Read the following case and answer questions that follow. PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEMS AT ALBION DRINKS Albion Drinks is a manufacturer of its own-brand soft drinks which are sold in grocery stores and supermarkets across the UK, and the company also provides private-label products to the major supermarket chains. It is part of a larger parent organisation which manufactures a wide range of products across the whole fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) spectrum. Its main manufacturing base (which is also its head office) is located in the North West of England. At its main location, the company employs around 1,200 staff of whom 1,000 are factory-based production operatives, with a further 200 based in the head office, undertaking support activities including finance, marketing, sales, product development, human resources and logistics. Trade Union membership within the factory is high (almost 100%) although only 25% of the head office employees are in a Trade Union. Two different Trade Unions represent the two separate groups of employees. The Employee Relations climate is generally good, although factory-based employees have traditionally been resistant to change, and are often slow to adopt new working practices. The company recently appointed a new HR Director following the retirement of his predecessor who had been in post for approximately 20 years. The newly-appointed HR Director did not come from a traditional HR background, but rather from production management in one of Albion’s sister companies. Staff generally believed that he had been appointed with a brief to generally "shake things up a bit." Upon appointment, one of the first activities of the new HRD was to task the Head Office HR Manager with the responsibility of introducing an appraisal system for all employees in the Head Office. His brief - or rather his instruction - to the HR Manager was to establish contact with the HR Director in one of Albion’s sister companies and simply lift their existing appraisal process and introduce it within Albion’s Head Office. "We don't want anything fancy or best practice; just something that we can use immediately with the minimum of cost and fuss" was his stated recommendation. The HR Manager followed his boss's instructions and obtained copies of the relevant paperwork which was rather more complicated that he had expected, particularly as the appraisal system in the sister company not only contained annual assessment against the year's objectives, but also an evaluation of each employee's performance in key competency areas which seemed appropriate within the sister company, but somewhat alien to Albion Drinks. Albion's sister division had not only trained its managers, but had also produced a comprehensive "How to Undertake an Employee Appraisal" guide. The HR Director therefore decided to save valuable time and money, and circulated copies of the training material in November to all appraising managers, along with copies of the relevant paperwork, with the instruction that all employees were to have received an appraisal by the end of December, by which date all documentation was to have been returned to the HR department. “These guys are experienced managers,” said the HR Director, “so they shouldn’t need any training in how to conduct an appraisal, should they?” The first murmurings of dissent started almost immediately when some of the Head Office managers raised questions over who they were supposed to be appraising. Certain departments had a shared resource pool of secretaries and administrative staff, and it had never been made clear who reported to whom, so there was confusion over who exactly was the appraising manager for some employees. In a few departments it was evident that managers and supervisors were using the lack of clarity as a way to evade responsibility for undertaking appraisals. It wasn’t too long after this that managers raised their concern over the terminology in the key competencies section of the appraisal documentation, particularly one area that required them to assess the “Innovation and Creativity” of their subordinates. One manager commented, “I pay my staff to come to work and make sure that the books balance at the end of the month. Whether or not they are innovative or creative has got nothing to do with the job.” Issues took a further negative turn when representatives from both Trade Union groups (i.e. both the Head Office Trade Union and the one representing factory-based staff) requested to see the HR Manager. The TU official representing the factory staff made his view perfectly clear by stating, “You might think that you can force something like this on the guys in the Head Office, but there’s no way that my members in the factory will agree to have such a shoddy process imposed on them. I’ll be instructing them to refuse to co-operate if you introduce something like this without consulting with the shop stewards.” The HR Manager raised his concerns with his boss the HR Director, who suggested that they let events take their course, as he was certain that at least in the Head Office the majority of managers would comply with the requirement to have all appraisals completed by the end of the year .The HR Manager left it until after the Christmas and New Year break before he counted the returned appraisal paperwork. Less than 45% had been returned.

Required:

a. Explain five performance management pitfalls in the above case study and provide possible solutions for each. (10 marks)

b. If you were appoint human resource Director for Albion Drinks what steps or measure would you have taken to ensure implementation of a sound performance management and appraisal system (10 marks)

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

ANSWER Leniency effect This pitfall occurs when a reviewer is nervous to give low ratings or negative feedback they want their employees to like them ... View the full answer