Performance Rating Influences

Respond to two or more of your colleagues’ postings in one or more of the following ways:

• Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.
• Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
• Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.
• Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.
• Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
• Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

Classmate 1: (Brittney)

“I do not believe that organizations should inflate or deflate employee performance level ratings based on economic conditions. The economic conditions may influence the organization as a whole but it should not influence the performance level ratings of the employees. The employees will continue to do their jobs to the best of their abilities. Inflating ratings deter employees from recognizing the true outstanding employees. Some employers inflate ratings of low performers to prevent conflict within the workplace. I do not think that inflation or deflation of performance level ratings have an effect on the base salaries of new hires. Performance level ratings usually have an effect on bonuses and not base salaries. Job valuations determine the base salary of new hires.”

Classmate 2: (Dara)

“Inflate or Deflate Ratings

An economic downturn leads raters to make a difficult decision, deflate performance ratings as a result of poor performance measures, or inflate performance ratings to keep morale elevated, staff engaged, and merit-based increases high. Deflating performance ratings based upon an external factor such as an economic downturn could seem unfair, as the employee cannot control the effect that downturn has on goals such as sales or customer growth. That said, artificially inflating goals in an attempt to make the staff “feel better” feels disingenuous, especially if the ratings genuinely do not match the individual’s performance. Neither option is particularly comfortable in a situation where the employee lacks control. However, the most appropriate option is to deflate ratings accordingly and perhaps incorporate a situational rating category (Kondrasuk, 2011). Within my current organization, a decrease in government payers translates to decreased margins. An executive staff member that receives portions of their compensation based upon those profit margins are still honestly evaluated as to whether the goals were met. There are compensation ramifications in these cases; however, being faced with the reality of the situation is essential as the organization works to determine more creative ways to work in this economic climate.”