performance management

PERFORMANCE AND REWARD MANAGEMENT

By {NAME}

Course
Professor’s Name
University
City (State)
Date

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………3
2.0 Main Strategies Involved in 360-degree feedback…………………………………..5
2.1 Design on the purpose of 360-degree feedback…………………………………….…..5
2.2 Decide on the areas of work and Behavior on which feedback will be given…………6
2.3 Choosing the instrument and methods for collecting data………………………………7
2.4 Decide on behaviors/items to be included in the rating instrument…………………….7
2.5 Decide who the feedback recipients are…………………………………………………8
2.6 Decide on who will give the feedback………………..……………………………………………………..…8
2.7 Decide how feedback will be given………………………………………………………8
2.8 Analysis of feedback data………………………………………………………………..9
2.9 Deciding how the data will be used………………………………………………………………………………9
2.10 Initial Implementation of the Project…………………………………………..……..9
2.11 Analyzing the outcome of the pilot scheme…………………………………….…….9
2.12 Plan and Implement the program……………………………………………………………………….….10
2.13 Monitoring and evaluation of the program…………………………………..………10

3.0 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………….10
References………………………………………………………………………………..….12 
1.0 Introduction
McDonald Corporation is a multinational Company whose management makes full utilization of the 360-degree feedback. The management of the McDonald Corporation consists a significant number of management departments which include: Quality management, Design of goods and services, location strategy, process and capacity design, layout and design strategy, Inventory management, supply chain management, and other essential departments. Therefore, the McDonald Corporation makes use of the 360-degree feedback to enhance improvement of the performance of all these departments.
360-degree feedback can be referred to as the process or the system in which employees receive anonymous and confidential information feedback from the individuals who work within their surrounding (Grenier and Rienks 2020). This process involves the peers, employee’s manager and the direct reports. 360-degree feedback can involve a random mixture of about eight to twelve individuals who carry out the filling of anonymous online feedback form via the online platform who covers a variety of relevant questions concerning the degree of competency within the workplace. The form of the feedback consists of questions that are measured in terms of scale rating and also provide open room for the respondents to provide their comments. An individual who receives the feedback also practices the filling out of the self-rating survey which involves the similar questions which were captured on the form received by the others.
The Mangers and the general leaders within the organization make use of the 360-degree feedback to enhance them to have a proper understanding concerning their strengths and weaknesses. The 360-degree feedback system tabulates the results automatically and makes the presentation of the results in a manner that will enhance the recipient of the feedback formulate a development plan (Grenier and Rienks 2020). Responses from an individual are always combined with the other peoples’ responses within the similar categorical rater to enhance preservation of anonymity and providing the employees with a clear image of an overview of the strengths and weaknesses.
It is not a secret that performance management has nowadays become a vital tool in the human resources management process. New business models, complex and dynamic working environment require an effective performance management system to develop and improve the performance of employees as well as rewarding them. Various performance management tools have been developed over the past three decades (Mayes 2019). Some of the most common ones are the Management by Objectives (MBO), Assessment Centre Method (ACM), Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS), Psychological Appraisal (PA), Human-Resource Cost Method and the 360-Degree Feedback. According to Baron and Kreps (1999), no proven performance appraisal method has been rated to be the ideal one. The 360-degree feedback process is mainly used in the appraisal, development and performance management processes. Atwater et al. argued that a multi-rater feedback method provides the best results when it comes to development.
Therefore, the study of the 360-degree feedback will be done on one of the multinational organization known as McDonald’s Cooperation. McDonald’s Corporation is an American organization that is widely dealing with fast-moving foods (Bragg et al. 2020). This company was founded in the year 1940 as a restaurant whose operation was brought on board by Maurice McDonald and Richard in California. McDonald’s Corporation is a restaurant that is widely involved fat moving foods such as French fries, Cheeseburgers, desserts, soft drinks, breakfast items and many other forms of meals. McDonald’s Corporation is one of the organizations which makes use of 360-degree feedback to enhance quality production and preparation of its meals and also improving the efficiency of its services (Carlos et al. 2020). The summary diagram of the varieties of stakeholders involved in 360-degree feedback within an organization is as shown below:

Figure 1: Summary of stakeholders involved in 360-degree feedback

2.0 Main Stages involved in 360-degree feedback
The implementation of the 360-degree feedback process is carried out in different stages. Therefore, this section of the study will put much focus on the 13 main stages of 360-degree feedback applied to McDonald’s Corporation as shown below:

