Fluent Essays

Overview: This milestone focuses on the topics of this week’s lessons: managing and appraising employee performance. Using the material on performance management and appraisals provided in this week’s lesson and the case, in a short paper you should:  Determine the HRM’s role in the performance management process and explain how to ensure the process aligns with the organization’s strategic plan.  Differentiate between the trait, behavioral, and results-based performance appraisal systems, providing an example where each would be most applicable.  Identify best suited appraisal for the Maersk Customer Service – CARE Business Partner.  Identify and describe a variety of performance rating scales that can be used in organizations including graphical scales, letter scales, and numeric scales. Guidelines for Submission: Your submission should be 2–3 pages in length and double-spaced using 12-point Times New Roman font. Be sure to list your references at the end of your paper. Submit journal assignment as a Word document.Additional videos to reference:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQbycpK8h7Q&feature=youtu.behttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E34Zt1cEpFA&feature=youtu.be week_4_module_overview_notes.pdf .3_performance_evaluation_methods.pdf .1_8.2_performance_management_systems.pdf ol_211_milestone_three_guidelines_and_rubric.pdf which_performance_rating_scale_is_best__and_what_should_an_employer_consider_in_adopting_a_performance_rating_scale_.pdf ol_211_customer_service_care_business_partner_job_posting.pdf _pdf_eng__2_.pdf week_4_module_overview_notes.pdf Unformatted Attachment Preview OL 211 Milestone Three Guidelines and Rubric Overview: This milestone focuses on the topics of this week’s lessons: managing and appraising employee performance. Using the material on performance management and appraisals provided in this week’s lesson and the case, in a short paper you should:     Determine the HRM’s role in the performance management process and explain how to ensure the process aligns with the organization’s strategic plan. Differentiate between the trait, behavioral, and results-based performance appraisal systems, providing an example where each would be most applicable. Identify best suited appraisal for the Maersk Customer Service – CARE Business Partner. Identify and describe a variety of performance rating scales that can be used in organizations including graphical scales, letter scales, and numeric scales. Guidelines for Submission: Your submission should be 2–3 pages in length and double-spaced using 12-point Times New Roman font. Be sure to list your references at the end of your paper. Submit journal assignment as a Word document. Instructor Feedback: This activity uses an integrated rubric in Brightspace. Students can view instructor feedback in the Grade Center. Critical Elements Evaluation: Performance Management Exemplary (100\%) Meets “Proficient” criteria and description is well supported and plausible Evaluation: Performance Appraisal Meets “Proficient” criteria and example is well supported and contextualized Evaluation: Suited Appraisals Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses scholarly research to substantiate claims Evaluation: Performance Scales Meets “Proficient” criteria and description is clear and contextualized Proficient (85\%) Determines HRM’s role in the performance management process, including how the process aligns with the organization’s strategic plan Differentiates between the trait, behavioral, and results-based performance appraisal systems, and provides an example where each would be most applicable Determines how to identify best suited appraisals for employee job duties, and supports response with an example Identifies a variety of performance scales that can be used in organizations and describes each Needs Improvement (55\%) Determines HRM’s role in the performance management process, but does not include how the process aligns with the organization’s strategic plan Differentiates between the trait, behavioral, and results-based performance appraisal systems, but does not provide an example where each would be most applicable Determines how to identify best suited appraisals for employee job duties, but does not support response with an example Identifies a variety of performance scales that can be used in organizations, but does not describe each scale Not Evident (0\%) Does not determine HRM’s role in the performance management process Value 23 Does not differentiate between the trait, behavioral, and resultsbased performance appraisal systems 23 Does not determine how to identify best suited appraisals for employee job duties 23 Does not identify a variety of performance scales that can be used in organizations 23 Articulation of Response Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy-to-read format Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas Earned Total 8 100\% 5/27/2020 Which performance rating scale is best, and what should an employer consider in adopting a performance rating scale? Which performance rating scale is best, and what should an employer consider in adopting a performance rating scale? Rating