Revamping Performance Appraisal

Revamping the Performance Appraisal System at Sweetwater State University

• Newly appointed Vice President for Administrative Affairs, Rob Winchester, was tasked with improving the appraisal system used to evaluate secretarial and clerical staff at Sweetwater State University (SSU).
• The traditional performance appraisal system was tied directly to salary increases at the end of the year, incentivizing administrators to rate their clerical staff as “excellent” to ensure maximum pay raises.
• The current university budget did not include enough money to fund maximum annual raises for every staffer, and SSU’s president felt that the custom of providing invalid performance feedback was not productive, leading to the need for a revised system.
• In October, Rob sent a memo to all administrators announcing a “forced ranking” system where no more than half of the secretaries reporting to any particular administrator could be appraised as “excellent,” forcing each supervisor to rank their secretaries based on quality of performance.
• The new system met with widespread resistance from administrators and secretaries, leading to picketing and rumors of a future slowdown by the secretaries.
• Rob consulted with performance appraisal experts at the School of Business to discuss the matter and received recommendations to revise the system.
• The experts recommended a new form to rate secretaries, like the one in Figure 9-2, as the previous form was insufficient and unclear.
• The consultants also recommended canceling the forced ranking system, as it was unfair and could result in all secretaries under an administrator being rated as either excellent or below standard.
• Instead, they recommended that every administrator fill out a form for each secretary at least once a year and use this as the basis for a counseling session, without tying it to salary increases.
• The goal was to get all administrators to take the appraisal process more seriously and provide honest ratings.
• The previous system had resulted in high staff turnover, and the new system aimed to reduce this by providing valid feedback and improving job satisfaction.
• The revised system would require a shift in mindset from administrators and secretaries, but it was hoped that it would lead to a more productive and fair appraisal process.

Revamping the Performance Appraisal System at Sweetwater State University

• Newly appointed Vice President for Administrative Affairs, Rob Winchester, was tasked with improving the appraisal system used to evaluate secretarial and clerical staff at Sweetwater State University (SSU).
• The traditional performance appraisal system was tied directly to salary increases at the end of the year, incentivizing administrators to rate their clerical staff as “excellent” to ensure maximum pay raises.
• The current university budget did not include enough money to fund maximum annual raises for every staffer, and SSU’s president felt that the custom of providing invalid performance feedback was not productive, leading to the need for a revised system.
• In October, Rob sent a memo to all administrators announcing a “forced ranking” system where no more than half of the secretaries reporting to any particular administrator could be appraised as “excellent,” forcing each supervisor to rank their secretaries based on quality of performance.
• The new system met with widespread resistance from administrators and secretaries, leading to picketing and rumors of a future slowdown by the secretaries.
• Rob consulted with performance appraisal experts at the School of Business to discuss the matter and received recommendations to revise the system.
• The experts recommended a new form to rate secretaries, like the one in Figure 9-2, as the previous form was insufficient and unclear.
• The consultants also recommended canceling the forced ranking system, as it was unfair and could result in all secretaries under an administrator being rated as either excellent or below standard.
• Instead, they recommended that every administrator fill out a form for each secretary at least once a year and use this as the basis for a counseling session, without tying it to salary increases.
• The goal was to get all administrators to take the appraisal process more seriously and provide honest ratings.
• The previous system had resulted in high staff turnover, and the new system aimed to reduce this by providing valid feedback and improving job satisfaction.
• The revised system would require a shift in mindset from administrators and secretaries, but it was hoped that it would lead to a more productive and fair appraisal process.