Business Report - CERA - Work Design - Assessment Answer

Business Report Assignment

Assignment Task

Limitations in CERA’ Individual Performance Measurement

The company has a system of strategy which supports the management by objectives to measure the employee performance. Though there is hope as HR have finally realized the ineffectiveness of the approach the initial appraisal plan adopted by CERA lacks the capacity to build individual success, and a culture of diversity and teamwork. The management by objectives is a weak performance evaluation tool which at the end of every financial year causes intimidation of some of the workers. According to Byoung, Hyoung & Ko,(2013),the procedure does not obey the laws of a good performance measurement approach as stipulated by the state that an equal and fair performance measure is one which allows equal opportunities, motivates and also permits the development of the individual employee. Such an approach makes working a passion for the employee and intrinsically motivates them to be more efficient and forthcoming (Curtright, Smith & Edell, 2000).

The individual performance measurement by CERA does not allow for training and development of employees so as to make it equitable. The employees are only issued with a given list of objectives to achieve, and they may not understand what it is all about. Without enough development, it would be unfair to base performance evaluation on the outcomes (Waal &Hedde, 2014). This form of discrimination is why you find that the junior and new employees perform lower than the more experienced persons. They may not understand why and the fact that they do not contribute to the performance of the organization may de-motivate them making their performance deteriorate even further. Again, the managers don’t define the roles well enough for everyone to understand what part to play in, and so the inexperienced junior staff still suffers from poor outcomes.

According to Frank (2008), today HRM around the world is awakening to the realization that bonuses only works for a limited period. CERA erred in building its employee appraisal on short term materials rewards such as bonus and additional money value for the achievement of some specific goals set by the organization. According to Gosselin (2005), it is a mistake by the team to focus on the best-performing groups and ignoring those that underperform without doing anything to change the situation and allow all the employees and departments to grow and be successful in their individual duties, as well as collective responsibilities. Moreover, it is also good to shine light on the selective treatment of employees by CERA’s HRM team; some of the workers are being treated as if they were students, even though they are not. Seemingly, therefore, CERA lacks a comprehensive performance appraisal system or strategy that has the interests of its employees covered. CERA pays its employees above the market rates, gives bonuses, and other monetary rewards to stimulate the worker's morale and commitment to their work.

However, the HRM practices and theories of today are not after making the best better than they are and leaving those who have not achieved their best to languish in the organization (Gosselin, 2005).The HRM issues of the modern time seek at ensuring that all workers can achieve their best with or without monetary rewards or incentives. The fact that CERA is paying higher wages, and sets limits for its employees to meet is one the common HRM mistakes that many other firms do that need to be changed. With policies, one cannot deny that even when the employees achieve the targets, some important aspects of HRM such as job satisfaction are missing (Mucha, 2013). Here is a case where employees work for the price money as opposed to individual growth, and group achievement.

According to Gosselin (2005), mistreatment of some staff does not in any organization lead to improved performance, and it is sad to mention that some of the CERA’s workers are being treated like students. According to Bhatti,Awan & Razaq, (2014), in an organization, the ranking is important as it defines the chain of command, but even so, it is not right for a firm to discriminate against its personnel in any way. CERA is running a discriminatory appraisal system that bars some employees from performing to their best, and at the same time gives some worker opportunities to achieve their limits. Junior staff members need to be encouraged to work their job up by improving their performance as opposed to demeaning and making it almost impossible for them to realize their full potential. According to Sarkar (2013), in current HRM practices, the delegation of duties to junior staff is more important than giving them a bonus because they are even motivated to improve their performance to earn themselves promotion to higher ranks. What CERA is doing is discouraging to the junior staff, as they cannot improve their performances if they are not motivated by things such as the possibility of earning themselves promotions to higher ranks or even the bonuses and the other additional rewards. According to Oyewobi, Windapo & Rotimi (2015), the approach adopted by CERA is discriminative in nature because it does not offer young employees to excel in their duties.

Alternative performance measurement approaches for CERA

The CERA Company uses the management by objectives approach for employee performance which seems not to be yielding the required results. According to Sillanpaa (2011), the primary purpose of application of a performance measurement tool is to ensure that employees are productive and that they stick to the organizational objectives, ensure proper remuneration and also allow for the growth and development of an employee. With these in mind, some performance evaluation basis can be recommended to CERA to stimulate the lost enthusiasm of the workers which in the long run will improve overall organizational performance. Money and bonuses alone are not enough to boost self-drive (Stoskopf, 2002). A good approach would be one that even with the right remuneration there is a creation of equal opportunities; it lifts the spirits of employees and creates a sense of responsibility and zeal towards their work (Tabatabai, Karbasian & Mirbagheri, 2014). According to Venclová, Salková & Kolácková (2013), to have a good performance management approach then, the strategy should include the three vital aspects. These contain the declarative aspect (understanding the goals and objectives), the procedures (following what to do) and the motivational aspects which ensure that employees love their jobs enough to give it their best.

