Performance Related Pay and Evaluating the Effectiveness of Learning - Assignment Example

Human Resource: Examination Section B: Q4. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Learning Evaluation is a very critical segment of anytraining or learning. A training officer must always assess his or her trainees to establish their progress. To perform an evaluation on the participants of training, a number of methods can be employed. Kirk Patrick (2012), in his Model of Evaluation, proposed four major effective ways of assessing the development of learners. These ways are categorised reaction, learning, behaviour and results evaluations. Reaction Evaluation method assesses the experiences of the training delegates. Through this method, the training officer shall be able to know the actual feelings of the participants about the training. In essence, this method tries to establish the general reactions of the learners. It does not ask very specific aspects of the training. To conduct the Reaction Evaluation, a training officer may use feedback forms or do a verbal assessment. Issues that can be realized through this evaluation include the relevancy of the training and whether the participants liked the entire process or not. The Reaction method of evaluation is very essential in that it helps the training officer establish the attitude of the learners. Attitude plays the most important role in any learning session. If the learners have a negative attitude towards the topic or the trainer, they may end up grasping nothing out of the entire training. However, this method has limitations. It does not assess the cognitive development of learners, therefore, a training officer may not know whether the learning objectives were achieved or not. Learning Evaluation is another method. This evaluation seeks to establish the increase of knowledge in the participants. To come up with the most accurate result, a training officer needs to perform a formative assessment (before the training starts) and a summative assessment (after the training). After the two assessments, the scores are compared. This can be done through written tests, interviews and observations. The Learning Evaluation method helps a training officer determines the cognitive development of the learners. However, the method cannot reveal whether the learners are able to appropriately put the knowledge into practice. Behavior Evaluation measures the extent to which the knowledge acquired has been applied. The limitation of this evaluation is that it can only be done by the bosses at work stations and not by the training officer. It also takes time to observe how a trainee has applied the knowledge. Results method seeks to establish the output at workplace, following training. Results are also determined by the managers and the trainers. To assess a worker using this method, a manager uses the Key Performance Indicators (KPI). The KPI monitors and evaluates the actions of team members, starting from the lowest level. It is always the subordinate employees that build the foundation of a vision. They practically work towards the set objectives; a manager only evaluates. It is, therefore, necessary that the KPI be placed at the bottom of the pyramid to check the actions of the team members who are answerable to the manager above. Key Performance Indicators are actually a way of making critical success factors measurable. For example, if the objective of an organization was to attract loyalty from customers, the KPI would be the number of repeat purchases at the end of a specified period (Mind Tool, 2014). From the three types of evaluations, Learning Evaluation could be the most preferred method. This is because this method tests the acquisition of knowledge. A trainee needs to acquire the knowledge before he or she can apply it. It is, therefore, important that a training officer ensure that the learning objectives are achieved. Section C Q5. Performance Related Pay Performance Related Pay (PRP) is a method of compensating for employees based on how well they have work. The measure of wages is based on the output by an employee. A more output implies higher salary given for an employee. Payment on commission is one form of PRP. Most sales companies pay their employees on commission so as to raise the sales. Currently, most firms are quickly adapting the PRP as the most preferred way of evaluating employees. As hardworking employees get more pay, the low performers in the same company get very little pay just to keep them going. This method of payment has its strengths and weaknesses as shall be discussed in the essay. Many business theorists such as Professor Yasser have always supported PRP as the best method of rewarding employees. The proponents of this method believe that money is the only incentive that can lead to increased productivity. The Performance Related Pay usually excites employees and instantly propels them to work hard for the achievement of set targets. The mere recognition of hard work in intrinsic motivation does not work well in a firm with several employees. By motivating employees to work hard, a company is able make more sales and increase its productivity. Consequently, a firm will be able to make more profit. This method does not only benefit a business organisation but also offers the employees an opportunity to use their experience and creativity so as to increase their output. The PRP does employees justice by rewarding their efforts, unlike in firms where salary is constant no matter the output. The Performance Related Pay is a more transparent way of rewarding the efforts of employees. They work hard with a clear expectation in mind. This method, therefore, minimizes chances of favoritism by the employers. Any salary increment and job promotion is done on merit basis. The employees would, therefore, feel very secure knowing their performances are evaluated appropriately according to the rates of their work and independent of favors by the managers. From a different perspective, the Performance Related Pay has some weaknesses and limitations. One of such limitations is that the PRP may not measure all the variables of a complex job. It