The performance evaluation system of Maple leaf shoes is so ineffective hence affecting the overall performance of the company. Performance evaluation system must be one which creates motivational opportunities to employees. What happens in Maple leaf shoes is discouraging to workers.
More than 75% of company’s employee had negative feelings about the system. This means that many workers are not satisfied with the manner in which they get assessed. Supervisors fail to meet their obligations by not conducting the assessment process as expected. It is said that some supervisors fill in appraisal forms in three minutes. In fact, there is no way an employee can be assessed in three minutes. This shows negligence among supervisors in doing their work.
The company’s management also has played a role in poor assessment. This is because actions are not taken to reflect employees’ performance. Since no promotions are effected based on the assessment reports, supervisors consider the assessment as a useless exercise. As a result, they fill in the assessment forms just to amuse their bosses but not for the best of the company.
I would recommend that supervisors receive thorough training in order to understand the essence of carrying out employee assessment. Then management should take actions depending on the reports drafted from the appraisal forms. For example, performers should be rewarded by either promotion or monetary gifts.
Those not performing well should also be involved in discussing their performance, and this can help identify their areas of weakness. Once the weak points are identified management can provide possible solutions hence increasing employees’ performance. The system of assessing employee performance should be restructured to ensure that employees accept the outcomes. When these changes are implemented, employees can enjoy healthy working relationships hence giving their best to the company.
For the case of Canadian Pacific and International Bank, a 360 degrees performance evaluation system has been faced with opposition from some section of managers. If I were in Mary Keddy’s position, I would work with the managers supporting the system to pull the rest into supporting it.
The first step is to engage middle managers in a discussion regarding the new performance system. Make them understand the benefits of successful 360 degrees performance evaluation systems. The managers should be allowed to air their fears about the new system and then all issues discussed. She should make sure that all fears raised are satisfactorily addresses and then together with the managers they should lay down strategies for implementation.
The next step should be training employees on how to evaluate their seniors and their fellow colleagues in the right direction. This ensures that backstabbing is not given a chance in the process of evaluation hence concentrating on areas suited for the best of the company. Since this system involves everybody in the company evaluating their colleagues, managers and their juniors, the evaluation forms should be guided by the human resource representatives.
For example, questionnaires meant for evaluating managers should contain areas which concerns performance. This helps control circumstances where workers may be bitter with their supervisors and would like to express all their feelings on the evaluation form. After everyone is convinced about the introduction of the new evaluation plan, Mary can proceed and introduce the evaluation system in the company. She should give details of when assessment will be done and make sure everybody takes part in the process.