+1-817-968-5551
+61-488-839-671
+44-7480-542904About Expert
Key Topics
Requirement
Request for Proposal
The Middle America School has engaged the services of your consulting firm to redesign their performance management system. They have requested a proposal from you detailing these procedures.The report should be easy to read, clearly describe the performance management process, and relay your understanding of the job and organizational context. You are encouraged to use relevant literature citations as well. Lastly, you should write an "executive summary" that will preface your report. Click on the following link for more information on how to write a response to an RFP:
The Middle America School is asking for your help in managing the performance of their professors. This is a small liberal arts school in the Midwest that has over 20 undergraduate majors. Currently, professors are simply paid for how many classes they teach and how many students they advise. Middle America is seeking your advice because accreditation organizations have begun to notice that their graduates are having trouble finding jobs, and they suspect that the classroom content and advising may not be tied to job skills. Course evaluations are known to have strong bias and may not be a reflection of teaching ability (i.e., only dissatisfied students respond, more difficult classes have lower ratings, low response rates, etc.), so there may be some legal issues with including these. What type of system would you suggest, what sources would you include, how should it be implemented, and how will you manage the culture change of a new system?
Organizational Strategy:
1.To be the best applied teaching school for the two most popular majors: Psychology & Business.
2.To acquire other struggling smaller schools and apply Middle America’s standardized processes, both operational and academics, to do successful turn around management.
3.To have a 90% employment or graduate school acceptance rate for graduates/graduating students.
Required Sections
• Executive Summary. Click on the following link for more information on how to write an Executive Summary: How to Write an Executive Summary. (Links to an external site.)
• Overview. Describe the purpose of system (how it will be used [developmental?], what decisions it will support [administrative?]) and how you will ensure alignment with the organization’s strategy.
• Job Analysis. Outline a plan for conducting job analyses, including SMEs and data collection methods, and how you will tie the development of the performance appraisal form to the job analysis. Include a sample job description in an appendix, not in the body of the proposal.
•The Appraisal Form. Please describe which type of appraisal format you will be using, e.g., type of rating scale, goal/objective setting. How will it be used and what is your justification for this type of form? Include an example of the appraisal tool itself. This is an example, not a full form. Please pick an appropriate KSA or competency for university professors and use it as an example to demonstrate what type of tool it is, how it will be used, and that you can produce a tool that is consistent with the methodology you have outlined in this report
• Process & Delivery. Describe the entire process for this performance management system for all stakeholders.
◦Create a timeline that details the performance management process from beginning to end for both the rater and ratee, as well as when HR should be involved. Think about Aguinis’ (2009) performance management process.
â—¦Decide who participates (is this a single rater or multiple rater system)?
â—¦Who initiates the process and monitors progress?
â—¦Are there formal meetings? Informal meetings? How is feedback delivered? Be sure to include your preferred method for providing feedback and coaching for performance improvement.
◦What is HR’s role in the entire process?
â—¦This process should also include details on:
â—¾ Training. Outline a training plan for key stakeholders (raters, ratees, HR). How will you train different stakeholders and what should be different about their training?
â—¾ Legal Defensibility/Fairness. List and explain specific components of your system that enhance legal defensibility and promote procedural justice and fairness.
• Conclusion. Summarize the main points of the proposal and the benefits of the system for the client.
Solution
Executive Summary:
The following report is an attempt to re-engineer the entire Performance Management System of The America Middle School. Request for Proposal form was studied thorough and an in-depth research was carried out to understand the nitty-gritties of Job of a Professor, how it is different from a regular corporate job and what are the expectations that are there from a professor in the current scenario of corporate requirements. Based on the studies and research, it is recommended that there is a need to implement KRA based Performance management System that sets the goal upright and is also very transparent. In the current context it is the best viable option for The America Middle School.
Why take stress when you can take financial management assignment help from the professional experts of Allassignmenthelp.com. You can pay and easily avail of our management accounting assignment help and score good grades. The talented and professional experts on our website will help you and provide you with conflict management assignment help at the most affordable price.
Overview:
The New KRA based Performance system is suitable for the school due to the following reasons (Vodák, 2010):
-
- The system is able to recognize the performers, since there is a detailed and agreed upon KRAs that are set in agreement with the Professors. Hence, those who are able to achieve them are the real performers.
-
- The decision that it will support is that the prime need is to identify the people, who are able to achieve the goals, which will be set in accordance to the current demand and revised strategy.
-
- The new strategy of the school is to be known best in the field and that will need some efforts from all the stakeholders and this appraisal system will help them recognize the people who really works well. This is about defining the new era’s performing team members.
Job Analysis:
In the case of teaching and professorship, the numbers may not be a god indicator of the real efforts and worth. The professor may be teaching many subjects and mentoring many students, but that is not the expectation. The real thing lies in the fact that how many new research publications have been made, how many new subjects and theories have been proposed. Also, in how many conferences have the professor made a mark of the school realized. This is all about marketing the real thing and being strong in the content at the same time. These are some really important attributes that deserved to be added in the KRA list of the professor.
The latest way of capturing the performers is firstly by allocating a mentor to each professor, may be a senior professor. The role of senior professor is to guide new research topics to the mentee and ensure that some tangible work is done towards that. If the latest things are seen to coming out of the school, the recruiters will automatically get attracted towards the students. There is a whole lot of revised KRAs to be added in the appraisal form. The additions will be more towards the concrete content of sellable and in demand skill sets, rather than just plain teaching capabilities. Annexure 1 is the sample of one such system.
