PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GROUP CASE STUDY
1. What evidence does this case provide for formulating and implementing a systematic approach to performance appraisal?
There is lack of communication and information between the manager (Frank) and the worker (Lola). The performance appraisal should be a dynamic tool to achieve goals and to clear objectives and working procedures in order to be more effective. It is necessary to discuss issues during at least once a year. In this case, Frank should explain to Lola what are his expectations and give her feedback in order to achieve the objectives.
2. Do you believe that Lola’s performance evaluation was valid and reliable?
Do you feel that Frank had a bias or stereotypical mind when filling out the evaluation? Explain your answer.
Yes. Frank had already mentioned to Sue that he was not pleased with Lola’s performance before the review was made. In it, he listed her inability to successfully complete the tasks that her position required, even when he arranged classes for her in order to improve her Marketing skills.
I do not think Frank had any particular bias, but since Lola was the first woman working in the department of Marketing he might have assumed that her work would be mediocre compared to the work done by a man.
3. What in the case indicates a problem with this supervisor’s evaluation? Please connect examples from this case to what the chapter discusses.
Firstly, the fact that it was not delivered by the deadline shows a lack of responsibility and respect by Frank. Moreover, Lola´s annual evaluation was not presented by Frank because of his personal health so it was done by the Senior Sales Manager. Talking about an employees upcoming evaluation with the Human Resources Manager instead of with the employee herself to improve her performance shows a lack of leadership by Frank. The review was not done in a timely manner for Lola, which prevented her from taking the proper actions to talk to her manager and communicate to her distaste for the
There is lack of communication and information between the manager (Frank) and the worker (Lola). The performance appraisal should be a dynamic tool to achieve goals and to clear objectives and working procedures in order to be more effective. It is necessary to discuss issues during at least once a year. In this case, Frank should explain to Lola what are his expectations and give her feedback in order to achieve the objectives.
2. Do you believe that Lola’s performance evaluation was valid and reliable?
Do you feel that Frank had a bias or stereotypical mind when filling out the evaluation? Explain your answer.
Yes. Frank had already mentioned to Sue that he was not pleased with Lola’s performance before the review was made. In it, he listed her inability to successfully complete the tasks that her position required, even when he arranged classes for her in order to improve her Marketing skills.
I do not think Frank had any particular bias, but since Lola was the first woman working in the department of Marketing he might have assumed that her work would be mediocre compared to the work done by a man.
3. What in the case indicates a problem with this supervisor’s evaluation? Please connect examples from this case to what the chapter discusses.
Firstly, the fact that it was not delivered by the deadline shows a lack of responsibility and respect by Frank. Moreover, Lola´s annual evaluation was not presented by Frank because of his personal health so it was done by the Senior Sales Manager. Talking about an employees upcoming evaluation with the Human Resources Manager instead of with the employee herself to improve her performance shows a lack of leadership by Frank. The review was not done in a timely manner for Lola, which prevented her from taking the proper actions to talk to her manager and communicate to her distaste for the