Nils Ekdahl and Anita Fierst are the VP and CFO of Circale Corporation which is in the path of expansion and had few acquisitions in the near past as a part of it. A pay roll cut of 20 million demanded by the CEO required in a span of four months due to untenable duplication of departments. But Mr, Ekdahl wants the right persons at the right job for every job. Michael Milanese had been the chief architect of a new performance-review system that Ekdahl was about to implement across all six of Circale's global locations. Circale Corporation has also been a past sufferer of unjustified cuts where in they just fired the employees from the organizations they merged with. The project was then dragged on to Fierst who was able to persuade the CEO that Milanese was ineffective and should be "encouraged" to retire. In the performance review report Ekdhal found that the managers had put mostly 4 and 5 in the performance review. So he conducted another Performance review after giving the managers training on how to grade the employees; despite of the opposition from the CFO ,but could find mostly find 3s this time. Problem Statment
Many managers are afraid of being the bad guy on performance reviews, which limits the individual development of employees and hinders overall talent development in organizations. Endhal should look into this problem and take it seriously since it is important aspect for the future of the organization. Why are the managers are dishonest / do not follow the marking schemes even after the guidelines and awareness about the importance of it, given to them? What can be done about with how much time and expense?
Should Ekdhal go forward with conducting one more performance review system design?
Ekdahl needs to ensure that his approach is not entirely concentrated on gathering grades. While performance management is important for the firm, the way the performance is reviewed is more important. You cannot enforce the Managers...