Essays on Performance Management at Countrywide Essay

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper 'Performance Management at Countrywide' is a good example of a Management Essay. The problem with the performance appraisal at countrywide is that the institution continues to decreasing sales while the level of customer satisfaction in some branches is persistently poor. Kevin, one of the employees of countrywide has been tasked with conducting annual performance appraisal for 27 branch managers. The problems that the company continues to experience have a direct correlation with the manners in which Kevin conducts the performance appraisals in all the branches. The company has made a commitment to pay a bonus and a fixed salary to all branch managers, which depends on the review rating of their annual performance as per the results obtained by Kevin.

However, Kelvin does contrary to this as he grants the branch managers a fixed bonus of only 20% despite the performance of that particular branch. As such, the bonus strategy aimed at motivating the manager has failed to achieve its intended goals, a phenomenon depicted by the decreasing sales. In addition, the managers are paid inequitable bonuses while the compliance levels in other branches were persistently poor because some employees were not equipped with ample training in the relevant financial regulations facets.

Moreover, the performance appraisal processes conducted involves the use of mere questions without any thorough scrutiny analysis in each of the countrywide branches. A scenario in which Kelvin actually takes Wayne one of the branch managers out for lunch as a way of gaining information about the performance of the branch and the manager further depicts Kelvin’ s wrong approach to the performance appraisal process. This one incident raises numerous questions about his commitment to conducting effective performance appraisal as a key aspect of any organization’ s performance and success.

To conduct a performance appraisal whose efficacy will be guaranteed, Kevin should either design a performance appraisal program which he should always conform to when conducting his appraisals, identify the opportunities variables, use physical processes, social processes, and both human and computer assistance (Cardy, 2011, pp. 17-35). In the performance appraisal that was conducted with Julia, Kevin had the audacity to overlook the process and insist that he was attending other meetings and letting Julia rate herself of which she was to be given the 20% bonus just like everybody else regardless of whether her rating was 5*(maximum)or 1* (minimum).

This implies that Kevin does not maintain a business relationship with his managers and treats them in a not so friendly manner. This is not in line with the motivation theory, which is a Human Resource Management theory. The theory is a conceptualization that perceives employees as the reservoirs of potential talent and suggests that it is the responsibility of the management to seek ways, in which they can tap such resources (Greenberger & Heneman, 2002, p 139).

Another Human Resource Management Theory that Kevin did not conform to is the employee training and development theory, known as the human resource development theory. According to the proponents of this theory, much emphasis has been made on the significance of increasing the skills of employees through both development initiatives and group-based training.


Appraisal with regard to goal properties, goal perception and rate satisfaction. Group and

Arthur, D. (2008). Performance appraisals: Strategies for success. New York: American Management Association.

Buzzotta, V. R. (1988). Improve your performance appraisal. Management Review 77, 40-44.

Cardy, R. L. (2011). Performance management: Concepts, skills, and exercises. S.l.: M E Sharp.

Dutton, G. (2001). Making reviews more efficient and fair. Workforce, April 2001, 80(4), 76-82.

Fandray, D. (2001). The new thinking in performance appraisals. Workforce, May 2001, 80(5), 36-40.

Findley, H. M., Amsler, G. M & Ingram, E. (1999). Reengineering the performance appraisal.

Greenberger, D. B., & Heneman, R. L. (2002). Human resource management in virtual organizations. Greenwich, Conn: IAP, Information Age Publ.

Kleynhans, R. (2009). Human resource management: Fresh perspectives. Cape Town: Pearson/Prentice Hall South Africa.

Linman T. (n.d), Pros and Cons of the 360 degree feedback, Retrieved from

Longenecker, C. O & Fink, L. S. (1999). Creating effective performance appraisals. Industrial

Management, Sep/Oct 1999, 18-23.

Mitchell, T. R. & James, L. R. (2001). Building better theory: Time and the specification of

National Productivity Review, winter 2000, 39-42.

Organization Management,25(2), 175-190.

Rao, T. V. (2004). Performance management and appraisal systems: HR tools for global competitiveness. New Delhi: Response Books.

Tziner, A., Joanis, C. & Murphy, K. R. (2000). A comparison of three methods of performance

When things happen, The Academy of Management Review, October 2001, 26.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us