The following is Assignment 3 for HRM2604.
Please note plagiarism is a punishable offence, edit and paraphrase assignment to avoid
plagiarism.
Abstract
1.1.Was performance feedback evident in the scenario? Discuss the importance of Naveen
providing his employees with performance feedback. (4)
No it was not evident.
According to Aguinis (2013)
Feedback is important in that it provides improved performance at all levels. Thus, having
information on one’s performance, if paired with a good developmental plan, is likely to
lead to performance improvement……..
, 1.2.Determine and explain the outcomes of a poorly implemented PM system evident at
Naveen’s restaurant. (8)
Chose only eight.
i. Increased turnover. If the process is not seen as fair, employees may become upset and
leave the organization. They can leave physically (i.e., quit) or withdraw psychologically
(i.e., minimize their effort until they are able to find a job elsewhere).
ii. Use of misleading information. If a standardized system is not in place, there are multiple
opportunities for fabricating information about an employee’s performance.
iii. Lowered self-esteem. Self-esteem may be lowered if feedback is provided in an
inappropriate and inaccurate way. This, in turn, can create employee resentment.
iv. Wasted time and money. Performance management systems cost money and quite a bit of
time. These resources are wasted when systems are poorly designed and implemented.
v. Damaged relationships. As a consequence of a deficient system, the relationship among the
individuals involved may be damaged, often permanently.
vi. Decreased motivation to perform. Motivation may be lowered for many reasons, including
the feeling that superior performance is not translated into meaning tangible (e.g., pay
increase) or intangible (e.g., personal recognition) rewards.
vii. Employee burnout and job dissatisfaction. When the performance assessment instrument is
not seen as valid and the system is not perceived as fair, employees are likely to feel
increased levels of job burnout and job dissatisfaction. Therefore, employees are likely
to become increasingly irritated.
viii. Increased risk of litigation. Expensive lawsuits may be filed by individuals who feel they
have been appraised unfairly.
ix. Unjustified demands on managers’ and employees’ resources. Poorly implemented systems
do not provide the benefits provided by well-implemented systems, yet they take up
managers’ and employees’ time. Such systems will be resisted because of competing
obligations and allocation of resources (e.g., time). What is sometimes worse, managers
may simply choose to avoid the system altogether, and employees may feel increased
levels of overload?
x. Varying and unfair standards and ratings. Both standards and individual ratings may vary
across and within units and be unfair.
xi. Emerging biases. Personal values, biases, and relationships are likely to replace
organizational standards.
xii. Unclear ratings system. Because of poor communication, employees may not know how
their ratings are generated and how the ratings are translated into rewards.
1.3.Explain which two operational challenges related to aligning a PM system and
business strategy manifested at Naveen’s restaurant. Substantiate your answer with
evidence from the scenario. (6)
Individual, team and organisational performance is aligned resulting in poor integrated
performance throughout the organisation (good individual and team performance lead to
overall organisation performance).
Please note plagiarism is a punishable offence, edit and paraphrase assignment to avoid
plagiarism.
Abstract
1.1.Was performance feedback evident in the scenario? Discuss the importance of Naveen
providing his employees with performance feedback. (4)
No it was not evident.
According to Aguinis (2013)
Feedback is important in that it provides improved performance at all levels. Thus, having
information on one’s performance, if paired with a good developmental plan, is likely to
lead to performance improvement……..
, 1.2.Determine and explain the outcomes of a poorly implemented PM system evident at
Naveen’s restaurant. (8)
Chose only eight.
i. Increased turnover. If the process is not seen as fair, employees may become upset and
leave the organization. They can leave physically (i.e., quit) or withdraw psychologically
(i.e., minimize their effort until they are able to find a job elsewhere).
ii. Use of misleading information. If a standardized system is not in place, there are multiple
opportunities for fabricating information about an employee’s performance.
iii. Lowered self-esteem. Self-esteem may be lowered if feedback is provided in an
inappropriate and inaccurate way. This, in turn, can create employee resentment.
iv. Wasted time and money. Performance management systems cost money and quite a bit of
time. These resources are wasted when systems are poorly designed and implemented.
v. Damaged relationships. As a consequence of a deficient system, the relationship among the
individuals involved may be damaged, often permanently.
vi. Decreased motivation to perform. Motivation may be lowered for many reasons, including
the feeling that superior performance is not translated into meaning tangible (e.g., pay
increase) or intangible (e.g., personal recognition) rewards.
vii. Employee burnout and job dissatisfaction. When the performance assessment instrument is
not seen as valid and the system is not perceived as fair, employees are likely to feel
increased levels of job burnout and job dissatisfaction. Therefore, employees are likely
to become increasingly irritated.
viii. Increased risk of litigation. Expensive lawsuits may be filed by individuals who feel they
have been appraised unfairly.
ix. Unjustified demands on managers’ and employees’ resources. Poorly implemented systems
do not provide the benefits provided by well-implemented systems, yet they take up
managers’ and employees’ time. Such systems will be resisted because of competing
obligations and allocation of resources (e.g., time). What is sometimes worse, managers
may simply choose to avoid the system altogether, and employees may feel increased
levels of overload?
x. Varying and unfair standards and ratings. Both standards and individual ratings may vary
across and within units and be unfair.
xi. Emerging biases. Personal values, biases, and relationships are likely to replace
organizational standards.
xii. Unclear ratings system. Because of poor communication, employees may not know how
their ratings are generated and how the ratings are translated into rewards.
1.3.Explain which two operational challenges related to aligning a PM system and
business strategy manifested at Naveen’s restaurant. Substantiate your answer with
evidence from the scenario. (6)
Individual, team and organisational performance is aligned resulting in poor integrated
performance throughout the organisation (good individual and team performance lead to
overall organisation performance).
