1. Identify three problems or flaws which may be present in the way the performance management process is being handled in this case. Explain why these are problems.
2. Why do you think Yusoff requested a transfer to another team?
3. Who is more "right" in being puzzled by the results of the performance management process--Yusoff or Karl? Explain your position.
4. What should be done to improve the performance management process used by Karl's company ?

Karl Swenson is the head of a atilities engincering project groop is a multination cnterprise based in the United States. With growiag opportunities due to globalization the company has emphasized the need to operace as a truly global organization, no as an MNC with various regiors or a U.S.-based company with overseas operations One implication of this goal is that cmployees are increasingly working together in multiple teams, includiag on a virtual basis, with representatives from all over the world and more frequently have sepervisors from different coentries. Karl's U.S. groep works with software sapport enginecring groeps in overseas operations, particularly in Malaysia, on an important new software program in utilities managemene. Because the team was provided the latest means of technolegy (for cxample, teleconferencing and electronic group softeare) to communicate globally, litule training was given te team members on eross-celtural conmaunication. The ream is under pressure not oaly to mcet quality standards on the new prodoct but also to get the program to market quickly. To meet these goals Karl sends e-mail messages such as the follosing to his coanterpart team leader, Yusoff, in Malaysia: We have followed the procedures suflicicnily and lave done enoegh rosesis to neamonably. meat and imrsodiadly mone on to the sets phase. These brief e-mail messages were sometimes met with unexpectedly long silences from the counterparts in Malaysia. At ober times the reaponding e-inal messages. indicated agrtement with Karl's poirs of view. Regardles of the respense, it was clear the Malaysias team appeared to cominue doing more teating and looking at the program from different atgles and checkpoints. Toward the end of a particularly important phave of the program-development projtet, Karl traveled to Malaysia for two weeki to finish the phase. The rwo weeks stretchod to four weeki, bet after much had work the product phase was sucoessfully. complesed. Just before he was to return to the Unitod Stam, Karl was ramiak of (I at importast task associated with one of the MNC's core values, whin ho as ao prowill timely -360-degree foedbuck-" As the acam leader, Karl was an imporiant snem of of ieformation in evaluabing Yusofr? work performance, and be neoded to provide force back as pact of Yusoff's performence apraisal. Ueing performance evaluation form provided by the MNC headquarters, Karl met with Yooff mand told him that alchoegh be had performed very well en the project overall, there were some arcas in which Yumof conld improve. Lace Karl documented the foedback in at o-mail to Ylasef and his supervisor in Maleysia. He felt he had carried oot the performance appraisa. in a transparent, falt manter in foll acoordance with the atandardl for foedback act. by his company. Karl was then quive sarpriand ia the week following his return to the Unikod Sutes. when he learned that Yeaofr had abrupely requested a trassfer to another itame witha very mueh to his sutementi dering the meeting evaluating his performanoe and never request for a transfrer and woedered why he was not respoedies to the laicut e-mal menases. Yes, there had been some problems, but this is normal with a bis proper. The moar important thisg for Karl wis that hey hat gotien the job done roceeseffully. Now be had a new prodict design to work on and he nednd the fall eflors of huston and the Malay sian cffice to move quickly to meet the neat deadine. Well, mag to in