Case59.The Self-Appraisal Problem

Leroy Washington, human resource director at Engel Products, was faced with a problem that he had not experienced before and was uncertain how to proceed. The problem was related to the firm’s self-evaluation appraisal process. This process requires supervisors to evaluate themselves by completing two forms. The first form, Responsibilities and Goal Accomplishments Self Evaluation Report (see Exhibit 3.3), requires that supervisors write down their primary job duties/responsibilities along with the objectives that they had agreed to accomplish during the past year. They are to evaluate themselves from 1 (Outstanding) to 4 (Unsatisfactory). They also need to write an overall performance summary. The second form, Career Development Self Evaluation Report (see Exhibit 3.4), is used for training and development purposes and asks supervisors to indicate their strengths, evaluate themselves in terms of ten criteria, and develop plans for improving their skills and knowledge. It also asks supervisors to explain their career interests by specifying what jobs they aspire to hold in the future. For each objective, they are required to specify the criteria they will use to judge whether the objective was met and a date by which the objective will be accomplished.

Exhibit3.3.Responsibilities and Goal Accomplishments Self-Evaluation Report

Instructions: List below your major job responsibilities and the objectives you set for yourself to accomplish during the past year. Then, rate yourself on each of these items as follows:

1—Outstanding—Your performance far exceeds this job requirement. You far exceeded this goal.

2—Commendable—Your performance exceeds this job requirement. You exceeded this goal.

3—Competent—Your performance met this job requirement. You met this goal.

4—Unsatisfactory—Your performance did not meet this job requirement. You did not meet this goal.

Job Responsibilities	Rating
1.
2.
3.
4.

List other job responsibilities and ratings on a separate page.

Goal Accomplishments (List Goals)	Rating
1.
2.
3.
4.

List other goals and ratings on a separate page.

PERFORMANCE SUMMARY (Using the space below write a summary of your job performance for the past year. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)

Exhibit3.4.Career Development Self-Evaluation Report

PART A—STRENGTHS. Describe below your specific technical, interpersonal, managerial, and other job-related strengths.

PART B—DEVELOPMENTAL NEEDS. Indicate below the technical, interpersonal, managerial, or other job-related weaknesses you perceive in yourself.

PART C—IMPROVEMENT PLANS. State below what steps you plan to take to improve your weaknesses, including any training/education you would like the firm to offer to you.

PART D—SKILL EVALUATION. Evaluate yourself in terms of the ten skills listed below.

SKILL	Unsatisfactory	Competent	Commendable	Outstanding
1. Work quality	4	3	2	1
2. Technical skills	4	3	2	1
3. Productivity	4	3	2	1
4. Adaptability	4	3	2	1
5. Interpersonal skills	4	3	2	1
6. Planning skills	4	3	2	1
7. Initiative	4	3	2	1
8. Decision making	4	3	2	1
9. Analytical skills	4	3	2	1
10. Profit orientation	4	3	2	1

PART E—FUTURE JOB. Indicate what job or jobs you would like to hold in the future.

Washington’s major problem was that one of the sales staff supervisors had not completed her self-evaluation on time. The firm had a policy that all supervisors were to be evaluated annually by their immediate manager. The policy stipulated that each supervisor was to complete a self-evaluation and turn it into his/her immediate manager by a specific date. Prior to seeing this self-evaluation, the manager would also complete an evaluation on the supervisor. The two would then meet, trade evaluations, compare the two documents, and discuss differences. The completed evaluations were then turned in to the HR director for review.

Unfortunately, Carol McCalmont had not turned in her evaluation by the deadline. Washington told McCalmont’s manager, Janet Weber, that the deadline had passed and asked Weber to remind McCalmont to quickly turn in the self-evaluation. One week later, the self-evaluation had not been completed; McCalmont stated she was still working on it and would turn it in soon. Another week went by, and McCalmont still had not submitted the self-evaluation, so Washington told Weber to let McCalmont know that she would not receive a scheduled raise until the report was completed.

Two more weeks passed and nothing happened. Then, Washington received a file that contained a performance review for McCalmont, written by Weber. However, the file did not include McCalmont’s required self-evaluation. Washington immediately called Weber to find out why McCalmont had not completed the report and why Weber had submitted her evaluation in the absence of a self-evaluation. Weber responded that she could only guess as to why McCalmont had not completed the report: the self-appraisal process was too time-consuming, and she did not want to admit that her performance was unsatisfactory in some areas. Weber added that she did not want to hold up McCalmont’s raise any longer and that is why she completed and submitted her evaluation. She believed that a small raise was warranted and that McCalmont’s failure to complete a self-evaluation should not disqualify her from receiving the raise.

Questions

• What action should Leroy Washington take in response to Carol McCalmont’s and Janet Weber’s actions? Should McCalmont be granted a raise even though she had not completed her self-evaluation?
• Evaluate Engel Product’s self-appraisal system. Should it be changed to make it more effective? Is it too time-consuming?
• Should the firm eliminate the self-appraisal portion of its appraisal system?