MGT520 module 9
We're the ideal place for homework help. If you are looking for affordable, custom-written, high-quality and non-plagiarized papers, your student life just became easier with us. Click either of the buttons below to place your order.
Order a Similar Paper
Order a Different Paper
Module 9: Critical Thinking Case Study (100 points)
There are a variety of techniques that can minimize performance rater biases. In your textbook, review “Case Study 6-2: Minimizing Biases in Performance Evaluation at Expert Engineering, Inc.” After reviewing the case and considering the course and textbook content, in a 4-5 page paper, not including the cover page and reference page, answer questions #1 and #2 (located at the end of the case study and as follows).
Question #1: Provide a detailed discussion of the intentional rating distortion factors that may come into play in this situation. Question #2: Evaluate the kinds of interventions you could implement to minimize intentional rating distortion, and its reasons, that you have described. What do you recommend and why?
You will need to include a brief introduction of the case and critically evaluate the current situation of Expert Engineering Inc. It is important to present an in-depth analysis of the case and integrate sufficient support from scholarly resources throughout the assignment. Use suitable headings and subheadings to organize the work in an appropriate manner.
Be sure to support your statements with logic and argument, citing any sources referenced.
Your well-written paper should meet the following requirements:
• _Use Saudi Electronic University academic writing standards and APA style guidelines.
• _Support your submission with course material concepts, principles, and theories from the textbook and at least two scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles.
Minimizing Distortions in Performance Data at Expert Engineering, Inc.
under various engineer titles, veteran engineer Demetri worked for Expert Engineering, Inc. for almost 15 years. He has recently been promoted to the position of Principal at the engineering firm. The firm’s performance evaluation history is both unique and long. All principals are involved in evaluating engineers because the founders of the firm believed in multiple source evaluation and feedback to prevent favoritism and promote a merit-based culture. At the same time, the firm has a long history of using quality performance appraisal forms and review meetings to better ensure accurate performance evaluations. Several months ago, however, the firm initiated a big hiring initiative of a dozen new engineers, nine of whom turn out to be graduates from Purdue University, which is the same university from which Demetri graduated. Indeed, Demetri was active in moving forward the hiring initiative. There is tension and discontent among the other principals, who fear that a time of unchecked favoritism, biased performance ratings, and unfair promotion decisions is on the rise.
Tips: Situation analysis (SWOT analysis)
use the text book:
Aguinis, H. (2019). Performance management (4th ed.). Chicago: Chicago Business Press. ISBN: 97809988140-87