The paper "Yarra Bank Stakeholders’ Views of the Performance Appraisal Program” is a persuasive example of a case study on the management. Performance appraisal involves reviewing the employee’ s performance on their duties and responsibilities. This is based on the results from the employee's work and not the personality characteristics (Miller & Thornton, 2006). The employees’ appraisal program is supposed to measure employees’ skills and accomplishments with high accuracy. This helps a lot in supporting profession growth and performance enhancement (Maddux, 2000). Yarra Bank's performance appraisal is five levels based and uses a forced ranking distribution.
The rating leads to superior performers (top 10%), good performers (next 25%), acceptable performers (next 45%) and marginal performers (15%) and lastly the unsatisfactory performers (5%). Despite being confidential, the employees are able to quickly learn on the ratings. This leads to wrong repercussions as workers start ranking each other’ s, envy and communication breakdown among workers (Miller & Thornton, 2006). The system also leads to demotivation and content. There is also favoritism for the employees belonging to unions despite the company denial. The system also leads to problems among the managers and is being regarded as an HR department exercise.
This report identifies the major stakeholders and their views on the performance appraisal system in place. The report also identifies the weakness present in the performance appraisal program and comes up with recommendations. 1.0 Major stakeholders and explain their likely views of the existing performance appraisal program. Stakeholders can be viewed as those people who play a key role in supporting and influencing the organization and making it exist without which an organization would cease to operate (Miller & Thornton, 2006).
The major stakeholders in the performance appraisal program are managers, HR departments, employees and trade unions. In this case, employees view the performance appraisal program as a source of division rather than motivation (Vasset, Marnburg & Furunes, 2010). Through the performance appraisal, employees separate themselves and how they view others. The employees rank each other into groups. The highly performing workers are regarded as stars and are regarded as belonging to a different ranking group. This leads to envy and deteriorating communication. The rating demotivated average employees.
Another problem is the fact that the better employees in some cases leave the company. Employees who underperform but belong to unions are perceived to be favored as compared to those who are not union members (Miller & Thornton, 2006). The trade unions who are also stakeholders may feel that the existing performance appraisal favors them (Miller & Thornton, 2006). The current performance appraisal program may lead to more employees joining trade unions especially the United Union of Australia. The managers feel the current forced distribution program is not fair. They feel that the appraisal system creates a lot of ill-feeling.
Some managers object their employees being ranked poorly making other departments disadvantaged. This leads to a feeling of tension and dissatisfaction. The HR department may feel that the program has lost its objectivity. This is due to the fact that it was a management program that is being regarded as an HR department exercise. 2.0 Strengths and weakness of the present program2.1 StrengthsPerformance appraisal is not witch-hunting but should help in finding strengths and weaknesses (Nelson, 2000). When a performance appraisal loses this aspect, it becomes meaningless as in the case of Yarra Bank.
The main strength on the Yarra Bank performance appraisal is the fact that it can identify and rank employees based on their performance. The appraisal system despite the fact that it has a lot of weakness is able to identify the employees’ contributions and rank them accordingly. The system is also able to communicate to the employees the results of the appraisal. This gives them a chance to give out their opinion. Without communication, performance appraisal becomes a one-sided affair where employees do not participate.
The communication aspect helps a lot in fostering development (Miller & Thornton, 2006). The bank has also been able to make the process on-going. For an organization to benefit from performance appraisal, it must be an on-going process.