2.14 Design on the purpose of 360-degree feedback

The initial step of the implementation process is to decide on the purpose of implementing the 360-degree feedback process at McDonald’s Cooperation. The main aim of implementing the 360-degree feedback method at McDonald’s Cooperation is mainly for development, team-building, performance appraisal and compensation purposes (Corbi et al. 2018). At McDonald’s Corporation, it is important to foster development and team building since most of the services at the McDonald’s Cooperation require mutual responsibility such as cooking, serving, collection of payment and cleansing of the utensils (Pedro et al. 2020). Hence, it can be considered as a dynamic team but at the same time, there is the presence of gender imbalance among the staffs since the employees are from the female gender when compared to males. Therefore, the implementation of the 360-degree feedback process will allow the management to devise a strategy regarding the development of the workers as well as to inculcate the collaborative working practice despite the aspect of gender imbalance.
The other challenge experience in McDonald’s Cooperation is on the rivalry among some employees especially the servers and the Chief-chefs In line with add, the 360-degree feedback can allow the management to assess the performance of the workers and provide performance bonus to the best performers and training to those who need to improve their skills. This is perfectly in line with Carter et al., (2005) who strongly believe that the 360-degree feedback process allows implementing strategic development decision and remuneration process. The McDonald’s Cooperation can also choose the 360-degree feedback process as it is a multi-rater and anonymous system and this will avoid conflicts among its staffs (Fleenor et al. 2020). One great concern regarding the system is that the management had to communicate it to all the related stakeholders. The design can also be made to facilitate the quality of its meals offered to customers.

2.15 Decide on the areas of work and behaviour on which feedback will be given.

The next step is deciding on the areas of work and behaviour on which the feedback will be given. This is an important process as the basis of the system will lie on this. A committee can set up under the leadership of the McDonald’s Cooperation CEO to determine the constructs that will be included in the feedback form (Chivers and Darling 1999). The committee should consist of at least five stakeholders within the McDonald’s Cooperation which can be the HRM Manager, Cashier and the other heads of various departments of the Restaurant. Armstrong (2009) argued that it is important to get the participation of all the parties concerned. Issues will be raised regarding the competencies applicable to the position. At first, general variables could be proposed and it will certainly create some concerns especially from the employees’ representatives. The HR team could find that if specific variables will have to be included it will become complex and some employees could be penalized.
2.16 Choosing the instrument and methods for collecting data

Once the constructive approach has been chosen, it is time to choose the methods for data collection. The option for a questionnaire could be widely accepted but some members of the committee might have other forms of preference or alternatives of collecting data. They believe that the questionnaire can be biased if not properly answered and it is also a great opportunity for someone to underate another member. They will instead propose the interview process by an independent body. Now that only one option needs to applied in collecting data, the Questionnaire technique will be applied in the 360-degree feedback process within and outside the McDonald’s Cooperation (Fleenor et al. 2020). The HR department ensures that the questions captured on the Questionnaire are not biased. The Questionnaire can consist of both open-ended questions and the closed questions where the respondents which include employees, peers, suppliers and other stakeholders can provide their responses.

2.17 Decide on behaviours/items to be included in the rating instrument.
The Questionnaire sheet can include a variety of behaviours or items that need to explore as have some impact on the operation of the McDonald’s Cooperation. One of the items or behaviours that can be investigated is the perception of the customers on the quality of their meals. This perception can be categorized into a rating of one to ten which values close to 1 show that the customer extremely dissatisfied while the values close to 10 shows that the customers are so much satisfied with the quality of food. Another behaviour that can be investigated concerning the performance of the McDonald’s Cooperation is the one to do with the perception of the employees concerning their view on the ethical leadership within the organization (Bracken et al. 2016). The perception of the employees on ethical leadership can be categorized into Excellent, Very good, good, fair, and poor. Apart from the two forms of behaviours mentioned, other related items within the organization can be included too.
2.18 Decide who the feedback recipients are.

The next stage is about deciding who will be the targeted group who will receive the feedback. The decision that all employees will be rated will be unanimously adopted (Bracken et al. 2016). Therefore, the McDonald’s Cooperation can decide the recipients of the feedback collected to be the heads of the various departments within the organization, the HR manager or the general manager of the organization.
2.19 Decide on who will give the feedback.

All concerns need to be listened to to reach an optimal decision in the interest of everyone. One way is that the competency part will be rated by the Head of Department together with another head from another department. While the attitude, behaviour and ethics part will be rated by one colleague at random, the HoD and the HR Manager. Regarding the feedback on the HODs, the attitude part will be rated by two employees and the Head of the HR department while the competency part will be rated by two random subordinates and the Chief executive officer.
2.20 Decide how feedback will be given.

Regarding, the conduct of the data collection done using the Questionnaire, there are three options, namely, digital, hard copy or verbal. Now that the distribution of the Questionnaire is provided mainly to the employees, customers and the other stakeholders, hard copy submission can be the best (Bracken et al. 2016). Therefore, the feedback will be manually collected from the respondents and given to the HRM department of the McDonald’s Cooperation where the confidentiality of the feedback is guaranteed.
2.21 Analysis of feedback data
When the data has been collected using the questionnaire, the analysis of the collected feedback can be analyzed using the statistical packages or software. Some of the tools that can be used to analyze the information of the data collected on the computer include IBM SPSS, Microsoft Excel and many others. The analysis of the data can be done using techniques such as descriptive statistics, frequency tables, Charts and many others.
2.22 Deciding how the data will be used.

