Discuss the different alternatives that you recommend as the most effective for measuring the performance of software developers working in teams.

Module 4 Case and scenario 1. After reviewing the module material, answer the following taken from the module:

The acting head of software development advises you that she wants to develop an effective performance appraisal system for her department. She remembers, from having taken a human resource management class as an undergraduate, that there are a number of different ways to measure performance and she wants your guidance in selecting one.

She also wants to make sure that the method chosen to measure performance fits the technical nature of the workers she supervises who work in teams. Knowing what an individualistic society the USA is, she suggests there be an individual and a team component.

a) Discuss the different alternatives that you recommend as the most effective for measuring the performance of software developers working in teams. Share at least three alternatives with the pros and cons of each alternative you suggest.

b) Answer/discuss the following: 1) What information will need to be gathered to develop the new appraisal system; 2) How you will make the performance appraisal job-related and valid; and 3) How you will mitigate the risk of rater errors when evaluating performance.

Module 4 case

Case for Module 4

You have been the human resources manager for Human Solutions Software for six months. 

These first six months have been difficult at times, with you needing to develop your credibility 

with the people who work for HSS.

There have been some major changes at HSS since you became the human resources manager. 

A West Coast branch office, which has 25 new employees, has been set up for HSS in Portland, 

Oregon; and the former chief of operations has moved to Portland to head that new office. HSS 

has also received a major contract with a German firm. That contract is being managed from the 

main office in Maryland now, but a European branch office will be opened in the next few 

months. The German contract has led to the hiring of an additional six employees at HSS 

headquarters, with four of those employees planning to move to Europe when the branch office 

opens there.

HSS has also received several new contracts, mostly with private firms, that have led to an 

additional expansion of 18 more employees at the HSS headquarters. This means that HSS has 

expanded from 65 employees, when you first started as the human resources manager, to 114 

employees now.

As human resources manager you have hired a consultant who has conducted job analyses for 

all the present positions at HSS. The founders at HSS have finally begun work on a strategic plan 

for the organization and see you as one of the lead people in developing that plan. You have also 

set up standardized recruiting and staffing procedures that have been used to hire many of the 

new employees at HSS.

The hardest part of your job has been convincing several of the founders that these changes 

were needed. The demands of the organizations that HSS contracts with, and several threatened 

lawsuits by potential or former employees, have helped you to get these changes approved by 

the board.

You have accomplished all of this with only one clerical person to help you. Recently you have 

been putting pressure on the board to hire two human resources generalists to help you in your 

tasks. You have justified this expense by the money that the organization can save by avoiding 

lawsuits, by doing more training internally, and by being more efficient in recruiting and staffing 

positions.

Two months ago you submitted a plan for reorganizing HSS based on the job analyses. This 

structure included a traditional board of directors (made up of the five founders), a 

president/CEO, five vice presidents (finance, operations, marketing, technical services, and 

human resources). This morning you found out that, with a few minor revisions, your plan has 

been accepted. You will be the new vice president of human resources with the two human 

resource generalist positions being approved also. The founders have also given you the 

responsibility to supervise the five personnel who administer and provide quality control for 

contracts that HSS has.

While you are excited about your new position and the success of HSS, you are aware of all the 

work that is ahead of you now. You see HSS as an organization that must be led into being a 

more mature organization, with more established employee policies. One of the first things that 

you plan to have your new HR generalists do is to work on organizing all of the employee policies 

at HSS into an employee handbook. You also feel a need to update and review the benefits 

policies for employees.

Scenario 1

One of the many things on your list of things to be done to help bring HSS into being a 

more mature organization is to implement a formal performance appraisal system. 

The acting head of software development advises you that she wants to develop an 

effective performance appraisal system for her department. She remembers, from 

having taken a human resource management class as an undergraduate, that there are 

a number of different ways to measure performance and she wants your guidance in 

selecting one.

She also wants to make sure that the method chosen to measure performance fits the 

technical nature of the workers she supervises who work in teams. Knowing what an 

individualistic society the USA is, she suggests there be an individual and a team 

component.

A) Discuss the different alternatives that you recommend as the most effective for 

measuring the performance of software developers working in teams. Share at 

least three alternatives with the pros and cons of each alternative you suggest.

B) Answer/discuss the following: 1) What information will need to be gathered to 

develop the new appraisal system; 2) How you will make the performance 

appraisal job-related and valid; and 3) How you will mitigate the risk of rater 

 

errors when evaluating performance.