scales are used in performance management systems to indicate an employees level of performance or achievement. These scales are commonly used because they provide quantitative assessments, are relatively easy to administer and assist in di erentiating between employees. Although there is no consensus on which speci c scale works best, most performance rating scales used by employers share common Rating scales may be numeric (e.g., 3, 4, 5) or alphabetic (e.g., a, b, c), with numbers or letters corresponding to an adjective, such as 5 = excellent or c = satisfactory. Rating scales also may be narrative. For example, one element on a scale may be unacceptable performance, described as fails to meet basic requirements and objectives. Scales that provide a positive message have become more Feedback elements. popular. For example, a scale may include ratings such as acceptable, e ective and very e ective. Five-level performance management scales are most commonly used, but employers may choose alternatives. Each approach has advantages and disadvantages. For example, a simple three-level rating scale may be enough to capture a jobs critical objectives while reducing the burden of the performance review process. A ve-level scale may provide an opportunity to better di erentiate between employees by o ering two superior performance levels, a satisfactory level and two less-than-satisfactory levels. However, there is evidence that managers are not e ective in making such ne distinctions and that they often focus on the middle ratings or tend to drift upward in ratings. Four- and six-level scales are also used and may reduce the tendency to drift upward or focus on the center. Regardless of the number of points on a rating scale, each level must be clearly de ned, used consistently by managers and t with the organizations culture. Raters should be provided with examples of behaviors, skills, measurements, and other data that will assist them in deciding the performance level. This level of detail is particularly important in numerical scales, where one persons 5 is another persons 4. Another type of performance management scale is the Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS). This appraisal tool generally contains a set of speci c behaviors that represent gradations of performance and are used as common reference points called anchors for rating employees on various behavioral dimensions. For example, teamwork may be a dimension on a BARS tool, with anchors such as participates in team meetings from time to time, frequently participates and contributes new ideas in team meetings, and so forth. BARS scales are not commonly used and developing a BARS assessment tool can be a time-consuming process. BARS may provide a greater degree of accuracy relative to performance appraisal, but improved accuracy under BARS is dependent on developing language that is precise, concise and readily understood when de ning each competency and behavioral attribute. https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-qa/pages/whattodowhendevelopingperfratescales.aspx 1/2 5/27/2020 Which performance rating scale is best, and what should an employer consider in adopting a performance rating scale? HR DAILY NEWSLETTER News, trends and analysis, as well as breaking news alerts, to help HR professionals do their jobs better each business day. Email Address CONTACT US (WWW.SHRM.ORG/ABOUT-SHRM/PAGES/CONTACT-US.ASPX) | 800.283.SHRM (7476) © 2020 SHRM. All Rights Reserved SHRM provides content as a service to its readers and members. It does not o er legal advice, and cannot guarantee the accuracy or suitability of its content for a particular purpose. Feedback Disclaimer (www.shrm.org/about-shrm/Pages/Terms-of-Use.aspx#Disclaimer) https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-qa/pages/whattodowhendevelopingperfratescales.aspx 2/2 OL 211: Customer Service – CARE Business Partner Job Posting Maersk Line is the world’s largest container shipping company, known for reliable, flexible, and eco-efficient services. We provide ocean transportation in all parts of the world. We serve our customers through 374 offices in 116 countries. We employ 7,000 seafarers and 25,000 landbased employees and operate 580 container vessels. We market our services through the following brands: Maersk Line, Safmarine, MCC Transport (Intra-Asia), Seago Line (IntraEurope), Mercosul (Brazil), and SeaLand (From 2015 Intra-Americas). Maersk Line, the global containerized division of the Maersk Group, is dedicated to delivering the highest level of customer-focused and reliable ocean transportation services. Our vision, built from a strong heritage of uprightness, constant care, and innovation, has guided our business operations since the first Maersk Line vessel sailed in 1904. By remaining committed to that vision we have expanded our business to become the world’s largest ocean carrier. And we are consistently recognized as the most reliable container shipping company. We are looking for a Customer Service CARE Business Partner in our Charlotte, NC office. You must be authorized to work for any employer in the US. Local candidates only; no relocation assistance is