This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: TO: Phillip Truelove, Director of HR, Hotel (The Mercer) SUBJECT: Employee Performance Review of Hotel (The Mercer) DATE: December 3, 2004 Though Hotel (The Mercer)’s method of reviewing employee performance consists of various assessment techniques, it lacks in its overall clarity and efficiency. Mixed-Standard Scales Strengths The most obvious strength of this appraisal is how it has separate rating scales for each reporting dimension, i.e. personal effectiveness, business awareness, and service excellence. This breaks down the core areas that Mercer wants their employees to excel in, in an organized fashion. Another positive aspect of the rating scale is that they provide a space for “supporting evidence,” which provides support for the reviewers claim about each employee’s performance. Weaknesses A mixed-standard scale is used to compare employees’ traits with a standard for those traits 1 , however, the performance standards of this scale are vague and imprecise. Another reason for using a mixed-standard scale is to specifically define each category. Using a four-point rating scale that does not fully differentiate between each of the numbers does not clearly define each category. When using any kind of rating scale, “people are either doing their jobs in an unsatisfactory manner, a satisfactory manner, or an exceptional manner” 2 . Having only three categories to choose from clearly states how that employee is performing. In this case, how does one differentiate between an employee that “under normal working circumstances organizes self to ensure completion of tasks,” and one who “thinks ahead and organizes self to meet changing demands of the department”? Isn’t it possible for one employee to be able to do both? These two choices for the same “Personal Organization” category both describe positive behaviors, with little differentiation between the two. These kinds of vague employment standards can get the organization into legal trouble. For example, in the case of Albemarle Paper Company v Moody , it had been found that 1 Bohlander/Snell. Managing Human Resources . p. 352. 2 Losyk, Bob. “How to Conduct a Performance Appraisal.” Public Management Magazine . April, 2002. p.9 “employees had been ranked against a vague standard, open to each supervisor’s interpretation” 3 . Because of this, appraisals must clearly define and describe specific traits that are being evaluated. In this case, if an employee thinks that the reviewer was bias in the way that they evaluated them or that they did not rate them fairly (which...
View Full Document
- Fall '07
- Management, supervisor, rating scale