Case Study
“A Performance Appraisal Snafu” 1. What do you see as the problem in this case? Explain. There are two issues I see in this case; first I disagree with peer evaluations. If at any point you had an issue with a co-worker, that could sway there judgment on your evaluation. Second, the evaluation of Mr. Taft by Mr. Fryer. Fryer should have excused himself from the evaluation if he could not be fair. He worked closely with Taft prior to this assignment. Mr. Singh has the same qualifications as Taft, but has more tenure with the company. Due to Singh’s work and his tenure he should have received the same or better than Taft.
2. Could these problems have been avoided? How? The issues could have been avoided, if the company had been doing the evaluations prior to the moves. It also could have been done differently by allowing the former department heads to evaluate the employees prior to the change of position. This would have been more fair and impartial.
3. Comment on the advantages and disadvantages of using peer evaluations in the appraisal process. The way I see it peer evaluations have the advantage of having it done by a person, with whom they work closely. The work performance would be more observed by a co-worker than a supervisor. I am not saying a supervisor is negligent, but they have to observe all employees not just one. The employees work closely with one another on a day to day basis. This allows them to observe both good and bad attributes.
4. What can be done to resolve the problem with Marcus Singh? I believe that his evaluation should be completed by his prior supervisor and re-submitted. This would be a fair assessment and he may feel better about the evaluation. I also think Mr. Taft’s should be completed again, by his prior supervisor to compare them. Mr. Fryer, I believe, let his personal knowledge and history with Taft to cloud his judgment on the evaluations. If the evaluations are found to be in error the company should
2. Could these problems have been avoided? How? The issues could have been avoided, if the company had been doing the evaluations prior to the moves. It also could have been done differently by allowing the former department heads to evaluate the employees prior to the change of position. This would have been more fair and impartial.
3. Comment on the advantages and disadvantages of using peer evaluations in the appraisal process. The way I see it peer evaluations have the advantage of having it done by a person, with whom they work closely. The work performance would be more observed by a co-worker than a supervisor. I am not saying a supervisor is negligent, but they have to observe all employees not just one. The employees work closely with one another on a day to day basis. This allows them to observe both good and bad attributes.
4. What can be done to resolve the problem with Marcus Singh? I believe that his evaluation should be completed by his prior supervisor and re-submitted. This would be a fair assessment and he may feel better about the evaluation. I also think Mr. Taft’s should be completed again, by his prior supervisor to compare them. Mr. Fryer, I believe, let his personal knowledge and history with Taft to cloud his judgment on the evaluations. If the evaluations are found to be in error the company should