The paper "Performance Management in Countrywide Credit Union" is a great example of a management case study. Strategically, organizations often strive to design appropriate work systems to achieve their goals, absorb individuals with capabilities to perform design responsibilities effectively and motivate and reward employees to improve productivity. Performance evaluation is a control mechanism that not only portrays the feedback of people but also assesses how activities are carried on in the organization. Without correct performance information in all units, supervisors are more likely to guess the commitment of employees towards the desired goals of an organization (DelPo, 2005).
This paper evaluates the performance management system of Countrywide Credit Union (Case) by focusing on the problems that lead to the poor performance of other branches. Also, the paper will provide recommendations for managing performance in Countrywide Credit Union. Problems with Countrywide’ s performance appraisal process and how Kevin (the supervisor/manager) conducts the review Kevin conducts the performance of branch managers without using data-based assessment method. Apparently, this is a critical issue since information, particularly on financial performance, needs reliable data for effective decision making.
For instance, Kevin asks two oral questions to the two assessed branch managers with no background data accompanying. Perhaps this may not describe the reality of performance in respective branches, however, it just gives ‘ fuzzy’ information for the decision-making process (Grote, 2002). There is a lack of accountability in the Countrywide Credit Union performance management system. Not all the 27 branches in the state are performing well, that is a reality from the case. Customers’ satisfaction levels are poor meaning the returns on investment (in HRM specifically) is slow. As much as Kevin is not accountable for his responsibilities, even the branch managers on the other side are not solemn in performing their assigned task.
For instance, Wayne is not sure if the branch is doing very well but he feels everything is okay. This displays a character of not being accountable to the job description and any other responsibilities within (Halachmi, 2002). There is no comprehensive assessment of branch managers and their teams. A comprehensive assessment simultaneously evaluates a leader and his/her team. Kevin is not the concern of the team but only on the leader.
He interviewed the two managers without considering the strategies (Performance targets) set by workers at respective branches in achieving operational objectives. A comprehensive system is indispensable for strategic planning and research (market and sales research) (Lussier and Hendon, 2013). For instance, poor performance on some branches may necessitate external recruitment. However, Kevin does not seem to look intensively on this issue. He just focuses on the welfare of the branch manager without considering the performance of the teams. The performance management system of Countrywide lacks legal support. Kevin executes the process unenthusiastically, and the result of this may not support disciplinary actions to those sitting on their responsibilities.
Julia sees obvious discrimination when it comes to performance review. Kevin walked out in the middle of the assessment between him and Julia. This reflects inappropriate handling of essential activities within the institution. Kevin and Wayne may be friends united by golf game but that does not mean they should hang out at golf club doing organization’ s official business. Kevin is so reluctant in adhering to the principles and laws of the organization (for performance management in specific) and this may be the factor contributing to the poor performance of other branches.
According to DelPo (2005), a performance appraisal process manager should be powerful and having complete knowledge of performance and productivity. Kevin, in this case, is not that kind of a manager though.
Burgess, L. R. (1977). Compensation Management: Rewarding Performance in the Modern Organization/ Comp -- $ -- Man: A Performance Workbook to "Compensation Management". Academy of Management Review, 2(3), 519-520.
DelPo, A. (2005). The performance appraisal handbook legal & practical rules for managers. Berkeley, CA: NOLO.
Elizandro, D., & Taha, H. A. (2012).Performance evaluation of industrial systems: discrete event simulation in using Excel/VBA (2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis.
Goswami, B. G. (2013). Performance Appraisal-Management by Objective and Assessment Centre–Modern Approaches to Performance Appraisal. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 7(5), 24-28.
Grote, R. C. (2002). The performance appraisal question and answer book a survival guide for managers. New York: American Management Association.
Halachmi, A. (2002). Performance Measurement, Accountability, And Improved Performance. Public Performance & Management Review,25(4), 370.
Knezevich, S. J. (1973). Management by objective and results: a guidebook for today's school executive. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
Lussier, R. N., & Hendon, J. R. (2013).Human resource management: functions, applications, skill development. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Methods of performance appraisal . (n.d.). Human Resource Management . Retrieved July 23, 2012, from http://www.openlearningworld.com/books/
Rao, T., & Rao, R. (2005). The power of 360 degree feedback: maximizing managerial and leadership effectiveness. New Delhi: Response Books.