The paper "Identification of Effective and Ineffective Performance - Network Solution" is an outstanding example of a management assignment. Network Solution's performance management system fulfils most of the characteristics of an ideal performance system highlighted by Aguinis (2009). Since Network Solutions has planned to implement a forced distribution performance management system thus this kind of system has the following characteristics of an ideal performance system: Identification of effective and ineffective performance Network Solution’ s performance system identifies effective and ineffective performance. As mentioned in the case study set percentage of employees was classified in each of several categories (for example, a rating of 1 to the top 20% of performers; a rating of 2 to the middle 70% of performers; and a rating of 3 to the bottom 10% of performers). This categorization of employees helps the management in differentiating between the effective and ineffective performance of employees. Acceptability and fairness Network Solution’ s performance system is highly acceptable and fair in its rating.
Its fairness lies in the fact that the incentives are given according to the rating of performance only. No favours can be given to any employee. This is clearly exhibited in the case study as in Network Solution’ s performance system Employees receiving a 3, the lowest rating, have a specified time period to improve their performance.
If their performance does improve, then they are released from the plan, but they are not eligible for stock options or salary increases. If performance does not improve, they can take a severance package and leave the company or they can start on a performance improvement plan, which has more rigorous expectations and timelines than did the original action plan.
If performance does not improve after the second period, they are terminated without a severance package. Individuals with a rating of 2 receive average to high salary increases, stock options, and bonuses. Individuals receiving the highest rating of 1 receive the highest salary increases, stock options, and bonuses. These individuals are also treated as ‘ high potential’ employees and given extra development opportunities by their managers. The company also makes significant efforts to retain all individuals who receive a rating of 1.
Aguinis Herman 2009, Performance Management, 2nd Edition, Prentice Hall.
Bowen, R. B. 2000, Recognizing and rewarding employees, McGraw-Hill Trade.
Bowman, J. S. 1999, Performance appraisal: verisimilitude trumps veracity, Alexandria, Virginia: Public Personnel Management, International Personnel Management Association.
Costello, S. J. 1994, Effective performance management, McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
David J. Woehr 1994, "Understanding Frame-of-Reference Training: The Impact of Training on the Recall of Performance Information," Journal of Applied Psychology 79, no.4.
Howell K, Cameron E 1996, The benefits of an outsider's opinion (performance appraisal), People Management (UK) Vol: 2; Issue: 16.
Kinnie, N. and Lowe, D 1990,'Performance-related pay on the shop floor', Personnel Management, Vol. 22, No.11.
Mcdonald, D., and Smith, A 1995, "A proven connection: Performance management and Business results", Compensation and benefits review, 27, 1: 59-62.
Noe, Raymond A., Hollenbeck, John R., Gerhart, Barry, and Wright, Patrick M. 2007, Fundamentals of Human Resource Management, Second Edition.
Pulakos, Elaine D 2004, Performance Management: A Roadmap for Developing,Implementing and Evaluating Performance Management Systems, Society for Human Resource Management, United States of America.
Wayne Mondy, Robert M. Noe, Shane R. Premeaux 2002, Human Resource management Pearson Education, Inc
Wells, C 2001, Reward and Recognition Programs: Driving Employee Performance, Loyalty, and Enterprise Profitability. Boston: Aberdeen Group Inc