Sonia was in an unfortunate situation regarding her performance appraisal. This situation definitely could have been prevented. First of all time was not given when going through her evaluation. Her supervisor Mrs. McCallister kept putting off her review because she was too busy. Finally she made time for Sonia. With that being said it didn’t allow the necessary conversation between the two to be taken. From what witnesses stated that Sonia came out crying. From what was put in her review she was not performing up to par. This leads me to conclude Mrs. McCallister just gave her critiques on Sonia ending the conversation. I don’t believe Sonia got the time she deserved to really see what she needed to truly improve on. In all honesty, on the accounts of Sonia’s actual performance she got praise. It’s when the supervisor went into a more opinionated appraisal that things turned south. The supervisor also stated that she was happy with the quality and accuracy of her work. So why would the supervisor find it necessary to put in her review that she is excessively on the phone, that it’s interfering with her work and endangering patients. This supervisor clearly didn’t put in the effort to find out what Sonia needs to improve on. Rather she just took cheap shots at Sonia, to have some time of improvement on there. Sonia’s review should have not reflected so heavily on the “attitude” that was given but more on her actual work performance. Sonia has a few options she could do after this performance appraisal. One, if she is feeling wrongly accused and feels this is not the company for her she can look for a similar job. As a laboratory technician with experience from a company for 2 years she shouldn’t have a difficult time finding another one. If Sonia does like the company and would prefer to stay the first thing she should do is visit the Human Resource representative. She should at that time be able to put in a rebuttal to the performance review. Sonia needs to first collect herself, make sure all her emotions are controlled. She needs to make sure she has a copy of the evaluation so she can review it. She must state that she acknowledges what in the review but make sure they understand that she does not agree with what’s in it. As stated before she needs to go through the review for any inconsistences or errors. Sonia must make sure she obtains the proper paper work for the rebuttal. Sonia needs to point out the opinionated statements throughout her review that are not factually proven. She needs to converse with her coworkers, ask them if they’ve had any problems with her. Most importantly if she does go through with the rebuttal she must be professional and respectful to whom she turns it in to, be it HR or the person the reviewer reports to. As stated prior, the biggest thing wrong with this system is the biases that reflects in the review. The supervisor said Sonia’s performance was at expectation, but what made it bad was the “attitudes” described in it. Sonia even confronted the times where she was aggressive or insubordinate, but her supervisor totally went over the question not answering it. Another error could have been the supervisor was evaluating the wrong person. If the supervisor wasn’t able to give an instance where her attitude interfered with any work activities she should have been able to easily answer. The supervisor left it off in a negative tone. There also wasn’t a lot of time invested into the appraisal. The supervisor didn’t really listen to Sonia, she just wanted to get done with the review. Something I would implement in my performance appraisal was beforehand allow employees to view an appraisal allowing them to self-assess themselves first. When evaluating my employees I’d also ask people they closely work with how they work. Gaining a general idea of the person from coworkers allow the firsthand look on what needs to be improved on. As the administrator you might not know everything that happens, or what someone’s weakness might be. You must also be aware of what those coworkers are saying, making sure they aren’t personally related, that there are actual duties that need improvement on. In Sonia’s example I would make sure she does limit the actual time on her phone to a minimum. I understand that family/children are important but she is still at a work place, and it’s unprofessional if she’s consistently on her phone. If I found out one of our evaluators was not using the method of performance appraisal I have chosen, I would have to have a conversation with that person. They must understand that the performance appraisal is not based on personal things, rather it’s on whether the employee is meeting the company’s expectations that are given based on their job responsibility/duties. Make sure the conversation is documented. If the unjust actions by the reviewer continues disciplinary actions must be taken. If after further investigation that Sonia was wrongly evaluated the old one must get destroyed and a new performance appraisal must be given. As crazy as a job can get time and an actual conversation must be taken to make sure the employee is given the evaluation they deserve.
References
Sklover, A. L. (2012, July 24). Performance Review a Problem? 16 Steps to a Robust Rebuttal. Retrieved from SkloverWorkingWisdom: skloverworkingwisdom.com