is, thus, rendered as a single-measure of performance in job. For example, in the job of customer care, the PRP will only consider the total number of minutes for the calls. However, the PRP criterion does not go further to establish the quality of service. For instance, it does not inquire whether a customer was satisfied or whether the issue was resolved. This system has, therefore, been seen as one that makes employees does not all factors into account and may make employees work at very unsafe speed. In some instances, PRP may make working environment very hostile when there is low volume of clients. The employees may violently scramble for the few available clients, creating unrest within the premises of business. This may paint a bad picture of an organization. Even though, PRP has been found to encourage more output (Mathew, 2012), Banko suggests that this form of motivation may actually lead to unethical behavior (2013). Other studies have also confirmed that employees, especially those with high core self evaluation, tend to act in the long term interest of the organization and behave more ethically because they will be more concerned with the success of the firm when given the PRP. But this is not so with the employees that have low core self evaluation. In fact, the PRP may promote unethical behavior in them. Therefore, there is need for an alternative for PRP. Employees can be rewarded on the ethical principles and theories such as utilitarian, duty and justice. Organizations can design systems that support ethical behavior while still offering PRP for the high performance for its employees. This can be done by setting up such behavioral regulations that must be strictly followed by the employees. A firm must then reward the employees who go by these regulations on their daily duties. Therefore, PRP needs to be supplemented with other forms of evaluation for its holistic realization (Bartram, 2012). Section D Question 8: Social Case for Workplace Equality Most men are never given the paternity leave at the work place. The reason for this situation is that some bosses still do not see the importance of a man to the wife during the pregnancy. Whenever such men ask for permission from their bosses, the kind of feedback they usually get is very discouraging. Due to this hostility from the bosses, a number of men now opt to take a French leave whenever such need arises. Chandler argues that paternity is now becoming the number one reason for the absence of men at work. He, therefore, recommends that employers be educated on the importance of paternity leave as this would be a great relief for the husbands (Chandler, 2003). A survey conducted by the US BabyCenter in the year 2010, suggests that another leading cause for the denial of the paternity leave by the employers is when both the husband and the wife work in the same company. In that case the employer is usually at a crossroad of whether to give both of them the leave or just the wife. However, the Family and Medical Act stipulate that the couple is entitled to a combined 12 weeks of unpaid leave. Most companies still lag behind this provision and instead, the wife is sent home while the husband is left working. Gray & Anderson, however, say that the major reason for men not to get the paternity leave is shame (2010). Some men feel ashamed to ask for such permission to go and attend to their wives at home. They would rather go by the traditions that state roles of men in the society. For such men, they would rather hire someone else to attend to their pregnant wives than be with their wives in person. They just do not want their ego to be bruised by assuming such a duty. Even if the boss is very much willing to give them the leave, these men will still shy away. According to Frank B, many of the employees and the employers do not understand the Federal law concerning the paternity leave. In this law, everyone, both men and women are entitled to compulsory maternity or paternity leave of not more than 12 weeks. However, the leave is not paid. When an employee returns, he is supposed to get back his previous job or a different job with the same salary. However, an employee is not eligible for the leave if he is not working for the federal government, local government or even any other company with fifty or more workers who are working not more than 75 miles from the work place. Gender equality is another major limitation to the paternity leave today. This reason is according to the findings of the International Labour conference held in September 2009. In the conference, concerns of gender equality at work place were raised. It was noted that employers permit more maternity leaves than they do paternity leaves. These employers show more favor to the expectant female employees than they do to the husbands of pregnant wives. The conference concluded that this was the key reason that minimizes the permission of the paternity leaves by the bosses. The ultimate recommendation pointed to the need for advocacy of gender equality at the various places of work. Reference Banko K. (2013). Relationships of Perceived Job Design Characteristics to Job Ability. Journal of Psychology. Harvard Bartram D. (2012). Age-related Differences in Work Motivation. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 85(2). Chandler, P., & Waud, C. (2003). Waud employment law: A practical guide for trade union officials, employers and lawyers. London: Kogan. Frank, B. (2011). Family and Medical Leave Act Redefined. Oxford. Gray, P. B., & Anderson, K. G. (2010). Fatherhood: Evolution and human paternal behavior. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. International Labour Conference (2009). Gender equality at work: Sixth item on the agenda. Geneva: International Labour Office. Kirkpatrick. (2012) Model of Evaluation. www.businessballs.com/kirkpatricklearningevaluationmodel.htm Mathew S. & Eric S. (2012) When Does Extrinsic Motivation Motivate Managerial Behavior?: Strategic Management Journal . Fisher College of Business. Ohio. Mind Tools (2014). Performance Management and KPIs. Mind Tools. Retrieved from http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTMM_87.htm Read More