Performance evaluations has several major purposes, a few include providing a basis for rewards and to evaluate previous training programs (Ivancevich, Konopaske, Matteson). I believe the managers presented the flaws in the evaluation system. One of the flaws that were pointed out in the case was the fact that emotions can creep into the evaluation process. If a manager has just chastised one of his or her employees that anger could cause a good employee to receive a bad mark. The evaluation process can allow dishonesty to enter. In the case a manager gave an employee a good mark even though her work was not up to par. Her reasoning was that the employee was going through a tough time and this mark would help pull her out.
I do not believe that evaluations can effectively grade employees. I once worked for a company where I was evaluated by a manager who only saw my work for two months. My previous supervisor was fired. I received a mediocre mark. In felt I was unfairly judged because the new manager hadn’t been around long enough. Although the system is not perfect I believe it can be corrected. I would like to see monthly evaluations conducted and then have them averaged to come up with a yearly score.
In your opinion, at what point does “fine-tuning” evaluations become unacceptable distortion?
Fine tuning becomes a problem when you are not accurately grading your team. You may have the intentions of helping someone out but you end up hurting them by letting them know their flaws. Although you may believe the system is flawed you have to stick with the guidelines you were given. I am not a fan of the system as it stands. I would advocate changing the system. However without agreed changes to the system I do not think they can be made.
Assume you are the vice president of human resources at Eckel Industries...