Psychology

My department puts a very high premium on securing, maintaining and developing the talent and skills necessary for its success. The employee selection process is competent and only lets in the candidates who are most qualified for the particular job. The performance appraisal process, during which employees achievements are assessed against their individual goals and the department goals, is equally thorough and rigorous.

Employee selection
Employee selection at the department is a thorough process which entails individual and group interviews and challenges which the candidates are expected to solve either individually or in groups. While the human resource department, which is in charge of the selection of employees, makes attempts at making the interview process less scaring to help the candidates think, talk and act naturally, the vigour of the process remains evident throughout the process.

The selection process used in the department is borrowed from the TriMetrix System which assesses candidates for their talents which make them particularly suited for the job.  In assessing the talents one has and how applicable they are to the desired job, the system relies heavily on the individuals behaviours, value, and attributes (Enlightened Leadership Solutions, n.d).

Although my department uses the face-to-face interview to assess a candidates values, I must observe that the interview process is a poor and ineffective method of assessing an individuals values. Values entail the internal factors or beliefs which motivate a candidate to do what heshe does, and which would be applicable for the job. Given that there is no sure-fire way of ensuring that what the candidates say during the interview is one hundred percent true, it becomes possible for candidates to associate themselves with some of the best values when they face the interviewing panel only for the team leaders the candidates possess anything but the values they cited during the interview (Woodridge HRM Articles, n.d).

The selection process is also meant to bring out the candidates behaviour which serves as an indicator of how the candidates can be expected to do their work. Candidates whose behaviour falls short of the company standards during the selection process rarely get the job, as it is assumed that the low behaviour standards will persist even after they get the job.  My department involves a lot of interaction between the members of staff and customers. Some of the customers come with foul moods and oftentimes use equally unrefined language yet the staff members are expected to deal maturely with such people, and if possible, lift their moods.

Thirdly, the TriMetrix Talent Report is intended to provide an indication of the candidates attributes. These are used to gauge what benefits a candidate is expected to bring to the department, and to the larger company. To assess the candidates attributes and behaviour, the department prefers real challenges to interviews. Candidates, individually or in groups, are exposed to a normal work-place challenge which they are expected to solve in the manner they think best and within a specified time limit. This method is more effective as through such challenges, the recruiters are able to pick out the candidates whose talents and skills match the job best. Tough but real life challenges bring out the candidates strengths and weaknesses, making it difficult for candidates to fake their strengths and skills. Lazy, hostile and short-tempered candidates rarely go past this stage as how each individual acts in a group is of much interest to the assessors.

The beginning of the year is an interesting time in my department not just because it marks the start of another year but because it is also the time for performance evaluation and goalsetting for all emoployees. The Encyclopedia of Business (n.d) defines performance as the process by which organizations evaluate employee performance based on preset standards. According to the company leadership, performance appraisal helps the management to utilize their human resources effectively, and ultimately, to improve productivity. Performance evaluation at the department is not pegged solely on the department leaderships evaluation. It also takes into consideration customer feedback and work-mates evaluation. An employee is thus evaluated by the management, workmates, and customers in a process which ensures that personality problems or biases have little effect on the annual evaluation report (Encyclopedia of Business, n.d).

Unlike performance appraisals done in agencies I have worked with previously, the present company is open on the appraisals and the employees have access to their evaluation reports. In fact, employees are allowed, and encouraged, to challenge the appraisal team should they feel that it has been unfair in evaluating their performance.

During the performance appraisal, each employees performance is evaluated (by a well-trained appraisal team) to determine whether each has achieved hisher individual goals, and the companys goals for the past year (Baskin, 2002).While the company assures every employee that the performance appraisal is not meant to be a scaring session in which the management dwells on the employees shortcomings and intentionally overlooks their successes, I have observed that most employees are not enthusiastic about performance. Fear for performance appraisals is notably greatest among who have problems with the supervisors during the year over poor time management records, misbehaving during company events and other minor mishappenings which earn one a summon to the department head.

At the end of the performance appraisal exercise, employees who have proved effective and hard-working are promoted or recommended for salary or allowance increases (Peter, 1992). Some are sent for company-financed trainings and are promoted on completion of the training. Some are promoted and retained in the same department while others are promoted and posted to other departments. This group includes employees whose performance has been judged as satisfying to the management, and who have shown significant and consistent improvements over the past year. The top two employees in the department win a two-week-long holiday fully financed by the company.
Employees who accomplish their goals but whose performance is deemed to not have improved significantly or consistently to deserve a promotion or a pay raise are sent for workshops. The reasoning behind this is that such employees are not lazy or incompetent and can therefore improve their performance if motivated and shown how. The only group which loses after a performance appraisal exercise comprises employees whose performance is found wanting. Members of this group are expected to account for their poor performance, and explain to the company leadership why the company should retain them. The luckiest of these are sent for training the cost of which is deducted from their salaries. After the training, they go back to their former positions, or are demoted, with letters warning them to either improve their performance or risk firing. They also have to commit, in writing, to take necessary steps to improve their performance. Those who are considered irredeemable and whose performance has remained poor for the second year running have their contracts terminated.