We will continue with the next part of the presentation:
Performance appraisal in Coca Cola company
At Coca-Cola, performance appraisal includes structured formal interaction
between two employees, a manager and you. The managers receive training to deliver
fair and accurate ratings at the end of the review period. They also have a system of
hiring an independent person, who can be a part of other teams in the company, to rate
employees and teams.
Some of the important parameters used at Coca-Cola to evaluate employee
performance review are training completed, individual goal setting, recreational activities
with many other parameters.
AI recognizes performance based on the work completed and responses submitted
during the tenure. This helps to easily recognize high performing individuals or teams for
role expansion, sponsorship to conferences and visits to other countries, communicate
expectations, encourage advanced learning and development opportunities.
When staff provide self-submitted video performance reviews every month, AI
can intervene to separate concerns that can be resolved immediately and overall company
performance can be increased because of the improved communication with the staff.
This saves 1117 hours of work partly because of the extended timeline of resolving
concerns of employees.
2.2.1. Objectives for appraisal policy at Coca-Cola are
Increase staff self-esteem,
Gain new insight into staff and supervisors,
Better clarify and define job functions and responsibilities.
Develop valuable communication among appraisal participants.
Increase motivation to perform effectively,
Distribute rewards on a fair and credible basis.
Clarify organizational goals so they can be more readily accepted.
2.1.2. Steps in appraising employees performance of COCA-COLA
Define the job: Means making sure that you and your sub ordinate agree on his or
her duties and job standard.
Appraise the performance: Means comparing your subordinate's actual
performance to the standards that have been set.
Provide the feedback: Means discuss the subordinate performance and progress,
and make plans for any development required.
2.1.3. Analysis of Coca-Cola’s Employee Performance Appraisal
In Coca-Cola, performance management entails all programs designed for annual
employee appraisal. This concerns procedures used in communicating work expectations
and relaying of feedback on a continuous basis through yearly performance rating.
Performance appraisal in Coca serves to promote and compensate employees among
other management decisions (Bauer & Erdogan, 2009).
Management/Performance by Objectives (PBO)
Define organizational goals
Defining employee objectives
Continuous monitoring of performance and progress
Performance evaluation/ reviews
Providing feedback
Performance appraisals rewards/ punishments
The company has implemented a single performance appraisal system for all
employees geared toward achieving fairness based on job-related metrics. The process
implemented offers an opportunity for improvement in internal oversight as a means to
achieve equal employment opportunity (EEO).
Management by Objectives’ (MBO) is a process by which employees and their
seniors meet to identify the underlying goals and objectives. In this process, employees
set their own goals, but the set company standards are used as standard measures against
which their performance will be rated. Peter Drucker introduced this concept of
management by objectives in the early 1950s (Taylor, 1994). The figure below shows an
overview of the MBO process.
At the beginning of the review period, each employee meets with his or her
superior to establish measurable objectives together with the required set of competencies
for the year necessary for the execution of the said objectives. Therefore, this mutual
relationship offers an opportunity for a continuous feedback process.
The feedback process also provides a framework for the identification of other
employee developments measured against the set plan. The company ensures a self-drive
assessment where employees communicate their progress to their superiors from which
managers make an exclusive evaluation based on the initial standards.
As a feedback-oriented appraisal system, the management disseminated rating
reports to the employees which employees may appeal to if need be (Taylor, 1994). To
comply with the laid down best practices, Coca’s appraisal system involves a half-yearly
employee review and mandatory training for two days where both managers and
employees go through training on the functioning of the system. Employees work in
conjunction with performance appraisal teams to plan, track and review their individual
performance.
At the end of the review period, the top managers undergo training to provide fair
and accurate ratings. In addition, an independent rater works to offer separate ratings for
employees based on ongoing performance evaluation This process ensures consistency
and fairness in the process.
2.1.4. Purpose of the Performance system in Coca-Cola
The major essence of the appraisal system applied by Coca is to develop a set of
employees who are aware of their duties, roles and responsibilities as expected of them
by the company. The system thrives on the belief that clarity of objectives and continuous
feedback lends an opportunity for achieving organizational and individual employee
goals (Taylor, 1994).
2.1.5. Effectiveness of the system
MBO is a participatory process involving goal setting and selection of actions
based on standard metrics in order to offer a basis for decision-making. Since the process
involved in MBO is comparison of individual employee performance with the laid down
organizational objectives, it follows that the process provides an objective evaluation for
employee performance. An open-end feedback eminent in the process is likely to
influence employees to fulfill their mandates.
Management by objectives thrives on features such as clarity of goals, effective
communication, and motivation. According to research, where employees engage in the
process of goal setting through an effective feedback oriented communication, they are
more likely to offer best services aimed at meeting organizational as well as individual
goals (Bauer & Erdogan, 2009). It is worth noting that since the process entails a
vigorous and inclusive evaluation, it is highly likely to achieve fairness and accuracy of
the overall outcome.
Second factor
It is not possible to know the inside information of the coca cola company so
based on objective assessments we assume the methods used by PepsiCo and Coca-Cola:
both companies use the following methods: ........; but But for each method, there
will be certain specific differences as follows:
Management by Objectives (MBO): Both PepsiCo and Coca-Cola use the MBO
method to evaluate employee performance. However, PepsiCo is known to place a
greater emphasis on individual goal setting, while Coca-Cola emphasizes team-based
goal setting.
360-Degree Feedback: Both companies use the 360-degree feedback method,
which involves obtaining feedback on an employee's performance from multiple sources.
However, Coca-Cola is known to have a more formalized 360-degree feedback process,
with specific guidelines and forms for feedback providers.
Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS): Both PepsiCo and Coca-Cola
use the BARS method to evaluate employee performance. However, Coca-Cola is known
to place a greater emphasis on using BARS to identify and develop high-potential
employees.
Critical Incident Technique (CIT): Both companies use the CIT method to
evaluate employee performance. However, PepsiCo is known to use CIT as a tool for
identifying best practices and improving employee training, while Coca-Cola uses CIT to
identify specific employee strengths and weaknesses.
Forced Distribution Method: Both PepsiCo and Coca-Cola use the forced
distribution method to evaluate employee performance. However, Coca-Cola is known to
use this method to identify and eliminate low-performing employees, while PepsiCo uses
it to identify high-potential employees and provide them with additional development
opportunities.
It's important to note that these are generalizations based on the reputation of the
companies, and the actual methods used by each company may vary by job role, location,
and other factors.
