Describe about the Human Resource Management for Business Performance Evaluation.
The case reflects an issue associated with the performance evaluation system in AUC National University where the performance evaluation of a lecturer, Dr. Jun Lee by the head of the Department, Professor Helen Haller reflected potential problems in failing to match the expectations of Dr. Lee. Dr. Jun Lee performs as an active lecturer in the University while also operates based on a close network of local business institutions and other professional associations. Dr. Jun Lee apart from taking part in different types of educational activities in the university also was confident of her contributions in creating meritorious students in the university.
Key Issues in the Case
The issue mainly highlights on the performance evaluation results of Dr. Jun Lee reflecting a combination of excellent and very good ratings. The generation of a combination of excellent and very good ratings affected the sentiment of Dr. Lee in that she felt that her performance in AUC National University had been undervalued by the Head of Psychology, Professor Helen Haller. The above issue gained further impetus owing to Professor Haller’s failure in highlighting the causes for which Dr. Lee’s performance had been evaluated on combined parameters of both excellent and very good. Professor Haller only commented that Dr. Lee’s performance in the university was okay and that the review generated was quite fine such that it was needless for Dr. Lee to be sad and upset. Professor Haller also stated that the review methods concerning the evaluation of the performance standards had been changed by her but declined to explain to Dr. Lee the type of changes introduced. No further explanations were generated by Professor Haller regarding the performance evaluation results of Dr. Lee and it was only stated that Dr. Lee’s performance was commendable and thus she was further encouraged by Professor Haller to sustain her contributions to the university in the long run. Dr. Lee felt very upset and frustrated regarding the generation of the performance review results and thus initially did not want to put her signatures in the results of the performance evaluation. However, later Dr. Jun Lee conceded and put her signature under the statement, ‘signed under protest’. Further, Dr. Lee also made plans for generating an appeal against the ratings to the Dean of her Department. Dr. Lee increasingly felt bad owing to lack of needed clarity regarding lack of effective clarity and justice on the part of Dr. Haller. Dr. Jun Lee also strongly felt that the whole process of evaluating her performance and contribution in the university had been largely unethical in nature.
Factors that had contributed to the Issues
Several factors had contributed to the above case. The aspect that Professor Haller failed to generate an effective discussion with the faculty members like Dr. Jun Lee the change brought about in the methods regarding performance evaluation and the measures of performance undertaken to evaluate their performances and contribution in the university. The performance evaluation practices of the AUC National University and that employed by Professor Haller also failed to reflect needed transparency and ethical treatment regarding the evaluation of the performances and contributions generated by faculty members like Dr. Jun Lee. Professor Haller is also observed to operate in an autocratic fashion regarding the conducting of the evaluation of the performances rendered by the faculty members. She never focused on involving and participating the faculty members regarding bringing about changes in the evaluation policy and also in times for the generation of the final results of the performance evaluation. Professor Haller also denied of effectively communicating the factors responsible for generation of like results as had been countered by Dr. Lee even at the request of the latter. The above factors make the current performance evaluation practices of Professor Haller lack needed clarity and thus tend to suffer from lack of ethical conduct.
Steps taken for Resolving the Problem
Different steps can be undertaken by the HR Director for resolving the problem to counter the above issues.
The HR Director requires Professor Haller and also the authorities of AUC National University to effectively follow modern or contemporary performance management or evaluation methods like 360 Degree Survey method, Management by Objectives, Balanced Scorecard Approach and also the Peer Assessment Review.
Management by Objectives
Management by Objectives (MBO) is a performance appraisal system that is put into place by the management for meeting of specific department and organisational objectives. The MBO performance appraisal systems are observed to be performance oriented in nature such that they focus on measuring or evaluating the performances of an individual associated with a specific department and organisation to the extent the performance or work-related objectives are accomplished. The objectives are outlined in a combined fashion by the manager and the subordinate groups such that the same helps in reduction of potential conflict regarding the results of the performance evaluation (Ferdman & Sagiv, 2012). The discussion between the managers and subordinates ideally contributes in selection of the objectives based on which the performances of the individual employees are evaluated. The employees or subordinate staffs are thereby required to conduct a self audit of their skills and potentials regarding the fulfilment of the objectives for both the departments and the organisation. The MBO performance appraisal approach is considered to be advantageous in that the same focuses on meeting of realistic objectives of the department and the organisation (Podsiadlowski, Gröschke, & Kogler, 2013). Further, the evaluation of the performances of an individual are required to be carried out based on judging their realistic potential regarding their meeting of the department and organisational objectives. Similarly, the employment of MBO performance appraisal programs also contributes in empowering the subordinates for identifying the different objectives and thereby in evaluating their realistic potentials for meeting the same. It thereby helps in creating a sense of autonomy and responsibility among the individuals regarding the fulfilment of the stated objectives (Stevens & Ogunji, 2010).
