Faculty of Business and Law Department of Marketing and Management Coursework One Word count: 3000 (excluding references and bibliography) Submission Deadline: on 15th May 2017 Essay format Learning Outcomes: (2 & 5) the following will be fully or partially achieved. • Plan effective performance management policies and practices to improve organisational and employee performance. • Critically evaluate the effectiveness of performance management. TASK The role of the line manager in managing an organisation’s performance management system has been subject to much discussion and debate. According to Hendry (1997) “The architects of strategic performance interventions are reliant on line management to transmit the desired messages but line managers have also been identified as the weak link in the application of performance management systems”. More recently a global survey has identified that many employees have a poor view of their organisation’s performance management system and attribute this view to the lack of manager capacity and capability. With reference to your organisation, or one that you are familiar with: (1) Critically examine the role of line managers in managing the organisation’s performance management system (50% weighting). (2) What actions can be taken by the organisation and its HRM function to improve the role of line managers to engender greater employee satisfaction and engagement with the performance management system? (50% weighting). GUIDELINES Introduction • The assignment is arranged in two parts, each part is equally weighted. The first part is concerned with examining your organisation’s performance management system and in particular the role of the line manager in this process. The second part of the assignment focuses on the practical actions that organizations, and their HRM function, can take to improve the role of the line manager in the PMS process to engender greater employee satisfaction and engagement. • Literature suggests that PMS are somewhat bureaucratic, complex, time-consuming, are perceived by employees to be unfair and that managers may not always have the appropriate competencies and proficiency to carry out this role effectively. • To assist you in this assignment it is important that you refer to a number of appropriate sources (minimum of 10 different sources) to inform your examination. Please see the following journal articles that provide a useful foundation for your work. Journal Articles 1. Alfes, K, et al (2013) The relationship between line manager behavior, perceived HRM practices, and individual performance: examining the mediating role of engagement, Human Resource Management, November/December 2013, Vol. 52, No. 6, pp839-859 2. Farndale, E. & Kelliher, C. (2013) Implementing performance appraisal: exploring the employee experience, Human Resource Management, November/December 2013, Vol. 52, No. 6, pp 879-897 3. Harris, L. (2001) Rewarding employee performance: line managers’ values, beliefs and perspectives, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12:7 November 2001, 1182-1192 4. Heslin, P.A., Vande Walle, D. (2011) Performance appraisal procedural justice: the role of a manager’s implicit person theory, Journal of Management Vol. 37, No.6, November 2011, 1694-1718 Assignment Structure The assessment criteria provide an outline of the structure you should adopt, i.e. Introduction – in this section you identify the key elements of your assignment. Review of academic literature – in this part of your assignment you will be expected to define the role and purpose of a PMS and compare and contrast different views associated with the role of the line manager in managing this process. Keep in mind that you should be examining issues of management capacity and capability. It is also important that you look at the importance of engaging employees in the PMS process.. Analysis and discussion – here you have the opportunity, in the light of the literature review, to provide a discussion around examples of good and poor management of PMS. Conclusions and recommendations – enable you to draw together the key conclusions derived from the preceding sections to inform your recommendations. Assessment criteria: Understanding and justification of the relevant people issue 10% A review of appropriate academic literature 30% Analysis and discussion 35% Conclusions and recommendations 15% Presentation & referencing 10% Please note: 1. All work submitted after the submission deadline without an approved valid reason (see below) will be given a mark of zero. (This is not the same as a non-submission, as a late submission counts as an attempt and a mark of zero may allow you to resit the coursework). 2. Short deferrals (extensions) of up to three calendar weeks can only be given for genuine “force majeure” and medical reasons, not for bad planning of your time. Please note that theft, loss, or failure to keep a backup file, are not valid reasons. The short deferral must be applied for on or before the submission date. You can apply for a short deferral by submitting a Coursework Deferral Application Form. Students MUST keep a copy and/or an electronic file of their assignment. Please also submit an electronic copy of your assignment via Turnitin. The electronic version of your assignment may be used to enable checks to be made using anti-plagiarism software and approved plagiarism checking websites. Any penalties for not complying with word limits will be in accordance with University and Faculty Policy. Return of Marked Work: Marked work will be returned to you. You can expect to have marked work returned to you by 4 weeks after the submission. Plagiarism Warning: Assignments should not be copied in part or in whole from any other source, except for any marked up quotations, that clearly distinguish what has been quoted from your own work. All references used must be given, and the specific page number used should also be given for any direct quotations, which should be in inverted commas. Students found copying from the internet or other sources will get zero marks and may be excluded from the University. 1.5 line spacing