2.

Based on your view of the objectives of performance evaluation, evaluate the

perspectives about performance appraisal presented by the managers.

Ideally, performance appraisal should be completely accurate and objective. However,

the performance appraisal process is far from accurate and objective, sometimes resulting in
rating errors. Based on the case study, the managers have made some errors when assessing
employee performance. Firstly, the halo effect can be seen when Tom got angry at one of his
assembly workers last week and that he let his negative feelings towards the employee to
influence his performance ratings easily. While we agree that evaluations definitely need to
have a base of accuracy, but it is also necessary to judge each criterion independently without
compromising what you feel for the employee. If we do not like someone it will not be right
to use that feeling in making review judgment, it is unprofessional. Besides, it is a fact that
each employee will always portray certain areas as their weakness and others as their
strengths. In this regards, what managers need to do is to ensure that they do not base the
entire evaluation with a particular impression.

While we agree that evaluations definitely need to have a base of accuracy, I like
Max’s view that most of good management is psychology. To know what is in the
individual’s and department’s best interest, a manager needs to understand people’s strengths
and faults, and know how to motivate and reward employees. If that means a little fine-
tuning, then so be it. Since Max’s priority is to motivate and reward, he may be able to build
a stronger connection between his employees and the work they are doing, but he may also
lead to leniency errors, whereby he would rate all employees higher than what the employee
is actually deserved (Jacobs et al., 1980). In the typical occasion, the results need to reflect
the actual situation where some employees are graded as high performers; others average
while other are poor performers. But in the unlikely event that all appraisal results come out
as similar, he needs to ensure that entire performance measures are given sufficient
consideration. It helps in a great way of making sure that fair appraisal has been carried out.

Meanwhile, Jim thinks that the scale is inaccurate. So as the memory. According to
Berry (2003), rating inaccuracy can be influenced by (1) inadequate observations, (2) faulty
standards or expectations about performance, and (3) difficulties in using a rating scale
(Berry, 2003). When Jim is unsure about his employees’ performance, Jim’s evaluation may
seem to be inaccurate because he is likely to consider recent performance more strongly than
performance that occurred earlier. This is called the recency-of-events error. In this case, it
sounds unfair to employees who have been outstanding throughout but later faulted few days
to assessment and vice versa because the appraisal will not be able to reveal the actual reality.
Besides, his rating is likely to incur personal bias error and that the inflation or distortion of
his ratings is likely to reduce the confidence in the performance evaluation. Failure to include
all performance behaviours in the performance appraisal of an employee can bias the ratings.

On the other hands, Lynne’s ratings involve attribution errors whereby she makes her
own independent belief on possible causes of some behaviours or outcome and letting that
influence her judgment. By considering the employee’s personal issue, she has inflated her
rating to encourage and motivate the employee so as to avoid negative interpersonal
consequences with the employee. In the appraisal process, Lynne may focus on cheering
employees instead of motivate them to perform better in their jobs. It is never a good idea to
develop an assumption of what made the employee behave in a specific manner and later use
it as a basis for reviewing the appraisal process. It is only essential if she sticks by the
stipulated standards and criterion and how the performance of each employee compares to
such standards. It only becomes a fair when the employee is judged on his/her actual
performance in line with the standards rather than political considerations.