The next level is to determine how the data will be used and by whom. The collected data or information can be used by the Chief executive officer or the Mangers of the McDonald’s Corporation to carry out the general status and performance of the Organization (Grenier and Rienks 2020). Therefore, the data can be used by the CEO to analyze the perception of the customers on the quality of meals prepared, to analyze the degree of ethical leadership within the organization, the relationship between the employees, the efficiency of its services, the degree of honesty and integrity within the organization and the rate of profitability on the organizational performance.
2.23 Initial Implementation of the project

Once all the steps above have been finalized, the next level is to plan the initial implementation of the system. Before implementing the process to the whole organization, it is advised that the process is carried out on a pilot basis (Zatsarinnaya et al. 2020). Once the feedback collected has been analyzed, it can be implemented to facilitate the improvement of the efficiency and effectiveness of the McDonald’s Corporation performance.
2.24 Analyzing the outcome of the pilot scheme

In this case, the company can have recourse to one or two employees who have past experiences on the 360-degree feedback system and the training can be conducted as the employees fill in the questionnaire (Grenier and Rienks 2020). As stated above, the results from the pilot study need to be analyzed and adjustments can be done to enhance the improvement of the McDonald’s Corporation performance.
2.25 Plan and Implement the program

Once the pilot study is analysed and changes have been made, the project can be implemented using the appropriate plan. It should be under the supervision of either the HR manager or an independent professional in the 360-degree feedback process.

2.26 Monitoring and evaluation of the program

The final stage is about the monitoring and evaluation of the program. Monitoring should be continuous and based on the evaluation of the process, improvement can be made in the future (Ali 2015). The evaluation process could be done through a survey and ask the employees about their perception of the system and how it has benefitted them in terms of compensation and personal development (Fleenor et al. 2020). Therefore, regular monitoring and evaluation of the program will influence the general performance of the McDonald’s Corporation organization.
3.0 Conclusion
In conclusion, the 360-degree feedback system seems to look like an ideal form of performance appraisal as it allows a multi rating system to assess the performance of the employees. Different opinions from different raters can be obtained about the same employee which as a result could be used as a basis of whether to reward, train or provide professional and personal development to that employee. Hence, in reality, this approach of 360-degree feedback is so realistic as it enhances the collection of first-hand information from all the stakeholders within the surrounding of the given organization that can facilitate necessary improvements on the general performance of the firm.


References

Baron, J.N. and Dreps, D.M., 1999. Strategic Human Resources: Frameworks for General Managers. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Bracken, D.W., Rose, D.S. and Church, A.H., 2016. The evolution and devolution of 360 feedback. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9(4), pp.761-794.
Bragg, M.A., Pageot, Y.K., Amico, A., Miller, A.N., Gasbarre, A., Rummo, P.E. and Elbel, B., 2020. Fast food, beverage, and snack brands on social media in the United States: An examination of marketing techniques utilized in 2000 brand posts. Pediatric obesity, 15(5), p.e12606.
Silverman, M., Kerrin, M. and Carter, A., 2005. 360 Degree Feedback: beyond the spin. Sussex: Institute for Employment Studies.
Chivers, W. and Darling, P., 1999. 360-Degree feedback and organisational culture. London: Institute of Personnel and Development.
Corbi, A., Errasti, I.L. and Burgos, D., 2018. A scalable approach for 360 feedback in cooperative learning. IEEE Access, 7, pp.9105-9115.
Fleenor, J.W., Taylor, S. and Chappelow, C., 2020. Leveraging the impact of 360-degree feedback. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Incorporated.
Grenier, A. and Rienks, S., 2020. The views of many: 360 feedback for child welfare leadership development. Journal of Public Child Welfare, 14(1), pp.101-121.
Cid de León Carlos, V., González Salvador, M., Abraham, E.M., Evelio Erick, C.M. and Rigoberto Corby, M.M., 2020. 360-degree evaluation review applied in top-level education.
dos Santos, J.R., Pedro, L. and Nunes, S., 2020. Emotional Intelligence and Leadership: A 360-Degree View in the Electronics Industry in Portugal. In Research methodology in management and industrial engineering (pp. 111-127). Springer, Cham.
Zatsarinnaya, Y., Logacheva, A., Suslov, K. and Stepanova, E., 2020, November. 360-Degree Assessment of Training Efficiency in Power Engineering Sector. In 2020 Ural Smart Energy Conference (USEC) (pp. 172-175). IEEE.
Ali, A., 2015. Leadership Assessment through 360 Degree Feedback System–An Insight of Prevailing Concepts. Global Management Journal for Academic & Corporate Studies, 5(1), pp.22-30.
Mayes, P.J., 2019. Study of the Impact of 360-Degree Feedback on Principal Reflection and Action Planning (Doctoral dissertation, East Stroudsburg University).

Tags: