CLC Assignment of Performance Appraisal at Telespazio
Telespazio is a company that is a leading edge in the industry of aerospace. This organization deals with implementing organizational models that have a global structure matrix and foster international integration and growth. The HR team of Telespazio was given the task to align the Human Resources Management System with Telespazio’s demands which were aimed at improving the strategic and the organizational changes that were occurring. The company focused on the PAT program which was the performance appraisal system. The program was introduced in 2005 and consisted of two parts. This appraisal program had been divided into two parts. The first part was the performance appraisal system which concentrated on who was in charge of the steps of the assessment. Also the Human Resource had significant challenges consisting of major revisions that were made to the appraisal program which were revising the entire program. Another challenge that was presented was implementing the entire redone performance appraisal system to Telespazio’s worldwide foreign subsidiaries that were to be completed by 2014. This company was in the middle of significant organizational and strategic change. Telespazio as intently focused on assessing employees who operated in the matrix organizations which were primarily project based. This was a critical review because any evaluation methods that are ineffective can assist in making employees perceive that there are ambiguous understandings of the roles and expectations that were needed to successfully complete the project. At the first juncture of the implementation there was a three tired approach which relied on the input of Direct Supervisors who were using Subjective measures with regard to their own teams, scoring every member in the outstanding ranges of evaluation while other Supervisors were not. This scoring effectively created a drastic difference in the median, and scores were uneven company wide and probably inaccurate, albeit well intentioned for the purposes of creating positive morale. Being that the scoring systems were less specific in the three tiered evaluation, the evaluation system had to be eventually changed to a four tier, which was then better able to specifically align the Objective evaluations with the Subjective, and to utilize actual information from the employees via the interview process and testing scores, rather than general opinions or overviews of direct Supervisors. Regarding testing and interviews and evaluations in other countries, there had been barriers also culturally which had not been fully addressed in prior reviews. The cultural differences not only in Management and Leadership styles varies from culture to culture, as well as self-evaluation and interview styles as to what is valuable to each person in the work place. So many differences which can be subtle such as in some cultures there is not a visible hierarchy in Management, or Leadership, people are not used to speaking-up to openly talk about their own positive skills, and attributes (Morrison & Conaway, 2016), or openly talk about personal issues that are affecting their work. Such practices are considered offensive or immodest, or a weakness, so these cultures may have to rely on performance based analytics more than self-evaluations in interviews. These aspects of cultural differences within the same company must be taken into account when designing Evaluations, and Reviews. There could be a separate testing design, perhaps outlined by a company who specializes in designing these tests cross-culturally. The interview process should be very specific to the culture in which the company is practicing, and not simply just an English translation of questions and evaluations based on those answers. These types of interviews should be an exchange of finite information, and also a time where the employee being interviewed has a chance to add input to what could be done better in the company, explain any short-comings in their performance, and a chance to be given further training if necessary. (Thompson, 2017)
Telespazio uses a performance appraisal system referred to as T-PAD which stands for Telespazio Group Performance Appraisal for Development. The system is used in evaluating each of the employees’ performance. As a result, every employee is put through a similar system to ensure that there is fairness and equality in the way that the employees. The employees are made to understand that they have differences which make them unique in the organization. Telespazio has embraced diversity which has led to the company remaining successful in the competitive industry (Singh, 2012). Through the use of T-PAD, Telespazio has managed to develop employees, their talents and skills. Additionally, the company has managed to achieve the objectives that are set by the management and the stakeholders. On the other hand, the company has enabled the employees to understand their areas of their weaknesses and make improvements that they can make to be better in their duties. The employees have therefore made changes that have made them suitable for their different organizational roles. All the employees are given an opportunity of making changes in their abilities through the T-PAD.
At Telespazio, performance rating is done through the use of a rating scale which divides employees into five categories. Level 5 is referred to as the exceptional level where the performance of the employees is far beyond the expectations. The level has employees in an organization who have unique skills and abilities thus offering high quality work in their different departments. Level 4 consists of employees who are just above the expectations of the organization while level 3 consists of employees who meet the expectations of the organization. level 2 of the rating is consisted of employees who need to make improvements in order to meet the expectations of the organization (Tselentis, 2009). On the other hand, level 1 consists of employees who are unsatisfactorily performing their daily duties thus making them unsuitable to the organization. The rating method is of importance to the organization as it enables the management to make necessary changes that would make the employees make improvements in their roles.
Morrison, T., & Conaway, W. A. (2016). Business management style in Sweden and doing business in Sweden.: World business culture. Retrieved January 12, 2017, from http://www.worldbusinessculture.com/Swedish-Management-Style.html
Thompson, V. (2017). American vs. Chinese business culture. Small Business Chron. Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/american-vs-chinese-business-culture-59039.html
Serio, L., Nanut, V., & Borgonovi, E. (2016). The Italian model of management: A selection of case studies. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing Limited.
Singh, S. (2012). New mega trends: Implications for our future lives. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.