Performance Appraisal and Management
Linking individual performance to organizational success is a difficult task in the simplest of environments. It is, however, an extremely important piece of the HR puzzle; especially when the context is global.
Employees are able to improve their performance and develop their KSAs (knowledge, skills and abilities) faster if they know what they are doing right and what they are doing wrong. So, an accurate performance appraisal offers the prospect of helping employees reach their full potential sooner rather than later.
Secondly, performance appraisal can also help ensure employees see a connection between their performance and the rewards (e.g., compensation) they receive. These two objectives, however, can compete with one another when one appraisal is used to fulfill both.
If the appraisal is developmental, it is important for both the employee and his/her manager to have an open discussion on the employee's strengths and weaknesses with a goal of identifying steps to be taken to help the employee reach his/her potential. It is difficult for this type of conversation to take place, if the appraisal also is used to allocate rewards (e.g. pay increases, bonuses).
Does the performance appraisal process where you work or have worked get used to fulfill more than one purpose? Do you think it fairly measures your performance? What would you change about the system if it was up to you?© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 17, 2018, 12:48 pm ad1c9bdddf
Now, I'm a military officer. I've been in this system for over 19 years now. For the first 6 and a half years, I was on the enlisted side of the house. In the military (more specific, the Air Force), we have a very rigid structure when it comes to how we evaluate those who work for us. As a supervisor (enlisted, or officer), we are required to meet with our subordinates 3 times prior to the writing of their annual performance report. We have initial feedback (within the first 30 days of the supervision cycle) that is designed to lay out the supervisors expectations. Then there is the mid-term feedback. We go back and look at the expectations, and rate each area to let the person know how they are doing. This is intended to give feedback in time, so that if they are falling below expectations, the individual has a chance to turn it around. And then there is a feedback session right before the performance report is written. This last session ...
This solution describes the U.S. Air Forces job performance report system.
Chenowith et al. and Sarnovsky Effective Supplier Management
Please begin this case by carefully reading two papers; Chenowith et al. (2012) and Sarnovsky (2015). Here's an overview of them.
Chenowith and her coauthors (2012) are organizational scientists at the not-for-profit RAND corporation, a "think tank" that began life as a quasi-governmental agency. Their paper examines initiatives in supplier relationship management undertaken by the U.S. Air Force Materiel Command.
Dr. Martin Sarnovsky is a professor at the Technical University of Koice, Slovakia; a country that was a client state of the Soviet Union before that communist empire broke up. A chapter of his online textbook (excerpted here) discusses supplier management. It is a detailed, useful treatment.
Carefully compare and contrast these two papers in 3-4 Pages.
1. What points do both of them make?
2. What points does one emphasize, the other not? Explain. (Hint: Tables with side-by-side comparisons would be helpful.)