http://ordercustomessay.com/samples.php

1. Running head: ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR & LEADERSHIP 1
1
Organizational Behavior & Leadership
Name:
Course:
Professor Name:
(August 11, 2012)
.

2. ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR & LEADERSHIP 2
Organizational Behavior & Leadership
Performance evaluation identifies with performance appraisals (PA). It is a periodic
and systematic process that is used to assess the job performances on the individual
employees concerning productivity according to a preset organizational objectives and
criteria (Robbins & Judge, 2007). The areas of considerations identifies with future
improvement potential, organizational citizenship behavior, task accomplishments,
weaknesses and strong points among other aspects (DelPo, 2012). Performance evaluation
data is collected with judgmental evaluation, personnel evaluations and objective production
evaluation.
Considering this case study, it has been noted that the engineer had previous exposure
with the aerospace industry. He is considered detail oriented, bright and hardworking. The
engineer is task oriented considering that he made vital changes to the middle sized
manufacturing company that led to massive savings in costs resonating with energy and
safety hazards. Despite the current developments, it has been noted that the engineer is
resented by the fellow co-workers. The engineer is not ready to be evaluated citing little
confidence with the company’s system of approaching the evaluation processes. He argues
that rating scales are defective focusing on relationships and personal traits (Robbins &
Judge, 2007).
The manager has been considering putting in place the 360 degree evaluation plan,
but he is doubtful whether the stubborn engineer will accept. The engineer at most times pays
less attention to the manager when he is addressing the coworkers. The 360 degree feedback
identifies with multi-rater feedback, multi source assessment and multi source feedback. This
model incorporates the feedback particularly from the members of the employees. This
means that the manager considers the direct feedback from the teams within the employee’s
peers, subordinates, self evaluation and supervisors.

3. ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR & LEADERSHIP 3
In some cases, evaluations from the external forces are considered resonating with
suppliers and customers and other influential stakeholders (Jensen, 2007), this maybe
performance by the application of traditional performance appraisal or by upward feedback
(Robbins & Judge, 2007). The results obtained are used in setting developmental map and
plan. This is critical in developing administrative decisions, particularly relating to
promotions and pay. The manager noted with concerns that the engineer was characterized
with medium rating on friendly aspects, low medium rating on workplace neatness and low
medium rating on the attitude (DelPo, 2012).
The company reflects on friendly rating, workplace neatness rating and attitude rating.
It was noted that the friendly rating on the part of the engineer was low considering that he
did not respect the inputs of the other employees (Jensen, 2007). It has been noted that work
friendly environment gears at successful work relationships. This is critical in cultivating
trust, diversity, mindfulness, interrelatedness, respect, varied interactions and effective
communication models. Rating on workplace neatness gears is critical in defining the
impression created by the leader in terms of work organization (Robbins & Judge, 2007).
Research indicates that un-neat leaders display unreliability, inefficiency, undependability,
incompetency and disorganized in nature (DelPo, 2012). This is despite the actual work
output. Rating on attitude identifies with the negative and positive views of the work, people,
events, things and the general outlook. Attitude correlates with emotions that define the
ability to perceive issues. Research indicates that friendly aspects, work neatness and attitude
are among the highly valued inputs in the organizational evaluations.
Employees are evaluated on objectives set, documented employee input, documented
leader input, verbal feedbacks and follow-ups among other considerations (Jensen, 2007).
Other areas of considerations identifies with initiatives, ambitions, attendance, cooperation,
attitude, communication skills, organizational oriented, general focus, integrity, previous

4. ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR & LEADERSHIP 4
evaluation improvements, effective duty allocations, technical knowledge, meeting deadlines,
productivity and quality of work. Other considerations identifies with reliability, stress
management, pitching in, teamwork and performance levels (DelPo, 2012).
The merits of including the peers, supervisors and the subordinates in evaluation
processes identify with the adding relevance, usefulness and in-depth information to the staff
members. This is considering that the managers find it challenging in evaluating employees
(Robbins & Judge, 2007). Effectiveness is enhanced by incorporating peers, subordinates and
supervisors in the employee’s evaluations. The disadvantages of using the peers, subordinates
and supervisors in employee evolutions identify with biasness and possible set ups leading to
legal issues. This means that information gathered maybe irrelevant, giving the wrong picture
of the employee being evaluated (Robbins & Judge, 2007).
Performance evaluation used in analyzing the performance data identifies with
objective production, personnel evaluation and the judgmental evaluation. Research indicates
that judgmental evaluations are the most common among the evaluation methods. The three
methods critically bring out the shape of the employees, which is critical in the success or
failure of the organization. It has been noted that the three models enhances on employee
feedback provision, developing employees, counseling employees, discussing compensations,
conveying compensations, enhancing disciplinary measures and defining the job status
(DelPo, 2012). Common bias and errors in the evaluations identifies with the stereotyping,
halo effects, similar to me errors and consensus tendencies. Accuracy is emphasized in this
case to provide reliability of the information collected (Robbins & Judge, 2007).
Reflecting on the case study, it has been noted that the best model applicable in the
evaluating the engineer is best administered by the performance management team and the
human resources management team through 360 degree feedback performed several times
per year. The fact that the engineer is against evaluations on the annual basis calls for regular

5. ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR & LEADERSHIP 5
evaluations which has better implications to the employees and to the organization in general.
This means that evaluations to be conducted in surprising and in unexpected feedback
systems (Jensen, 2007).
References

6. ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR & LEADERSHIP 6
DelPo, A. (2012). How to Conduct Employee Evaluations. Retrieved August 11, 2012, from
Nolo.com: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/employee-evaluations-how-to-
conduct-29547.html
Jensen, J. (2007). Employee evaluation: It is a Dirty Job, but Somebody's got to do it. The
Grantsmanship Center , 1-15.
Robbins, S. P. & Judge, T. A., (2007). Organizational behavior. (12th ed.). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.