Personal write-up (Case 2) : Performance Management at Vitality Health Enterprises, Inc.

The employees direct leader or manager should evaluate employee performance.

Because since their direct leaders know about their employee work content and job performance.
The purpose of performance appraisal is not review or record the employees work result. But
guiding and assisting employees better finish the work target. And the most important is
feedback. Because within feedback, employees can know how well they work performance and
how to improve themselves. Manager should evaluate employees performance with gives rating
through PMS(A-E).

With personal report and peers evaluation could help the direct leader make a better
appraisal since employee work with each other almost every day. They know each other
performance well. The process of self-evaluation is also process for employees to reflect and
summarize their performance.

When an individual, team, or organization performances are lacking, a leaders should be

motivate or penalize the lack of performances. In real world, my opinion both will work. With
the reward system, employee should be motivated for gaining a bigger salary and recognition
from the leader. And with penalize employee will be more work hard because they afraid get
penalize.

Moreover, many low achievers will be categorized as achiever just to fill spot. I suggest
manager should set small target to each the employee. Every employees achieved one of the
many targets may get a credit and the credit can be accumulated will be automatically classified
Achiever or even Top Achiever. This sound fairer and most employees will focus on their own
target and get good score.

The Vitality health had 13 different rating level from A-E including plus and minus
which led to managerial abuses. PMET discovered that many managers gave almost everyone C
or B provide D or A ratings and rarely gave E. And hence there was a homogeneous rating
systems which fail to distinguish between performers and non-performers. So the system should
be revised. There are two bad about this system :
1. Some employees only do duties that will be reviewed and less likely spend time on tasks that
not helpful their performance appraisal result. Although these task can help the company.

2. Both a good performance department and a failing department have the same allotment of Top
achiever rankings which is unfair for the employees in good performance department.

To this point, the company should make evaluation method as well as merit allocation
method more flexible. In my opinion I recommend add reward method. With set up outstanding
contribution bonus to reward employees who make a contribution for the company. And set up
progress award to reward the employees who make a big progress. With this the employee will
feel more appreciated. I also recommend the company have performance appraisal every quarter
to avoid unintentional errors such as memory and judgment errors.

Forced distribution model of performance rankings could distinguish top performers and
bad performers, motivate the employees and attract new top performers and can also avoid
managers having leniency. However, the worse thing is bad relationship between the colleagues.
Manager can be evaluation on their performance. This will make the manager have a serious
attitude toward evaluation work and if their rates are not good, they can reflect their working
method. However, the worse thing is that if the employees not satisfy with their performance
rating results, they may blame it for their managers and give managers an unreal rate.