provided. We Offer Maersk Line offers you an exciting career opportunity in an international, challenging business environment characterized by high pace and diversity with focus on creating valuable relations with our current and new customers. We offer a competitive salary and benefit package, such as health insurance, dental and vision insurance, a 401K savings plan with an employer match, and paid time off. Key Responsibilities • Act as the customer’s primary point of contact, be the customer’s internal advocate. • Be fully responsible for customer satisfaction, own, manage all customer facing activities, while working with Sales, GSC, One Team, Finance, etc. • As part of Commercial Intelligence - build strong relationships with customers, gain an understanding for their business, service needs, drivers and desires and leverage this to engage in discussions about new business opportunities and competitor/market intelligence. • Ensure smooth execution of the whole shipment lifecycle, by working closely with customers and internal support groups to achieve customer satisfaction goals through pro-active resolution handling and Issue resolution ownership. Process improvement focus is essential— look for waste • Understand claims policy and its impact on company assets and guide customers best possible through any potential claim situation • Utilize Care business partner relationships to encourage fast equipment turnaround and collection of applicable charges as required. • Understand and be familiar with KPIs and act in line with set targets. Drive continuous improvements opportunities and opportunities to lower costs. • Monitor agreed service levels, and identify root cause when targets are not met, advise management of potential service failures and / or trends. • Share thoughts with team at VMS reviews • To always perform in a manner consistent with and loyal to the A.P. Moller – Maersk values. Who we are looking for • Direct call-handling experience • Demonstrated relationship attributes • Practiced listening techniques • Negotiation skills • Conflict resolution skills • High school diploma or equivalent (4 year degree preferred) • 1–2 years of experience in transportation highly desirable • Proficiency in Microsoft Suite 9-412-147 REV: MAY 5, 2013 BORIS GROYSBERG SARAH L. ABBOTT A.P. Møller - Maersk Group: Evaluating Strategic Talent Management Initiatives At the start of 2012, Maria Pejter, senior director of Maersk Group’s Human Resources department, and Bill Allen, head of Human Resources (HR), sat down to consider some key aspects of Maersk’s talent management strategy. Through 2008, Maersk had experienced several years of rapid growth and strong profitability. The global recession in 2008 had negatively impacted both Maersk’s top line and its returns; however, operating results had since improved, and Maersk earned record profits in 2010. In recent years, Maersk had seen a rise in its unusually low historic employee turnover rate. And Maersk had experienced a notable change in its corporate culture as it transitioned from a family-owned Danish shipping company into a global, publicly-traded conglomerate. Allen and Pejter were evaluating Maersk’s talent management priorities in the context of the increasingly competitive and fast-moving talent market of the 21st century. As Maersk continued to grow, finding, developing, and retaining high-quality talent was becoming a bigger challenge. In particular, Maersk was experiencing five notable talent challenges. The first of these was increased employee turnover. Maersk had traditionally relied heavily on employees who started with the Group as trainees and then spent the entirety of their careers there. However, with competition in the labor market increasing, a greater number of Maersk employees were leaving the Group for external opportunities. Maersk estimated that, of the approximately 400 trainees it brought on board each year, only 20\% of them were still with the Group after five years. In light of this rise in attrition, Maersk’s HR had increased its efforts to bring in experienced hires from the outside. Allen and Pejter needed to better understand how much of a problem this higher attrition rate was creating. How did it compare with what other firms were experiencing? And was it possible that this higher turnover also provided an opportunity to bring in high-quality talent and to further diversify the Group’s employee base? The second challenge centered on what to do with Maersk’s training and development programs. The training that Maersk had traditionally provided to its trainees was extensive, and included both formal courses and on-the-job training, including rotational programs that allowed employees to move across geographies and business units. This training was costly, but had been considered a solid investment because many employees stayed with Maersk throughout their careers. However, with employee attrition rates rising, and industry competitors targeting Maersk employees because of their strong training, perhaps this strategy needed to be rethought. Additionally, as the need arose to ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Professor Boris Groysberg and