Let Task

Individual task outcomes should also be evaluated. The value of using common sets of evaluation criteria Is better in the long run because It will be the same across the board. This will make the process fair to all the employees that are being evaluated. To be evaluated on only one or two out of the three mentioned above would be unfair to all of the employees. If one employee was exceptional on behavior and Individual task outcomes and another employee was exception on behavior and traits rating on just behavior and traits would not be fair to the first employee.

Rating employees on a broader scale produces better employees in the long run. They have the three areas that they can work on and excel to become a better fit for the organization. Now the 360-degree evaluation works by evaluating the employees on the set criteria however their direct supervisor is not the only person evaluating them. These evaluations are performed by the customers, suppliers, supervisors, and coworkers. This Is very diverse way of rating an individual’s performance. One could have a certain behavior around the boss but once he/she Is out of sight the Individual may retreat other employees poorly.

This Is a major advantage to a 360-degree evaluation since the employees have to keep a good rapport with all people they contact. On the other hand the 360-degree evaluation also has some disadvantages. I have an example that has happened to me and my co-workers due to an evaluation of this type. I worked for a large banking organization and we had phone contact with the customers discussing their credit card application. We either told them we approved them or if they were decline. No matter the decision, surveys were sent out Mandalay.

No matter how nice and courteous I would be to someone if I did not approve them and give them a high enough credit line that survey would not come back with positive marks. Everyone found this out early on and began to give In to customer demands and thus the banks credit loses started to Increase. In this case the 360-degree can have negative Impacts on the company If the employees start to cater to one aspect of it and the employees if they do honest work and decline Commonly used methods of performance evaluations like written essays, graphic eating scales, and forced comparisons all have their similarities and differences.

For instance written essays and rating scales both have to be filled out by the supervisor. They can relay the same evaluation in the end, but the written essay might mean more to an employee since it takes the manager more effort to write. On the other hand the written essay could be a bad thing if the writing skills of the managers are not up to par. Forced comparisons, like the other methods, are good at measuring and ranking your employees abilities, however ranking your employees can turn into popularity contest instead of a true ranking.

I chose these three methods because my current employer uses a combination of all three. We have the graphical part that measures everyone on the same scale. Then we have the essay part which covers skills and goals not mentioned in the graphical part, and then the managers meet to rank all of the employees 1-5. I think when used in combination these three commonly used methods work the best. Used individually all 3 of these method also have bias’ and errors. As mentioned the essay method is only as good as the manager’s ability to write the essay.

If a manager is unable to string a complete sentence together the employee is not going to see the managers intentions through the written word. With the graphical method while easier for the managers since they have a form to fill out it can be ineffective since it only ranks the employees on the topics that are provided on the forms. A manager might have a specialized employee that does something that no other employee does but has no way of expressing this since it is a basic form. And the final method of forced comparisons ranks the employees as if it were a popularity notes.

If manager is fond of 4 employees and only has 20 there is a good chance that those 4 employees will always rank in the top one fifth leaving an employee that does comparable or better work on the outside looking in. To improve the performance evaluation process in the given scenario I believe there should be multiple methods used to evaluate the employee’s productivity, behavior, and traits. To do this effectively the 360-degree method should be implemented but only allow it to account for 15% percent of the overall evaluation.

This allows the co-workers and customers to get a say on how an individual is doing in those areas score. This should be done in a graphical method only so it is a fair evaluation to the individual. Next there should be a combination of the graphical method and the essay method for the direct manager/supervisor to evaluate the employee. This should account for 45% of the evaluation. The final 40% should be on productivity alone. In the scenario given the employee in question no doubt has superb productivity, but in the current method of evaluation the employee gets no credit for it.