HRM 533 – HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

CASE STUDY 4

NAME:

MATRIC NO:

GROUP:

LECTURER’S NAME: DR NOR AZAIRIAH FATIMAH OTHMAN

DATE OF SUBMISSION:
1. Why did Adobe need a new performance management system? What drawbacks might
there be to the company’s check-ins?

Adobe had totally redesigned its performance management system to eliminate the
yearly performance review and replace it with a more frequent and less formal "check-in"
process. Adobe need a new performance management system because the formal performance
management system failed to conduct. One of them is limited annual feedback and giving
feedback is difficult. Limiting important feedback to the annual appraisal means it is often
irrelevant and meaningless. It’s all too easy to simply feedback on what we can remember from
the last 12 months, rather than what matters. Besides, 67% of leaders feel uncomfortable
communicating with staff. A further one in five managers admit to finding it difficult to praise
others.

In addition, the poor communication also the reason why adobe need a new
performance management system. Some of the employees answers word “don’t knows” to their
managers. They may tell managers what they think they want to hear. When employees have a
lack of communication, they don’t understand how the performance review benefits them or
the wider company. Performance reviews also are extremely stressful for both managers and
employees. The employees more stressful because of the rankings and ratings.

Next, the bad news of formal performance reviews makes Adobe changes their
performance management system. More than half of employees feel that formal performance
reviews have no impact on how they do their jobs. 80% of them prefer feedback in the moment
than a progess review after a certain number of months.

The check-ins system used in the company changed from formal performance review.
There are still have drawbacks to this new performance system. For example, the Adobe moved
from yearly performance rankings to frequent “check-ins” where managers provide employees
targeted coaching and advice. Since it is a new system, they require executives and managers
to have regular tough discussions with employees who are struggling with performance issues.
Due to the stressful working environment, many employees leave the company and quit
because of stress with this new system.

Other than that, it is reducing unnecessary cognitive load, while at the same time,
nudging managers to engage more often and more candidly with direct reports to help them
develop their skills and plan their careers. The new system amplifies also the feeling that “I
own the place, and the place owns me” – because it places the onus on managers and their
employees to make regular adjustments that improve individual and team performance, It also
bolsters accountability because managers have far more responsibility for setting employee
compensation than under the old system.

2. Are formal performance reviews always bad? Why or why not?

The formal performance reviews not always bad. There is also the good of this
performance management system. The bad of not having ongoing performance management is
the employees could quit based on unfair results. If an employee performs well and then feels
that he/she was assessed unfairly, there’s little motivation left for him/her to stay with the
company. Even if an employee doesn’t quit the company, he/she may become withdrawn and
disengaged. Other than that, the employees may lose self-esteem. Employees who feel that they
were evaluated unfairly will likely lose self-esteem, which can create resentment towards
management and the organization as a whole.

Failure to set standards makes the process unfair. If there are no standards for
performance in employees’ roles, they won’t know what’s expected of them, and therefore
simply won’t know what justifies excellent vs. poor performance. Furthermore, biases become
more prevalent. Without data and metrics to rely on to gauge performance, managers are more
likely to give biased reviews. Human assessment are subject to natural biases that result in rater
errors. Managers need to understand these biases to eliminate them from the process.

The good of the formal performance review is in term of documentation. A PA provides

a document of employee performance over a specific period of time. it’s a piece of paper that
can be placed in an employee file. Employees crave feedback and this process allows a manager
the opportunity to provide the employee with feedback about their performance and discuss
how well the employee goals were accomplished. It also provides an opportunity to discuss
employee development opportunities.

By the formal performance reviews, employees need to understand what is expected of

them and the PA process allows for a manager to clarify expectations and discuss issues with
their employee. It provides a structure for thinking through and planning the upcoming year
and developing employee goals. Besides, the process should motivate employees by rewarding
them with a merit increase and as part of a comprehensive compensation strategy.