The Appraisal Form:
The appraisal form that is recommended is the subjective KRA based appraisal form, in which the KRAs will be filled post the detailed discussion with the Mentor and the Management team. This is to ensure that the goals towards which the Professors will be working. The entire dynamics of just being a teacher will be changed, in which the Professors will be entering the KRA based assessment criterion (Info-Track, 2011). The major changes are that, the new formula for engaging the performance appraisal would be:
Performance rating = {X1 * (No. of Latest Publications) + X2 * (No. of New Courses Introduced) + X3 * (No. of representations made in the industry confluences) + X4 *(No. of New Industry Tie Ups) + X5 …. Xn (For regular teaching KRAs)}/ {?(X1…Xn)}.In this manner the focus of the Professors will move towards the things that they should be more keen towards as per the latest corporate expectations and it will give the school the edge they need.
Process & Delivery:
Performance Appraisal Time Lines:
Action Item 1st January 20XX 2nd January 20XX 3rd January 20XX 4th January 20XX 5th January 20XX 1st November 20XX 10th November 20XX 1st December 20XX 2nd December 20XX 3rd December 20XX 4th December 20XX 5th December 20XX 10th December 20XX 11th December 20XX 12th December 20XX 13th December 20XX 15th December 20XX
Goal Setting Session1
Goal Setting Discussions
Mentor - Mentee Assignment and Discussions
Finalization of KRAs and Assessment Plan
Research Focus Area to be defined
Achievement Form to be filled
A self-Assessment to be Submitted
Detailed discussion of the research and teaching capabilities introduced to be discussed with mentor
Mentor representation to the Board
Board Decides the value addition to be brought to the system
Final Review Assessment Recommendations
Discussion of Board with mentor and mentee about Appraisal
Final agreed upon points for appraisal
Participants:
The participants will be everyone from the board member committee and the mentor of the professor. The mentor will be the one who will be representing the case of the professor and his own appraisal depends on the performance of his mentee. This is the most used structure and adapted by all the main companies in the world. Through this the professor will be given enough opportunity to represent the case properly and effectively, so that there is no discrepancy observed later on. This way the system will work towards the betterment of the entire Eco space, of which smaller struggling colleges will love to be part of (Hayes, 2010).
Initiation and Monitoring:
The entire system is run mainly by two people, Mentor and the Mentee. It is the role of the Mentor to come up with some exciting work for the mentee and ensure what all are the tasks that will ensure the development of the Mentee and the School overall. In which ways the school will become a better name in the Industry. The Mentee will set the goal in association with the Mentor and the Board Member and will officially approve it. This will set the direction for the professor and he will have the clear guidelines in his mind about what to keep as the focus area. It will always encourage the professors to find latest trends in the business and hence frame new courses and content in the curriculum and ensure that the Industry tie ups are strengthened (Kramer, 2014).
The Monitoring of the task is done by the Mentors by regular meetings and also be the Board Members in the semiannual review meetings. This is just to ensure that the pace is in the right directions and also to overcome the constraints that the professor might be facing. Everything is focus on one thing that is to make students more active and employee able in the current market demands and scenarios.
Meetings Information:
Meetings are very much needed to keep a very close and fine watch on the happenings, this is to ensure that the budget that is allocated to the professors is being used fruitfully and in the interest of the college and the students. Meetings will be set as monthly ones, between mentor and mentee and it will be ones in three months between the boards and the mentor mentee duo. Since the performance is interdependent in the new system, everyone will take the things seriously. Once a year meetings will be organized to check upon the latest industry insights and efforts that are made to strengthen that even further. All these to support the ultimate aim of the new appraisal system, about making a better recognition in the industry and making the pupils more relevant. This will also encourage collation between, the MiddleAmerica School and the new schools which are struggling with the same issues.
Training of the New System:
The new system will definitely be a very appalling to the old professors, since they have been concentrating on almost different things till now, but now the systems are recommended to be changed and hence a lot change management is needed here. The main thing is to realize the importance of the changed system on their own career and the benefit it will bring to the company. It must be told to them that the system is there to simplify the future and not complicate that. Regular sessions for filling the new form will help the people to gauge the system in the more positive form.
How to Judge the Fairness:
The first step is to ensure that there is no conflict between the focus area of the two professor, so that both cannot come with similar though papers, as this may turn into a legal issue. Secondly, there must be a thorough check on the work that the professor is doing, it should be in the harmony of the college. There are legal issues related to literature work and all those things must be made extremely clear to the people. The system is transparent and all the things are as per the protocol that will be set.
Place Order For A Top Grade Assignment Now
We have some amazing discount offers running for the students
Place Your OrderConclusion:
The bottom line that is to be met here through this new Performance Management System is to shift the focus of the resources towards a focused future and ensure that they see the world beyond the boundaries of the curriculum. This will help the management and the school overall to improve their visibility and recognition in the outside world and hence make their students more employee able and get mastered in the field.
References:
-
1. Hayes, M. (2010). Results-based Performance Management System. New York: Depedmarikina publications.
-
2. Info-Track. (2011). Performance management system. London: Infor Track Appriasal System.
-
3. Kramer, C. (2014). The Performance Appraisal as a Management Tool. Mumbai: Proapptive Consulting.
-
4. Vodák, J. (2010). Mentoring - Performance management Tool. Žilina: Faculty of Management science and Informatics.
Give your grades a boost
Just share your requirements and get customized solutions on time.
-
1,168,768 Orders
-
4.9/5 Overall Rating
-
5,052 Experts
