Managing People in a Global Context Exam
Performance Appraisals Question 4.
Identify the main ways in which the effectiveness of performance appraisals
may be improved. Illustrate your answer by using corporate examples you are
familiar with.
Performance appraisals (PA) measure employees' performance in organisations. A company's effectiveness
relies on having an efficient PA system that assesses strengths and weaknesses, encouraging positive
behaviour and facilitating employee development. However, 87% of individuals find PA ineffective. Critics
argue about its inaccuracy, leading to unintended consequences like unnecessary competition and reduced
cooperation (Roberts, 2003). Effective PAs require careful planning, and negative effects can be mitigated
through employee participation and feedback (DeNisi and Kluger, 1996).
In Rob Parson's PA at Morgan Stanley, the process was ineffective due to Nasr, his manager. Despite
Parson's skills, Nasr's approach lacked assertiveness and clear guidance. Nasr's prior connection and
sympathy hindered objectivity, and his diplomatic style, while trying to provide feedback, was perceived as
treating Parson with kid gloves. The reluctance to be assertive and the perceived bias raised concerns about
fairness and effectiveness, impacting Parson's potential for improvement and development.
To design an effective appraisal system and minimise negative dynamics, organisations like Morgan Stanley
can implement strategic measures, one of them being scales to improve validity. Using well-defined and
relevant scales ensures that the evaluation process accurately captures employee performance. For instance,
companies like Amazon adopted a 360-degree feedback system, incorporating multiple perspectives into the
evaluation process. By utilising comprehensive scales that consider various facets of performance,
organisations can reduce the risk of biases and create a more holistic and objective appraisal experience
(DeNisi, 2000). This approach encourages fair assessments and contributes to the overall effectiveness of
the performance appraisal system.
To enhance performance appraisals, organisations can invest in manager training programs, focusing on
error avoidance and adapting leadership styles. Antonioni's (1996) research highlights the impact of errors
like recency bias, emphasizing the need for strategies to minimise biases. Training can educate managers on
these aspects for more objective evaluations. Adapting leadership styles, such as transformational
leadership, enhances managerial capabilities. Downton's (1973) principles of inspirational motivation and
individualized consideration can inspire and motivate employees, as seen in companies like Apple. Aligning
leadership styles with performance evaluation practices ensures a more comprehensive and effective
approach.
Another approach to enhance evaluation accuracy, organisations can implement systematic feedback
sessions between employees and employers, aligning expectations and fostering transparent communication.
This strategic approach, exemplified by Netflix, involves discussing specific performance instances and
aligning expectations for a fair evaluation process. Ashford (1983) highlighted the positive impact of
feedback, increasing employee performance, involvement, and willingness to work towards common goals.
Systematic feedback not only addresses biases like leniency but also serves as a motivational tool for
appraisers in participative organisational climates. Actively engaging managers in constructive
discussions creates a positive feedback loop, enhancing their motivation by emphasising their role in
employee development and the organization's success.
For the PA situation with Nasr and Parson, the appraisal meeting should prioritise open communication
and mutual understanding. Nasr can begin by clearly communicating the reasons for not promoting
Parson and providing specific feedback on areas for improvement, following the "Tell and Listen"
approach for transparency. The meeting should occur in a formal, private setting for confidentiality and
honest conversation. Optimal timing at the end of the day, preferably Tuesday or Wednesday, allows for
reflection and questions. Creating a relaxed environment with a calm tone encourages constructive dialogue.
Nasr should aim for clear communication, ensuring Parson understands the feedback and the path forward
for professional development. This approach not only addresses the immediate issue but also fosters a
positive working relationship.
Lastly, organisational justice significantly influences employees' perceptions and attitudes, impacting
commitment, trust, satisfaction, citizenship behaviours, and potential revenge behaviours. The
procedural aspect, emphasising voice and choice in decision-making, contributes to perceptions of fairness
and empowerment. In situations where employees have limited say (e.g., promotions), employers should
still listen but control decision-making. The interactional dimension, focusing on clear communication and
interpersonal treatment, is equally vital. Organizations prioritising fairness in procedures and interactions
foster positive environments, enhancing commitment, trust, and job satisfaction. Perceived injustice can
erode trust, fuel revenge behaviours, and undermine organisational culture and morale. Therefore,
organisations committed to a healthy workplace should continually assess and improve practices, ensuring
organisational justice guides decision-making and interpersonal relations.
In conclusion, achieving optimal performance appraisals requires a multifaceted approach, including
systematic feedback sessions, addressing biases, and fostering transparent communication. Companies like
Amazon, Apple, and Netflix showcase the benefits of continuous feedback, aligned expectations, and open
dialogue, promoting organisational justice. These strategies not only mitigate biases but also enhance
employee motivation, performance, and overall organisational success. The Nasr and Parson case
underscores the importance of well-conducted appraisal meetings with clear communication, transparency,
and empathy in navigating challenging situations.
Work-Life-Balance Question 6.
Discuss the main factors which account for the increased employers’ interest in
‘work-life balance’ practices and critically evaluate the possible actions that
the organisation could take to improve employee well-being.
The concept of work-life balance is increasingly vital in employment practices, recognising the intricate
connection between professional commitments and personal well-being. In today's demanding work
environments, long working hours contribute to mental health issues like burnout and family conflicts.
Research underscores the negative link between stress and job satisfaction (Richard and Burke, 1991) and
the positive one between stress and turnover (Keller, 1984). Prioritising mental health is crucial for
organisations to mitigate job dissatisfaction and turnover. Additionally, alignment between the
organisational environment and individual perceptions is vital, as discrepancies contribute to stress
(Lazarus, 1996), impacting work-life balance (WLB).
Predictors of work-family conflict, including inflexible schedules, non-standard work arrangements like
weekend and shift work, limited job autonomy, and individual characteristics (such as dual earner couples
and those with caring responsibilities, often women), further complicate the delicate balance between work
and personal life. The interplay of national policies, income inequality, consumer aspirations, and
occupational expectations collectively contributes to the prevalence of long working hours, further
impacting WLB and overall employee well-being. As Blyton (2008) notes, understanding the link between
aspects of work-time and the ability of individuals to reconcile work and non-work demands is critical in
addressing the challenges associated with WLB.
The manager's dilemma in approving flexible workloads involves a nuanced decision-making process.
Balancing the extension of provisions to cover leisure and voluntary work, implementing formal
procedures for equitable work reallocation, and improving communication systems are key
considerations. Managers must navigate these challenges to accommodate individual needs while ensuring
overall team productivity and maintaining transparent communication. This requires a careful balance to
align employee expectations with organisational goals.
To foster a healthier work-life balance (WLB) at organisations like ClarityBase, various practices can be
implemented. Mommy Track and the 'Family Friendly' Backlash underscore the importance of part-time
work options, allowing employees like Jana Rowe and Davis Bennet to tailor their workload. Similarly,
term-time-only work policies provide flexibility for individuals with specific family-related needs during
school term periods. Additionally, flexible arrangements such as flexi-time and compressed work weeks
provide autonomy over schedules, while job-sharing policies and remote work options enhance
adaptability.
Childcare support policies are crucial in this regard. For instance, ClarityBase provides time off for
employees like Megan to care for children and takes pride in offering on-site or subsidised nurseries,
contributing to a remarkable employee turnover rate of less than 5%. These comprehensive WLB practices
not only enhance satisfaction and well-being but also cultivate a positive work culture, facilitating the
harmonious integration of professional and personal life for a more engaged and productive workforce.
In the UK, the statutory right to request flexible working, available after 26 weeks of service, primarily
benefits employees with parental or caring responsibilities. Employers exhibit a 91% approval rate, but
eight legitimate grounds for refusal balance accommodating employee needs with essential business
considerations. These include additional costs, meeting customer demand, staff reorganization, recruitment
constraints, quality, performance, work sufficiency, and planned structural changes.
Despite statutory provisions, poor communication within organisations poses challenges for implementing
WLB practices. Budd and Mumford's (2006) research reveal that only 16% to 37% of employees actively
engage in WLB practices, with a significant awareness gap favouring senior positions. Clear and inclusive
communication channels are crucial to ensure equal access to and understanding of WLB initiatives across
all employee positions.
Friedman's Total Leadership offers a holistic framework integrating work, home, community, and self,
emphasising synergy among these domains for enhanced well-being and leadership impact. By aligning
values and actions across self, work, home, and community, individuals excel professionally, enrich their
personal lives, and positively contribute to communities.
In conclusion, the modern employment landscape emphasises competitive WLB practices for employee
recruitment and retention. The potential extension of statutory provisions recognises the interconnectedness
of work and life domains. The business case for WLB centres on improving employee health and wellbeing. Encouraging individuals to take leadership over their WLB signifies a transformative approach to
creating healthier and more fulfilling work environments.