CASE STUDY

Appraising the Secretaries of Sweet water University

SUMMARY OF THE CASE:

This case study is about the newly appointed vice president, Rob Winchester and about the
difficulties he faced shortly after his university career began .Rob's boss, Sweetwater's president
assigned him the first task of improving the performance appraisal system used to evaluate
secretarial and clerical performance. In this case, the main difficulty is the performance appraisal
which was directly tied to salary increases given at the end of the year. The graphic rating forms
which were used to evaluate clerical staff were not efficient as these forms never gave the true
evaluation of performance. So, to change the faulty performance appraisal system two
Sweetwater experts gave their recommendations to solve the problem. The first recommendation
was not to use graphic rating forms as this rating method did not provide any clear picture about
the good or bad performance. The second recommendation was not to force administrators to
arbitrarily rate at least half their secretaries as something less than excellent. The
recommendations given by the experts were good and made sense but these recommendations
created problems like efficacy of any graphic rating forms if it is compared to the original forced
ranking approach used by Rob and what should be the basis of performance appraisal.

ANALYSIS OF THE CASE:

The job of Rob Winchester was to completely change the performance rating system of the
university because the previous system was dealing with high staff turnover ratio and also the
process didnt look just. The initial performance appraisal form was filled by administrators.
Administrators had to rate their secretaries on the basis of work they have done. The problem
with this form was that every administrator used to rate their secretary as excellent so as to avoid
staff turnover and on the other hand if the secretaries were not given hikes in their salaries they
were moving to another job in the private sector as the private was giving them better salaries
than Sweetwater U. According to the research the success of any performance appraisal system
was directly related to the human response given to them by the staff. In this case, the response
was not good as the staff that doesnt get good appraisal leaves the university. Having new staff
every year was also good not a good choice for the university. So it didnt leave any choice for
the administrators but to give most of the secretaries excellent to keep them on the job. The
administrators were not given anything for the good work done by their staff or for ranking them
properly. Thus administrators were not much interested in what their secretaries are getting. So
they started giving excellent to as much secretaries as possible to keep them away from leaving
the job. With this thing one more problem came up with the system was that it was letting even
the incompetent secretaries to enjoy the benefits like increments in the salaries. This
subsequently led to the decrease in the overall quality of the work. The Appraisal form
completely lacked procedural justice, as no one checked that whether the given ratings are on
performance or not. Also the secretary given a very good rating is really worth it or not. Lack of
transparency in the system was the basic flaw in this system. This flaw leads to another problem
which was Unclear Standards. The form only consists of four levels on which the secretary can
be graded i.e. Excellent, Good, Fair and Poor. Also the traits on which secretaries were
to be marked were unclear. The given standards lacked in the clarity and hence these parameters
used in the rating may be perceived differently by every person. Like, Good can be perceived
by someone as just next to excellent, but any other person might perceive it as just better than
fair. Therefore the administrator who is rating might not be happy with the work done by the
secretary but the secretary might think that it was the best work done by him.( p. app1).
By competition among secretaries, jealousy and race will reduce the efficiency of staff.The new
appraisal system created by experts advised Rob not to relate salary hike with performance
appraisal. This idea might be good when the appraisal system is not efficient. But salary hike is a
big motivational force behind every employee working for a company. If the secretaries will not
get salary hike for doing good work, then their interest in work might get affected and their
efficiency will reduce. The new form created by experts suggests giving points to secretaries on
different criteria. This might turn out to be good as numbers better describe performance than
words. Performance Appraisal Of A Company Introduction The Vice President Winchester has
been given the task of creating a new performance appraisal system for the secretarial and
clerical staff of Sweetwater University as the current evaluation system does not satisfy a good
performance appraisal system. The standards presently being used are very unclear and do not
give a good view of how the job is being performed. Moreover the administrators are being very
biased and are rating their employees above their real performance. Mr. Winchester has taken
advice from performance appraisal experts who helped him address the issues. Validity of
experts recommendations The experts have recommended that new more detailed rating forms
should be used. This means that the job should be analysed so that the different aspects of the
work done by secretaries are assessed, such as communication, typing speed, quality of the job
done, initiative taken by the secretaries, creativity, integrity, team work, behavior and
productivity.

