The growth of the business, the employment market, the conditions of employment, all affect management plans. Management must face the problem and work out solutions in consonance with present conditions. An example of a current problem is the shortage of science teachers and the probable greater shortage in the near future. It is difficult to recruit science graduates because of the greater attractions offered by industry. While this problem is in itself serious enough, the future is even bleaker. As the older men retire, who will be available to replace them?

Dependent on the nature of the position and the policies of the company, promotion may be determined by the judgment of a superior, the judgment of a committee, or the analysis of personnel records. Some companies attempt to utilize the methods employed in civil service through the use of competitive examinations. All these methods are subject to the same criticisms made of the various methods of selection. Unpopular promotions, however, have a much more significant effect on morale than mistakes made in initial selection.

Certain comparable measures of ability and fitness should be adopted, and employees rated by them, if promotion and remuneration in the company are to be fair to all. Records of length of service, tardiness, and absence are kept in most companies in the personnel department. Other factors to cover in a rating plan are quality of work, quantity of production, and those traits and characteristics which do not lend themselves to objective measurement, such as personality, dependability, judgment, and co-operation. Various rating plans are in use, but the value of many of them is questionable. Some, while technically good, require experts to use them, and as the average foreman or supervisor who is asked to rate those under him is not trained in rating, he does not understand the significance of the various factors involved. Then, too, foremen and supervisors ordinarily are rather pressed for time with their regular duties; so, they put off sending in their reports of the ratings until they are forced to do so by continual pressure being brought to bear upon them. They do not have the time carefully to weigh and consider before answering; so, they put down a rating hastily, invariably marking it high so as \”to be on the safe side.\” Ratings done under such conditions are rarely satisfactory and may lead to future complications. It is rather difficult, for example, to explain to an employee or to the union who represents him why he has to be laid off if on his rating sheet he has been incorrectly rated high.

Probably the reason some rating systems are not of more practical use is that they are too pretentious. Rating, as with all other systems, should be made as simple as possible, and use readily defined and evaluated characteristics. The grading plan should likewise be easy to apply and should be specific in its assignment of values.

Some persons unconsciously rate a favored person higher than they should, or if they rate a worker high in one trait, they are inclined to rate him high in other traits, and vice versa. All persons have their good and poor points, and each trait should be rated separately so that the rating given on one trait will not influence the rating given on other traits. For example, the deportment of an employee may leave much to be desired; yet he may deserve a high rating on quality of performance and productiveness. Another worker may be steady and industrious and always be on hand when needed, but he may lack the ability to learn new duties readily and have little initiative. Such a worker may know his job and do it well, but he would not be good material for promotion to a job in which he would have to learn new routines and meet changed conditions. His rating should show that fact rather than be misleading by a high rating on all factors because he is dependable and does his present job well. This is also true of a comparison of the ratings given by different supervisors. Some s supervisors rate all workers under them rather high; other supervisors may be inclined to rate too low. The ratings in such cases are not comparable. Instructions and discussions in plant conferences on how to rate have been found to correct and improve these conditions.

Traits are not of equal importance on all jobs, and the rating system should reflect the difference. In one job on which the employee works alone, accuracy and good workmanship may be the predominating requirements; in another job, accuracy as such does not enter into the picture, but personality, and co-operation are essential requirements because the job deals primarily with the handling of people. To use the same rating sheet for both cases might be misleading, for an employee can be accurately rated only in terms of how well he does his particular job and only on those traits which are important in the performance of that job.

Comparison of the ratings in one period with those of previous rating periods shows the progress of employees. If employees are allowed to see and discuss their ratings in private conference upon request, their ratings can be used to stimulate self-improvement by showing the worker how well or how poorly he is doing and by encouraging him to make use of his strong points and improve the weaker ones.

Author Bio: http://sites.google.com/site/cliptheschoolbeginning/
http://sites.google.com/site/arturvictoriasite/

Category: Business
Keywords: Business, Organization, Structure, capital, Development, Credit, Sales, Communication, Resources, Em