Application of MBO Performance Appraisal Process to the Case
The application of Management by Objectives (MBO) performance appraisal process to the case requires Professor Haller to collaborate with the faculty members of the Psychology Department like Dr. Lee for helping in identifying the different objectives that are required to be ideally met for enhancing the results of the Psychology Department and also in augmenting the ranking of the university in the region (Ongori & Nzonzo, 2011). The collaboration carried out by Professor Haller with the faculty departments of the Psychology department would contribute in identifying the objectives or goals that are required to be accomplished by them. This would also help the faculty members to enhance their skills and potentials for meeting the identified and agreed objectives (Olsen & Martins, 2012). The same would help in reducing the level of conflicts that can emerge owing to failure in agreement regarding the performance appraisal results generated by the university and the psychology department and the expectations of the faculty members. The application of the MBO Performance Appraisal process would have contributed in evading the situation of conflicts between Dr. June Lee and Professor Haller (Shen, Chanda, & D’Netto, 2009).
360 Degree Performance Appraisal Method
The 360 Degree Performance Appraisal Method contributes in conducting of performance appraisal of an individual employee based on the involvement of different stakeholders like the individual himself, the subordinate groups involved in the organisation, the peers and colleagues of the individual employed in the organisation with also the superiors in the firm. The appraisal rendered by the different stakeholders identified as above effectively helps in meeting the objectives of the 360 Degree Performance Appraisal Method (Bhatia & Kaur, 2014). The Self Appraisal system process in the 360 Degree Performance Evaluation System rightly helps an individual in evaluating and understanding one’s strength and weakness regarding the accomplishment of stated objectives (Edewor & Aluko, 2007). The same can be effectively used during the rating of the real potentials and weakness reflected by the individual in terms of fulfilling the tasks or goals. Similarly, the appraisal process of the superiors effectively focuses on identifying the communication, team building, leadership and also collaboration potentials for fulfilling identified goals or tasks(Shi & Wang, 2011). The post appraisal process also requires the superiors to ideally discuss with the individuals assessed the potential shortfalls or drawbacks that need to be effectively revised for conducting the tasks in an enhanced fashion. The appraisal conducted by the subordinate and the peer groups ideally helps in understanding the manner the individual is perceived and accepted by them in the organisation. It would also help the individual to understand the expectations and the requirements of the subordinates and peers from him or her and thereby require the individual to act on such basis (Mooij & Hofstede, 2010).
Application of the 360 Degree Performance Evaluation System
The application of the 360 Degree Performance Evaluation System can be effectively carried out in the case evaluated relating to AUC National University. The performance evaluation of Dr. Jun Lee can be effectively carried out through the use of the 360 Degree Performance Evaluation System where the subordinate groups essentially relate to the student communities while the peer groups relate to the different faculties operating in the Psychology Department. The superior groups essentially relate to the Head of the Psychology Department and the University Dean. The 360 Degree Performance Evaluation System requires the joint performance appraisals conducted by Dr. Lee, the student and peer groups and also the superior groups in the University (Rozkwitalska, 2012). Self appraisal conducted by Dr. Jun Lee would help in reflecting on the strength and weaknesses of Dr. Lee as evaluated by her regarding the fulfilment of identified tasks and objectives. The performance appraisal conducted by the student and faculty groups in the University would contribute in understanding the expectations and needs of the students and other faculty members from her and thereby would help her in modulating her conducts while generating lectures and also in collaborating in group meets and work meets in the university (Salas, Tannenbaum, & Kraiger, 2012). Finally, the appraisal conducted by the department head and the university dean would help Dr. Lee in understanding her real time potentials and drawbacks. The university authorities are required to ideally communicate the feedback of the performance appraisal program to Dr. Jun Lee such that the same can help Dr. Lee in enhancing and augmenting their potentials for generating greater performances in the near future (Olsen & Martins, 2012).
The Balanced Scorecard Performance Appraisal Method
The Balanced Scorecard Performance Appraisal System is identified as an effective performance appraisal system that can be employed by the organisational heads for evaluating and measuring the performances of individual employees or subordinate groups in an organisation (Jehanzeb & Bashir, 2013). The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) performance appraisal system focuses on evaluating the performances of an individual based on essentially four parameters or perspectives like from the viewpoint of the customers, from the viewpoint of the internal processes of the organisation, the viewpoint of development of innovation and learning in the organisation and finally the financial perspective. Conducting of appraisal from the consumer viewpoint requires the understanding that whether the performances or contributions rendered by the individual enhance the organisation’s potential for meeting of the needs and expectations of the consumers (Dartey-Baah, 2013). The viewpoint of internal operations or processes of the organisation would contribute in understanding the internal processes that would help the individual to perform in the same in meeting the expectations of its stakeholders. Further, the performance appraisal from the innovation and learning perspective contributes in understanding whether the individual effectively helps in enhancing the innovation and knowledge potential of the organisation. Finally, performance appraisal from the financial perspective would evidently help in understanding whether the contributions generated by the individual would help in enhancing the financial potential of the organisation through revenue growth (Rose & Kumar, 2008).
