The paper 'Performance Appraisal at Countrywide Credit Union' is a perfect example of a Finance and Accounting Assignment. Countrywide Credit Union performance appraisal process has problems that impact negatively on the mangers that are appraised. The annual performance appraisal process has a negative impact on the company. This is because the managers have to wait for the whole year before the performance appraisal is conducted. This leads to a lack of satisfaction among the managers as the appraisal turns out short of their expectations. It is due to this reason that Julia is also not satisfied with the process after waiting for the whole year.
The company also allows for the formal and informal methods of performance appraisal to be conducted. This method has a negative impact on the process as very minimal information regarding the performance of the employees is obtained. Adequate time is also not allocated to the process as evident during the appraisal of Julia When Kevin who was in charge of the process had to stop it in order to attend to other issues. Performance appraisal reports are not implemented in the company as all the managers receive bonuses despite the poor performance that is being witnessed by the company.
The managers who post poor performance and those who perform well still receive the 20% bonus which is an indication that the company does not implement the results of the performance appraisal when awarding the bonuses. The actual performance of the employees of an organization should be obtained through the results of the performance appraisal (Wiatrowski, 2013). This is aimed at ensuring that decisions are made based on performance. Problems with the performance appraisal by Kelvin The performance appraisal methods and process that are used by Kevin contributes to the inefficiencies faced by the company.
Kevin performs the performance appraisal with a lot of favoritism and nepotism. During the performance appraisal of Wayne, he was only asked one question that does not determine his performance. He was also rated 4 out of five with five being the superior performance. The performance appraisal was carried out during a boozy lunch and Wayne was appraised after they had taken several beers.
This is also an indication that Kevin was not serious about the process. Kevin used the informal approach since he and Wayne were long time golfing partners. However, Kevin decided to use the formal approach during the performance appraisal of Julia. This is because he did not know her well. This is an indication of nepotism was involved during the process. Although the process was formal, Kevin told Julia to rate herself out of 5 and that every manager would still get the bonus anyway. This is also an indication that Kevin did not take the process seriously and he did not care how the managers performed.
By indicating that everyone was going to get the bonus, it indicates that he did not care about the process. Kevin was also not ethical when carrying out the process as he ranked the managers without reviewing their actual performance. It is due to the conduct of Kevin that Julia was not satisfied with the process. A performance appraisal should be transparent in order to satisfy everyone (Scullen, 2011).
Scullen, S. E. (2011). Why do you have a performance appraisal system? Drake Management Review, 1(1), 183-193.
Wiatrowski, M. (2013). Performance appraisal. Psychology and Policing, 257.
VandeWalle, D. (2011). Performance appraisal procedural justice: The role of a manager’s implicit person theory. Journal of Management, 37(6), 1694-1718.
Kuvaas, B. (2011). The interactive role of performance appraisal reactions and regular feedback. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 26(2), 123-137.
MacGregor, J. N. (2014). The Effects of Performance Rating, Leader–Member Exchange, Perceived Utility, and Organizational Justice on Performance Appraisal Satisfaction: Applying a Moral Judgment Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 119(2), 265-273.
Tian, H. (2011). A Method for Determining and Applying Index Weights in the Sector Performance Appraisal System Based on Process. In Management and Service Science (MASS), 2011 International Conference on (pp. 1-4). IEEE.
Brown, M. (2010). Consequences of the performance appraisal experience. Personnel Review, 39(3), 375-396.
Kluger, A. N. (2011). Strength-based performance appraisal and goal setting. Human Resource Management Review, 21(2), 137-147.
Azzone, G. (2011). Adopting performance appraisal and reward systems: a qualitative analysis of public sector organisational change. Journal of organizational change management, 24(1), 90-111.