General Motors Performance Management System - Case Study Example

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL Name: Institute: Performance Appraisal Introduction A worker performance appraisal according to Samarakone (2010) is a process frequently integrating both oral as well as written elements; wherein management assesses and offers feedback on worker job performance, which includes steps to redirect or improve activities as required. Performance documentation offers a platform for promotions as well as pay increases, and appraisals are as well imperative to assist employees improve their performance as well double up as an path through which employees can be rewarded or acknowledged for a job well done. Additionally, appraisals can act as a host of other undertakings, offering an initiation point from which organisations can shape and elucidate responsibilities in line with trends of the business, comprehensible management lines, and encourage re-examinations of possible old business practices. All workers must get an appraisal that is considerate and accurate, and the achievement of the process relies heavily on the supervisor's keenness to finish an objective and constructive appraisal as well as on the worker's readiness to act in response to helpful suggestions in addition to collaborate with the supervisor to attain future goals. In this paper we examine Performance Appraisal by evaluating GM’s performance management system and proposing necessary improvements. General Motor Overview General Motors Company was at first instituted in 1908, however, the 2008, global recession in addition to worldwide credit upheaval pushed the sales of GM’s car on the brink of depression levels and dried out private source of funds. GM, fatally with no operating cash, got a bridge credit from the US Treasury, but it was under the condition that GM hastens the tough reform of its processes that were in full swing for a number of years (Goussak, Webber, & Ser, 2012). Thus, in 2009, GM filed for bankruptcy and with the assistance from the U.S. Government, a fresh GM was born with four brands: Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, as well as Buick. Ever since then, the company has grown speedily with more than 70 percent of its sales coming from other countries not including US and has developed to be one of the global top automakers. At the moment, GM has employed over 200,000 staff collectively and runs its business in more than 100 nations, plus china remains to be its biggest market (Goussak, Webber, & Ser, 2012). GM Performance System Performance has demonstrated to be a true acid test for GM’s endurance in the worldwide marketplace, because high-performing workforce presents higher performance, giving the company an additional competitive advantage. General Motors has made sure that its Performance management system is resourceful, support collaboration, teamwork, as well as communication. The Performance management system was above all espoused to reward, recognize, identify, as well as retain their finest performers to achieve development that is sustainable. GM’s top management comprehends the significance of sustainable development that is reason why it has used big sum of money in getting hold of performance management system to make certain they become successful, but far-reaching discrepancy in staff performance persists in the face of this investment. In a study conducted in GM’s workers in more than 2o nations they confirmed that more than 50% of workers felt that performance management system in General Motors was useless. Essentially, this observation is anticipated to stop motivating employees; thus, creating feelings of frustration or torment that damagingly have an effect to their overall performance, which sooner or later surpasses the whole reason of developing and executing a valuable system. Goussak, Webber and Ser (2012) analysis recognized that GM invests in matchless processes for their performance appraisals; still, they fall short to become aware of the implication of the human capital. Because the GM’s managers possess the highest consequence on that human capital, GM’s management help workforce to feel empowered, praise and identify employees' successes, respect their workforce, and also performs regular debates with employees. In General Motors, the performance process, where personal objectives are linked to organisational goals, is the emblematic foundation of the cycle in addition to goal setting, which time and again takes place in line with annual standard evaluation cycles. Proposed Improvements The subsistence of an fittingly prepared performance management system according to Gunaratne and Plessis (2007) is vital for GM at the moment, because the field of performance management has the whole process from supervision of staff performance, creating an outline for assessing that performance, and doing something in consideration of that. The imperative makeover that has been observed in the process has been a focus on the staff time-honoured growth, where GM has no consideration of reinforcing a staff for its own gain, but fairly aspires to put forward long-lasting benefit to the worker by means of growth, which may as well be utilised following the departure of an employee from the company. GM’s performance appraisals appears to be in some way behind than the rest of automakers, owing to the fact that even in contemporary era, GM still utilises performance evaluation system empty of physical records. Validation of the process has not been a concern in the GM management program up till now, and for that reason Goussak, Webber, and Ser (2012) believe that documenting all organizational process is crucial for future point of reference, and to make certain the elimination of inequality, prejudices and resolutions that are pre-judgmental. In this regard, GM must act upon its e performance appraisals on paper and not on the interviews foundation, rather the system for interview have to be stamped out and organisation estimates have to be carried out by way of evaluation forms. Samarakone (2010) believe that this can be valuable to any carried out in a well thought-out and designed approach. Fiscal state of affairs is the merely standard for analysing performance of workers in GM, devoid of reflection to any other expertise. The process of evaluation according to Samarakone (2010) has to be arranged together with distinctive projects have to be suitably established in an attempt to evaluate worker’s performance with no bias. Additionally, the GM performance management system have to be resolute throughout, generating an outline that perceptibly explains the state for the performance evaluation, measures, and the appropriate penalty or reward action that may be utilised subsequent to the evaluation rooted in worker performance. Gunaratne and Plessis (2007) posit that this punishment or reward strategy have to be made of information such as what level of performance is worthy what reward action offered (Gunaratne & Plessis, 2007). All this according to Samarakone (2010) would make certain that the appraisal system runs efficiently in addition to making certain that the overriding outcome of the ideal results, which is the goal evaluation of the worker performance as well as pursuing appropriate steps of optimizing the alleged performance to present advantage to GM as a company as well as its employees. Conclusion In conclusion, it has been argued that performance appraisals have to present unchanging feedback at all business function as well as management level. Essentially, performance appraisal allows the company to identify the workers training needs and enables it to change a plan for training employees. Undoubtedly, performance appraisal meets the psychological desires of individuals since workers must discern how they are performing in their job and this heightens workers’ morale as well as job satisfaction. Scores of companies like GM make use of performance appraisals to plan transfers and placements as well as to offer input into decisions concerning increases in remuneration, transfers, and promotions.  Finally, performance appraisals can be utilised as a foundation for the counselling and coaching of individual workers by their managers. References Goussak, G. W., Webber, J. K., & Ser, E. M. (2012). A Critical Needs Plan For General Motors: A Cultural Pluralism Approach. Review of Business & Finance Case Studies, 3(2), 45-53. Gunaratne, K. A., & Plessis, A. J. (2007). Performance Management System: A Powerful Tool To Achieve Organisational Goals. Journal of Global Business and Technology, 3(1), 17-28. Samarakone, P. (2010). Improving performance appraisals using a real-time talent management system: The advantages of a real-time talent management system. Human Resource Management International Digest, 18(4), 35-37. Read More