Question no 01 :
Do you think that the experts recommendations will be sufficient to get most of the
administrators to fill out the rating forms properly? Why? Why not? What additional
actions (if any) do you think will be necessary?

Answer:

No, I think the experts recommendations will not be sufficient to get most of the administrators
to fill out the rating forms properly because:The administrators might be biased and convinced to
rate "excellent". This will not improve ability and skills of secretaries and clerks. A Few
administrators want to be unpopular to his subordinates and he will hesitate to rate the optimum
marks. I think the following additional actions will be necessary: Managers may opt for generic
dimensions such communications, team work, know-how and quality. Another option is to
appraise performance based on the jobs actual duties. There should provide performance
appraisal software so that the administrator can only put the data and the authority can only find
the ultimate total score and can easily evaluate.

I dont feel that the experts recommendations will be sufficient to get most of the administrators
to fill out the rating forms properly. The managers would be pleased with the recommendation
to rescind Mr. Winchesters forced ranking technique but would definitely challenge the idea of
not tying salary increases to appraisal forms because its what theyve always done and it is the
only way they feel they can provide competitive wages for secretaries. The issues of providing
invalid feedback to each secretary has been a standing practice for quite some time, therefore it
would be ludicrous to think that a practice imbedded in the organizations culture would simply
cease to exist per a recommendation. Administrators must understand and value the new process.
In order for the recommendations to be accepted and practiced Mr. Winchester will need to
educate administrators on the new process and why it is necessary then provide training to
improve the administrators appraisal skills and monitor the effectiveness of the new appraisal
form to ensure that that they are operating in a manner that aides in the success of organizational
goals. In order for appraisal techniques to be effective administrators must be made aware of
potential problems that may exist during the appraisal process such as leniency/strictness, bias
and central tendency. According to research by R. Murray, if people understand and believe in a
program and see it as a means of helping themselves to accomplish their own personal desires
through contributions to organizational goals, they will use it and feel committed to it
Question no 02 :

Do you think that Vice President Winchester would be better off dropping graphic rating
forms, substituting instead one of the other technique we discussed in this chapter, such as
a ranking method ? Why?

Answer

Yes, because using graphic rating forms have several problems such as unclear standards, halo
effect, central tendency, leniency, bias etc. Instead, the ranking method is much better to get the
desired result. Because in this system employees are ranked from best to worst on a particular
trait. Alternation ranking method avoids central tendency.

Rob Winchester decided to put a hold bar on number of secretaries getting anything above
average. This new forced ranking system was done because administrators were very lenient in
ranking their staff. But forced ranking system is very strict and it is unfair for those who have a
very good staff. New forced ranking method might create a very unhealthy, cut-throat
competition among staff and it will damage the distributive fairness in the system. The
distribution of the budget for appraisal should be fair to keep the staff satisfied.Staff satisfaction
is a big criterion for any organization to work.

Question 3:

What performance appraisal system would you develop for the secretaries if you were Rob
Winchester? Defend your answer.

Answer :

The main objective of a performance appraisal system is to develop good performance from the
employees and to raise production. Using a performance appraisal system allows employees to
see the level they are working at and managers are able to get information from employees so
they can help make their jobs more successful. These appraisals should be consistent throughout
the whole process and in a consistent timely manner. There are several types of appraisals, some
examples include; essay, standardized scales, use of critical incidents, management by objectives,
it is always better to pick the right format for your organization. During an appraisal, the
employee is evaluated on job performances and is thought to improve job performance and show
any areas that are in need for improvement. Clear goals should also be established for this
appraisal system, so that it may be clear to every employee. These goals should be achievable
goals as well as the goals being adjusted to meet the needs of individual employees so that there
is a better chance of the employee achieving their goals. There should be some sort of a reward
system in place following these appraisals for the employees that have exceptional performance
or that have really shown improvement, this will help the employee strive to achieve their goal in
a manner in which they also can be proud of their self. Having the employee be involved in their
own appraisal is also a great way to get the employees own views and opinions as to where
he/she is strong and weak, this helps them to see themselves grow or decline in their job
performances, and be involved a great deal more with the whole process.