documented employee input, documentedleader input, verbal feedbacks and follow-ups among other considerations (Jensen, 2007).Other areas of considerations identifies with initiatives, ambitions, attendance, cooperation,attitude, communication skills, organizational oriented, general focus, integrity, previous
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR & LEADERSHIP 4evaluation improvements, effective duty allocations, technical knowledge, meeting deadlines,productivity and quality of work. Other considerations identifies with reliability, stressmanagement, pitching in, teamwork and performance levels (DelPo, 2012). The merits of including the peers, supervisors and the subordinates in evaluationprocesses identify with the adding relevance, usefulness and in-depth information to the staffmembers. This is considering that the managers find it challenging in evaluating employees(Robbins & Judge, 2007). Effectiveness is enhanced by incorporating peers, subordinates andsupervisors in the employee’s evaluations. The disadvantages of using the peers, subordinatesand supervisors in employee evolutions identify with biasness and possible set ups leading tolegal issues. This means that information gathered maybe irrelevant, giving the wrong pictureof the employee being evaluated (Robbins & Judge, 2007). Performance evaluation used in analyzing the performance data identifies withobjective production, personnel evaluation and the judgmental evaluation. Research indicatesthat judgmental evaluations are the most common among the evaluation methods. The threemethods critically bring out the shape of the employees, which is critical in the success orfailure of the organization. It has been noted that the three models enhances on employeefeedback provision, developing employees, counseling employees, discussing compensations,conveying compensations, enhancing disciplinary measures and defining the job status(DelPo, 2012). Common bias and errors in the evaluations identifies with the stereotyping,halo effects, similar to me errors and consensus tendencies. Accuracy is emphasized in thiscase to provide reliability of the information collected (Robbins & Judge, 2007). Reflecting on the case study, it has been noted that the best model applicable in theevaluating the engineer is best administered by the performance management team and thehuman resources management team through 360 degree feedback performed several timesper year. The fact that the engineer is against evaluations on the annual basis calls for regular
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR & LEADERSHIP 5evaluations which has better implications to the employees and to the organization in general.This means that evaluations to be conducted in surprising and in unexpected feedbacksystems (Jensen, 2007). References
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR & LEADERSHIP 6DelPo, A. (2012). How to Conduct Employee Evaluations. Retrieved August 11, 2012, from Nolo.com: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/employee-evaluations-how-to- conduct-29547.htmlJensen, J. (2007). Employee evaluation: It is a Dirty Job, but Somebodys got to do it. The Grantsmanship Center , 1-15.Robbins, S. P. & Judge, T. A., (2007). Organizational behavior. (12th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.