Application of the BSC Performance Appraisal Method
The application of the balanced scorecard performance appraisal method can be effectively applied to the case such that the department head of the psychology department and the university dean are required to effectively evaluate the performance of Dr. Jun Lee in terms of her contribution in meeting the demands and expectations of the students relating to the psychology department, the different types of innovative and learning aspects as is observed relating to the teaching or professing style of Dr. Lee and also the contribution of Dr. Jun Lee in attracting new students in the psychology department of AUC National University (Slavi?, Berber, & Lekovi?, 2014). Further, the employment of BSC Performance Appraisal Method also would help to understand the internal process that would contribute in encouraging Dr. Lee in generating greater performances and productivity in the long run. The same would help the university authorities in augmenting the aspect of the internal support that would augment the performance potential of Dr. Lee in the university (Rozkwitalska, 2012).
The above analysis rightly reflects that the performance evaluation approach employed by Professor Helen Haler in AUC National University can be effectively enhanced through the use of the Management by Objectives (MBO) performance appraisal systems, 360 Degree Performance Appraisal Systems and also through the employment of the Balanced Scorecard Performance Appraisal Systems. The employment of the above types of performance appraisal systems is observed to encourage the university authorities and the departmental head in maintaining effective communication with Dr. Jun Lee for enhancing her performance styles and also in effectively accepting the real time results of the performance evaluation system as generated by the university heads. The use of the above types of performance evaluation systems would rightly contribute in augmenting the level of ethical practices regarding the performance evaluation systems in use.
Bhatia, A., & Kaur, L. (2014). Global Training & Development trends & Practices: An Overview. International Journal of Emerging Research in Management &Technology , 3 (8), 75-78.
Dartey-Baah, K. (2013). The Cultural Approach to the Management of the International Human Resource: An Analysis of Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions. International Journal of Business Administration , 4 (2), 39-45.
Edewor, P. A., & Aluko, Y. A. (2007). Diversity Management, Challenges and Opportunities in Multicultural Organizations . International Journal of the Diversity , 6 (6), 189-195.
Ferdman, B. M., & Sagiv, L. (2012). Diversity in Organizations and Cross-Cultural Work Psychology: What If They Were More Connected? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice , 5 (3), 1-51.
Jehanzeb, K., & Bashir, N. A. (2013). Training and Development Program and its Benefits to Employee and Organization: A Conceptual Study. European Journal of Business and Management , 5 (2), 243-252.
Mooij, M. d., & Hofstede, G. (2010). The Hofstede model. International Journal of Advertising , 29 (1), 85-110.
Olsen, J. E., & Martins, L. L. (2012). Understanding organizational diversity management programs: A theoretical framework and directions for future research. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 33 (8), 1168-1187.
Ongori, H., & Nzonzo, J. C. (2011). TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES IN AN ORGANISATION: AN INTERVENTION TO ENHANCE ORGANISATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS. International Journal of Engineering and Management Sciences , 2 (4), 187-198.
Podsiadlowski, A., Gröschke, D., & Kogler, M. (2013). Managing a culturally diverse workforce: Diversity perspectives in organizations . International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 37, 159-175.
Rose, R. C., & Kumar, N. (2008). Organizational Culture as a Root of Performance Improvement:Research and Recommendations. Contemporary Management Research , 4 (1), 43-56.
Rozkwitalska, M. (2012). Accepted and strong organisational culture in multinational corporations . Journal of Intercultural Management , 4 (3), 5-14.
Salas, E., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Kraiger, K. (2012). The Science of Training and Development in Organizations: What Matters in Practice. Psychological Science in the Public Interest , 13 (2), 74-101.
Shen, J., Chanda, A., & D’Netto, B. (2009). Managing diversity through human resource management: an international perspective and conceptual framework. The International Journal of Human Resource Management , 20 (2), 235-251.
Shi, X., & Wang, J. (2011). Interpreting Hofstede Model and Globe Model: Which Way to Go for Cross-Cultural Research . nternational Journal of Business and Management , 6 (5), 93-99.
Slavi?, A., Berber, N., & Lekovi?, B. (2014). PERFORMAnCE MAnAGEMENT IN INTERNATIOnAL HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: EVIDENCE FROM THE CEE REGION. Serbian Journal of Management , 9 (1), 45-58.
Stevens, R. H., & Ogunji, E. (2010). Managing Diverse Organizational Environments for Strategic Advantage:Exploring the Value of Developing Business Diversity Curriculum in Higher Education. Journal of Management Policy and Practice , 11 (4), 72-85.