There are a variety of factors that can affect the overall performance rating of an individual. Aguinis (2019) defined two methods—judgmental and mechanical—for reaching an overall score, and states that the mechanical approach is preferable in most cases, particularly if performance objectives are not weighted.
Review “Case Study 6-1: Judgmental and Mechanical Methods of Assigning Overall Performance Score at
The Daily Planet
” at the end of Chapter 6 in the
Performance Management
textbook.
First use the judgmental method to come up with Kuhn’s overall performance score.
Next, compute Kuhn’s overall performance score using the weights in the table.
Is there a difference in the scores? What are the implications for the employee rated, for the supervisor, and for the organization? Which method would you use and why?
Chapter 6 Performance Analytics
193
1
2.
3
4
5
Quality of work-Work meets quality standards and
established editorial standards; stories are written
in clear and appropriate manner, are consistent with
editorial policy, and are fair and balanced; research
is thorough and encompasses all relevant sources,
which are verified to ensure accuracy, works with
editors to revise and improve content; develops and
maintains network of contacts who can provide early
notification of breaking stories.
Dependability and adherence to company values and
policies-Consistently meets deadlines, conforms to
attendance policies; adapts to work demands; con-
forms to established values and policies; adheres to
ethical standards of the paper and the profession; re-
spects confidentiality as appropriate; behaves in man-
ner that enhances the image of the paper.
Contribution to effectiveness of others/unit-Works
with others within and outside the unit in a manner that
improves their effectiveness; shares information and
resources, develops effective working relationships;
builds consensus, constructively manages conflict;
contributes to the effectiveness of own unit/group and
the paper
2.
3
4
1
2
3
4
CASE STUDY 6-2
Minimizing Distortions in Performance Data at Expert
Engineering, Inc.
U
Ender various engineer titles, veteran engineer
Demetri worked for Expert Engineering, Inc. for
almost 15 years. He has recently been promoted
to the position of Principal at the engineering firm. The
firm’s performance evaluation history is both unique
and long. All principals are involved in evaluating
engineers because the founders of the firm believed
in multiple source evaluation and feedback to prevent
favoritism and promote a merit-based culture. At the
same time, the firm has a long history of using quality
performance appraisal forms and review meetings to
bet ensure accurate performance evaluations.
months ago, however, the firm initiated a big hiring
initiative of a dozen new engineers, nine of whom turn
out to be graduates from Purdue University, which is
the same university from which Demetri graduated.
Indeed, Demetri was active in moving forward the
hiring initiative. There is tension and discontent among
the other principals, who fear that a time of unchecked
favoritism, biased performance ratings, and unfair
promotion decisions is on the rise.
1. Provide a detailed discussion of the
intentional rating distortion factors that may
come into play in this situation.
2. Evaluate the kinds of interventions you
could implement to minimize intentional
rating distortion, and its reasons, that you
have described. What do you recommend
and why?
CASE STUDY 6-1
Judgmental and Mechanical Methods of Assigning
Overall Performance Score at The Daily Planet
T
The form here shows performance ratings
obtained by David Kuhn, a hypothetical
reporter at a major newspaper in the United
States. First, use the judgmental method to come up
with his overall performance score. What is Kuhn’s
overallº performance score?
Second, the form below actually omitted weight
information for the various competencies. The
weights are the following:
Now, compute Kuhn’s overall performance score
using the weights in the table. Is there a difference
between the score computed using a subjective,
rather than the mechanical method? If yes, what
are the implications of these differences for the
employee being rated, for the supervisor, and for
the organization?
Weight
Competency
Producvtivity
.15
Quality of work
.50
.25
Dependability and adherence to company values and
policies
Contribution to effectiveness of others/unit
10
Name: David Kuhn
Job Title:
Reporter
Supervisor:
John DuBoss
Dept.: International
Performance Period:
from Jan 19
to Dec 19
Job Description: Researches and writes news, features, analyses, human interest stories. Develops and cultivates news
sources and contacts. Completes assignments by deadlines, ensuring accuracy by verifying sources. Attends newsworthy
events and interviews key sources. Respects confidentiality as appropriate.
Does not
fully meet
Unacceptable standards
Fully meets
standards
Significantly
exceeds
standards
Outstanding
1
3
4
5
Productivity-Production is high relative to time and re-
sources consumed; develops expected number of sto-
ries and covers beat adequately to ensure stories are
detected as they break; stories are developed within
time frame that enables deadlines to be met; and ap-
propriate reviews are performed as they are refined.
“Adapted from R. J. Greene, 2003, “Contributing to Organizational Success Through Effective Performance Appraisal,” Alexandria,
VA, Society for Human Resource Management.
192
Purchase answer to see full
attachment