On-Boarding Performance Management Assignment Essay
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Language English Pages 5-10 pages
Please read ALL directions below carefully before answering the final assignment.
- Read the entire case study carefully and then respond to the seven Discussion Questions on page 5. Answer all questions and all parts of each question.
- Develop each answer to the fullest extent possible, including citations from outside resources and course resources, where applicable, to support your arguments.
- Do not type the answers into the case study document.
- Include a Cover Page with Name, Date, and Title of Assignment.
- Do not include the original question. Use the following format: Question 1, Question 2, etc.
- Each response should be written in complete sentences, double-spaced and spell-checked. Use 12-point Times New Roman font with 1-inch margins on all sides.
- Include page numbers according to APA formatting guidelines.
- Include citations in APA format at the end of each answer.
Case Overview—Part B
In August, Jason Hubbs submitted a résumé to the human resource department of Big Time Computers Inc. in response to an advertisement in the local newspaper for a senior technical writer. After a short interview process in which three of the four individuals on the selection committee felt that he should be hired, Lisa Cavanaugh hired him.
Hubbs spent a three-week training period learning departmental methods and procedures, becoming familiar with Big Time’s products, and preparing for his first writing assignments. As a senior writer, Hubbs was also expected to serve as a technical publications project leader for one of Big Time’s product groups. During the training period, Hubbs attended project meetings to meet the employees from other departments who were involved with that product group and to become current on what was happening within it.
Following the training period, Hubbs started his first writing assignment, the revision of a software manual to reflect upgraded product software. Hubbs went two weeks beyond the scheduled date for completing the first draft of the revision. In editing the first draft, Hamrick felt that the writing quality and organization were poor and suggested extensive changes before the manual was distributed for review. Hubbs implemented these changes and prepared the manual for review. One week before the review, Hubbs sent an advance notice email message to the reviewers, notifying them of the upcoming review. Mark Samson, the project leader for the product described in the manual, pointed out to Lisa Cavanaugh that the message was sloppy, and had misspellings and poor grammar. He expressed concern that the credibility of the technical publications department was at risk if the quality of any of the written material that went out to the entire company was poor. Hamrick and Samson also expressed concern to Cavanaugh about Hubbs’s writing ability.
Cavanaugh decided to implement some procedures to monitor Hubbs’s progress and temporarily give him more supervision. She scheduled weekly meetings with Hubbs during which he was to give her a detailed status report for the week, with particular emphasis on tracking manual schedules. She also required Hubbs to send his work to the technical editor on a chapter-by-chapter basis, and each week Hamrick would meet with Hubbs to discuss his writing. Cavanaugh also decided to postpone giving project leader responsibilities to Hubbs, but she had him continue to attend project meetings with Murray and planned to give Hubbs a project in the future.
Resentment was starting to develop in the technical publications department due to Hubbs’s failure to meet expectations. Several of the writers complained to Cavanaugh because Hubbs had been hired as a senior writer at a higher salary, yet his writing skills were apparently inferior to theirs. Murray also expressed dissatisfaction at having to serve as project leader for
two projects when the expectation was that Hubbs would take one of the projects. Hamrick fell behind in his editing assignments because of the extra time he was spending with Hubbs, and the editorial assistants complained about the quantity of cleanup required because of Hubbs’s poor work. In private meetings with dissatisfied employees, Cavanaugh expressed faith in Hubbs’s abilities and urged patience while she worked on developing his skills.
Hubbs showed signs of improvement in his writing skills and his ability to meet deadlines under the procedures implemented by Cavanaugh. As a result of this and because Hubbs now had four months’ experience at Big Time, Cavanaugh assigned Hubbs to write a marketing article on a topic related to his area of technical expertise. Hubbs was to work with a marketing engineer and a marketing product manager to develop the article by a specified date. When the initial review of the article was due, Hubbs gave the first draft to the marketing department without any review or edit from within the technical publications department. Marketing was dissatisfied with the organization and content of the article; Dennis Smith, marketing product manager, met with Lisa Cavanaugh to express this dissatisfaction. Although Cavanaugh assured Smith that technical publications could complete the article to his satisfaction and on schedule, Smith decided to have the article written by a marketing employee.
Though his writing skills were slowly improving, lingering resentment continued about Hubbs’s status and salary as a senior writer. Morale in the department was low. Hamrick continued to have a difficult time fulfilling his editing responsibilities because of the extra time he was spending with Hubbs, and Murray couldn’t meet manual schedules because of the time spent fulfilling project leader responsibilities for two projects. Lisa Cavanaugh knew that it was time to act.
Big Time Computers Inc.
Answer the following:
- Evaluate the effectiveness of the process of onboarding and training Hubbs. What elements of the new hire orientation process would be particularly important to his successful performance? What other training opportunities could have helped him prepare for his role?
- Assume the role of the manager in this case. How do you handle a new employee who lacks the specific skills that were presented during the selection process? How do you determine if training is the solution and how much training is reasonable or expected?
- Discuss the risks versus the benefits of the manager’s decision to have Hamrick mentor
Hubbs. Overall, do you think this decision was effective? If you do not agree, who do you think would have been a more suitable mentor for Hubbs?
- Evaluate the manager’s process of handling Hubb’s performance problems. Was it effective or could it have been handled differently? Was anything overlooked? What other factors besides lack of skills or ability could have contributed to Hubb’s poor performance? How could the manager have mitigated some of these factors?
- Consider the performance issue with the marketing department. What happens when poor performance affects a department’s reputation and credibility? What must the manager do to first improve that performance and secondly, control the damage from poor performance?
- The manager needs to act. What are her options and what factors and/or additional information must she consider before making a decision?
- Review Case A and reflect on the recruiting and selection processes used to hire Hubbs.
- How could the recruiting and/or selection processes been improved to mitigate the new hire’s performance issues?
- What effect could the recruiting and/or selection processes have had on Hubbs’s subsequent performance and his team’s perceptions of his performance?
Quality of Response No Response Poor/Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Good Excellent Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. The can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper.
GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!