Attribute approach

One of the methods for performance evaluation that would be recommended for CERA is the Attribute technique of measurement. According to Wiesner, McDonald and Banham (2007), this approach measures and rewards performance based on the behaviors and characteristics of the employees in the company, who are aiming at bettering the organization's performance. The strategy works by self-drive, skills and unique attributes of an employee that makes them competitive compared to the rest (Sarkar, 2013). The primary characteristics which are usually related to god performance include creativeness, team player, project management, dispute resolution and cognitive abilities. This approach is a broad range of evaluation basis which makes the method quite reasonable and equitable. According to Sillanpaa (2011), the method has some techniques to measure performance, and one of the most common ones is the graphics rating scale approach whereby the scale runs from one to five, and an employee is rated according to their attributes. The rating is done by an evaluator who analyses and checks how the employee has been participating in the company progress and how well they support teamwork manage problems at the workplace and uphold professional standards during their daily routine. Each attribute is given a number between one and five and the average is computed to establish the performance of the employee so as to identify a fair appraisal. According to Byoung, Hyoung & Ko (2013),the approach is less complex to develop and can be used in any company.

The mixed standard scale is an improved version of the visual scale and is used to qualify an employee’s performance as high, low or medium. According to Stiffler (2006), it is another technique used for measuring the performance related attributes of an employee and tends to classify rather than quantify in numbers.

Critics state that it is not a good method since too much time is spent on identifying unique aspects of the job performance attributes of employees and also in some circumstances, it may be vague due to different misinterpretation of the concept of unique attributes. According to Curtright, Smith & Edell (2000), the evaluator or the person rating may be biased and allocate poor ratings to their less favorite employees.

However, this method is very appropriate for CERA particularly in this time when they are less enthusiastic. The current methods of performance management only aim at awakening extrinsic motivation which only lasts for a long time, but the attribute approach works in a different way (Waal and Hedde, 2014). There is no better way of motivating an employee like showing them that they are appreciated and that because of their characteristics the company performed better last time (Verbeeten, 2008). May it be the team spirit or the dispute resolution technique, if an employee feels that he is part of the organizational growth because of his or her nature, and then this is likely to bring out self-drive (Gosselin, 2005).This strategy will mean that the employees are intrinsically motivated and that no one has to be supervised since they believe they are good at what they do and this instills an inner sense of responsibility which makes employees more productive. CERA should try this approach as it is more diverse compared to the management by an objective method and thus ensures that a variety of employees are appreciated. According to Mucha (2013), an employee cannot be all bad neither can they be all good; one can be a project manager while another one scores well as a team leader and this bring equality and creates equal opportunities based on how their skills match with available opportunities. The method will also enhance a culture of teamwork which is a critical aspect of overall performance when people learn to live and work together; making a maximum contribution of what they are best at, this is likely to give a favorable output (Stoskopf, 2002).

Behavioral approach

The behavioral approach involves a variety of initiatives aimed at molding the behaviors of employees so that their attitudes and values can support organizational growth and performance. According to Venclová & Kolácková (2013), the actions measure the behaviors of the employees and determine how much they are in support of the vision and then the performance is evaluated on that basis. According to Stoskopf, 2002,one of the most common techniques used in the behavioral approach is the Behavioral Observation Scale which has a list of behaviors that are more likely to stimulate productivity and another lower scale with behaviors which are less liable to encourage organizational performance. According to Wiesner, McDonald & Banham, (2007), based on this magnitude a person’s behavior is observed and ticked along their corresponding characters, and this is used to evaluate how much such a person qualifies for appraisal. The BOS also rates the frequency that the employee gets involved in the behavioral attribute so as to establish whether it is due to de-motivation or it is just in their nature. According to Gosselin (2005), this aspect makes the method fair since if an employee’s behavior shows a negative attitude towards their work, it is not guaranteed that they are lazy since reduced motivation incentives can cause such reactions. The overall rating of the employee performance would be based on the average of their frequencies.

Another technique which is used is the application of competency models which describe the various skills required for an individual job and which are vital for effectiveness. An employee performance is checked upon the listed skills and the more of them they have, the more the opportunities for appraisal. A challenge in using this technique is that the evaluator has to be a good judge of both the psychology and physical behavior of employees. According to Curtright, Smith & Edell (2000), the acts of a person do not necessarily affect the performance of their behavior may support growth to some extent, but then their other practices may undermine the same. It is hard to tell how one person action can be used to measure performance since no one is perfect and we all make mistakes.

This approach is also applicable to CERA since it encompasses several dimensions to measure employee performance and not only the output. According to Byoung, Hyoung & Ko (2013), the behavioral approach analyzes the various ways in which a person’s behavior can influence performance and how one is competent enough to deserve a better opportunity or appraisal of some kind.

Conclusion

It is clear that in the contemporary world, performance management requires a diverse and more equitable method of performance evaluation. Performance management practices which intimidate some of the employees are unfavorable for performance since the company cannot move forward while some of the employees are scared and de-motivated. Some of the performance measurement approaches like the one in CERA may fail to work on improving overall employee performance especially if it promotes ranking according to performance.

Recommendations

It is not enough that the managers of CERA company to measure performance of employees but do little to effectively improve that performance. The managers should focus not only on customer satisfaction, but also on employee satisfaction by providing better incentives. The roles of the employees towards the achievement of the goals and objectives of the firm should be carefully reviewed and communicated so that they understand what they are supposed to do better. It is not enough to define the roles and not engage employees in active training so as to develop their skills and also make them feel appreciated. A right plan should offer equal opportunities for development and provide motivation to employees. When employees feel they have played a part in the achievement of objectives they are motivated to work even harder and they also develop loyalty towards the organization. The attributes and behavioral approaches are recommended for CERA since they offer an extensive framework for employee evaluation and thus support equal opportunities and motivation. CERA should give the methods a try.