Research Associate Sarah L. Abbott prepared this case. HBS cases are developed solely as the basis for class discussion. Cases are not intended to serve as endorsements, sources of primary data, or illustrations of effective or ineffective management. Copyright © 2012, 2013 President and Fellows of Harvard College. To order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, call 1-800-5457685, write Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA 02163, or go to www.hbsp.harvard.edu/educators. This publication may not be digitized, photocopied, or otherwise reproduced, posted, or transmitted, without the permission of Harvard Business School. This document is authorized for use only by Victoria Fleury in OL-211-X5410 Human Resource Management 20EW5 at Southern New Hampshire University, 2020. 412-147 A.P. Møller - Maersk Group: Evaluating Strategic Talent Management Initiatives hire more experienced individuals, should more emphasis be placed on the training needs of these individuals? What other types of training should Maersk be offering its employees to ensure they were well equipped to meet the business challenges of the 21st century? Third, should Maersk continue to hire experienced individuals from outside the firm? In recent years, the percentage of senior positions filled by external hires had increased from virtually none to 30\%. What were the pros and cons associated with hiring from outside? How should Maersk think about integrating these external hires? Feedback on Maersk’s integration efforts to date had not been positive. Was it Maersk’s responsibility to integrate these senior hires, or was it a matter of hiring the type of people who understood what it took to be successful in an environment like the one at Maersk? Many companies practiced “natural integration.” What practices should Maersk put in place to integrate experienced hires, if any? Fourth, one way of bringing in external talent, while potentially reducing the associated integration risk, was by rehiring former Maersk employees (“boomerangs”). While Maersk had no formal policy on rehiring, it had historically been considered taboo. However, given Maersk’s significant talent needs, Maersk had reversed its position on this policy a few years back. Pejter and Allen planned to look at how this policy was working and determine whether or not the change had been a good one for the Group. Should it rehire former employees? If so, under what conditions? And, at what level should they be brought in? Finally, Maersk was becoming a more diverse company with a more diverse customer base, and was operating in an increasingly diverse business environment. In light of this, how did Maersk build an inclusive culture? Did one already exist? Or was it something they needed to continue to work on? A.P. Møller - Maersk Group: Company Background The A.P. Møller - Maersk Group (“Maersk” or “the Group”) was founded as a shipping company in 1904 by Arnold Peter Møller and his father, Captain Peter Maersk Møller. Arnold Peter Møller served as CEO of Maersk until his death in 1965. He was succeeded by his son, Maersk Mc-Kinney Møller, who served as CEO until 1993 and chairman of the board until 2003. In 1993, Jess Søderberg, who had been with the Group since 1969, became CEO, but resigned in 2007 after a rumored clash with Mc-Kinney Møller.1 He was replaced by Nils S. Andersen, an external hire who had been with Carlsberg A/S for over 20 years—most recently as president and CEO—but had served on Maersk’s board of directors since 2005. Headquartered in Copenhagen, by 2012, Maersk was the largest company in Denmark, and operated in 130 countries with nearly 110,000 employees. Maersk comprised over 1,000 companies, and operated one of the largest container shipping businesses globally as well as oil and gas exploration and container terminals operations. Additionally, Maersk held a 68\% stake in Dansk Supermarket Group and a 20\% interest in Danske Bank. Maersk’s businesses included:  Maersk’s container services businesses—Maersk Line, Safmarine, MCC Transport, and Seago Line—which contributed 40\% of Maersk’s revenues. These operations consisted of 645 owned and chartered vessels with aggregate capacity of 2.5 million twenty-foot equivalent units (TEU).  Maersk Oil, Maersk’s oil and gas exploration and production (E&P) operations, which contributed 20\% of revenues. Maersk had E&P operations in the United Kingdom, Denmark, Qatar, and Algeria. 2 This document is authorized for use only by Victoria Fleury in OL-211-X5410 Human Resource Management 20EW5 at Southern New Hampshire University, 2020. A.P. Møller - Maersk Group: Evaluating Strategic Talent Management Initiatives 412-147  APM Terminals, which owned and operated container terminals globally and contributed 7\% of revenues. Its network included 55 container terminals and 154 inland facilities in 64 countries.  Maersk Drilling, offshore drilling and land rig operations (including a 40\% interest in Egyptian Drilling Company), which contributed 3\% of revenues.  Other businesses: Maersk Supply Service (anchor handling and platform supply vessels); Maersk Tankers (oil and gas tanker shipping ... Purchase answer to see full attachment