Organisational Behaviour: Employee Performance Analysis in a Bank

This report provides an analysis of employee performance within a Spanish bank, focusing on the behaviours of Lea Restrepo and Carles Nadal. Lea, a confident but potentially overconfident management trainee, faces challenges in meeting performance expectations, exhibiting denial and struggling with skill development. Charles, a long-tenured and dedicated supervisor, demonstrates strong leadership and communication skills, consistently leading his team to success, though he tends to be conservative and modest in self-assessment. The report delves into their behavioural traits, offering advice on improvement and reflecting on personal insights related to performance appraisal processes. The context of a potential "rank and yank" approach underscores the importance of accurate and constructive feedback for employees.

Running head: ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
Organisational Behaviour
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author’s note

ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
Table of Contents
Introduction....................................................................................................................................2
Part a: an Analysis of Lea Restrepo and Carles Nadal’s Situation.................................................3
1. Explanation of their behaviour...............................................................................................3
2. Advice to Lea and Charles.....................................................................................................9
Part b: Personal reflection............................................................................................................12
Conclusion....................................................................................................................................15
Reference......................................................................................................................................16
1

ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
Introduction
Performance appraisal is the process by which a company provides rewards and
appreciation to the employees who have put in their efforts in achieving the objectives of the
business in the previous year (Dusterhoff et al. 2014). It is an assessment of the skill, talent,
knowledge and cognitive inputs that the employee has provided in doing his or her job. The
performance of an organisation is collectively based on the performance of the people who are
associated with the company. As there are positive aspects of performance appraisals like
increment in remuneration, promotion in position, improved motivation to put in the best efforts
etc there are also a number of negative aspects as well. People may be disheartened and de-
motivated if their appraisal is not as per their expectation; the results of the appraisal may also
give rise to conflict situations leading towards an unhealthy work environment (DeNisi and
Smith 2014). The human resource department of an organisation is responsible to developing
the policies and framework of performance appraisal. There are a number of tools and
frameworks that are developed over the years which help the management in deciding the
performance of the employee. 360 degree feedback, graphic rating scale method, ranking
method, essay method, Field review method, BARS, Management by objectives etc are some of
the common methods (Aggarwal and Thakur 2013). Some of the listed methods are traditional
however some are new, based on the nature of the work and the business the human resource
department develops or adapts a framework that is best suited for the employees. Business
organisations deem their employees to be one of the most important stakeholders and thus it is
important to ensure that the employees are provided with what they deserve (Dusterhoff et al.
2014).
2

ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
This report focuses on the performance appraisal of a financial institution or bank. A
bank is an organisation that has a number of divisions in operations and hence accordingly the
performance appraisal is done. It has been indicated that there is a self-assessment process
where the employees get an opportunity to access one self and can rate themselves from poor to
outstanding. This report will focus on two employees, the first part of the report is an analysis of
their situation and the second part of the report is a reflection.
Part a: an Analysis of Lea Restrepo and Carles Nadal’s Situation
1. Explanation of their behaviour
From the case studies that has been provided regarding Lea and Charles it is clear that
the two people are distinctly different from one another.
Difference in between Lea and Charles
Lea is a confident person and that has always been her positive aspect the fact that she
was given the position she is in is because the confidence that she had portrayed during her
interview. Her knowledge and skill requirement for the position during the time of recruitment
was assessed as buildable and as a management trainee it is expected for her to do mistakes and
learn from them. Under the supervision of the seniors it is expected for a management trainee to
learn and grow however fro Lea things have not been as positive as anticipated. Assessing her
for 18 months it has been observed that the confidence that has come across during the time of
interview was rather over-confidence. This aspect of her behaviour takes away from the
achievements that she has made for the past year. First of all the fact that she had confidently
said that she will receive merit score in her final semester has back fired as she has scored on
average grades and then there has been incidents where she has confidently done something that
3

ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
is wrong and the team had faced repercussion for the same. It is important to be confident but
confidence should come out of certainty and not expectation (Farndale and Kelliher 2013).
Lea had also been confident about her knowledge and skills in the industry, she has
mentioned her father was also in the same industry and thus it was perceived that she talent and
understanding of the banking industry is her forte. This has also been proven wrong in her case,
as a trainee there has been instances reported by the supervisors of Lea that she has problem in
understanding and picking up things which are most straight forward and other members of her
team has no issues in. As a trainee it is expected of the individual to keep an open mind in order
to understand and gain knowledge specific to the company. In the process there is also a large
portion of unlearning as practical is not as black and white as theory (Barnes-Farrell 2013). This
aspect of her behaviour has the team lagging behind, in terms of growth as well as in terms of
performance. While working as a team it is important to be on the same page. For example: if
the team is given the training of a software and the time period of learning that has been set is
three months, then it is expected that everyone in the team learns the basic as well as some
advanced version of the software, but if a member is lagging behind then the team cannot move
on to the application of the training.
Another behavioural aspect of Lea that has been observed is the fact that she is that she
is also very enthusiastic. Confidence in her brings this enthusiasm as she feels that she succeeds
every challenge that is put across. Enthusiasm in taking challenge is positive it showcases that
she can take challenges and move on (Deepa et al. 2014). However, her vigour and enthusiasm
has not proven to be positive for her colleagues. Most of the time it has been observed that a
new task that she enthusiastically takes up ends up being in a mess and failing. This is a major
issue for the team’s performance if a person continuously keeps on performing poorly. For
4

ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
example: if a new project requires to be delivered urgently and four people from the team are
needed to do the task, and the client is premium. In such a case if a person like Lea out of
excitement volunteer for the task and ends up doing a poor job there are chances of losing a
valuable client. This way the performance of the other three people who were working together
also falls.
Denial is another behavioural trait of Lea that has been identified. Over the period of her
tenure as a management trainee in the company, there has hardly been any success story that she
could share. Her skill development and training has also been rough as her development is not at
par with others. Most of the job that she is assigned is poorly submitted or has a very average
approach, on the other hand her enthusiasm and eagerness makes her a prompt volunteer every
time. There are instances where are colleagues had to intervene from her taking a task.
Therefore it can be said that her performance coupled with her over-confidence has developed a
negative impression towards her. Her denial of understanding the situation, has also led her to
believe that she is good at what she is doing however the results of her performance show
otherwise. The fact that she has assessed herself as an outstanding performer will give rise to
conflict situation during the time of evaluation. She will be evaluated by her manager or
supervisor based on her success and the accuracy with which she has delivered her work. An
issue with a person who is in denial is that they cannot be rectified easily. Lea is a person who
does not think that she requires support or training which on the other hand is an issue for the
team as well. This leads her to be a bad learner as well; overconfidence tends to shroud a
person’s learning skills as they are of the view that they are already able.
Charles he is a person as described in the case study to be one who has started young,
her joined the organisation when he was just 18 years old. This indicates that he is an ambitious
5

ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
person who works hard. Now he is 35 years old and over the years of his serve tenure in the
bank he has over and again proved himself to be a hardworking employee. He has been
associated with the company for more than 17 years which indicates his loyalty and his focus
develop his career. With the experience he has gathered over the time in the bank he could have
easily applied for a position in another organisation, however, he has chosen to stay in the
position of the supervisor for 5 years now. His consistency in the position has provided him with
an advantage of building a valuable relation with his team. The relation in between the
supervisor and the team members is important in order to achieve the objectives of the team. It
can also be said that the supervisor of a team is partially responsible for the way the individual
members of the team and is fully responsible for how the team operates as a whole (Deepa et al.
2014). The tenure that Charles has served in the company also indicates that he is a patient
person who doesn’t deal with things in a rush.
He is the supervisor of the frontline customer service tellers team, there are 10 members
in this team that he has been supervising for more than 5 years. This indicates that he not only
can be a good supervisor but is also a good communicator. To be successful in the customer
service department one has to be an efficient communicator and this skill is also required to
manage a team efficiently. However, his behavioural trait is observed to be more conservative
and introvert. He is not very lively person which can be a downside to his position but he is
modest as well which makes him a good leader. People listen to what he has to say as he is a
good listener himself. His leadership skills are evident from the performance of his team and
their consistency in the performance. The duty and responsibility of the team is taxing and is
also stressful in such a situation being among the top of the game indicates Charles leadership
quality. He has led his team to success consecutively. This aspect indicates his dedication
6

ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
towards work and his tendency of hard work, as a supervisor his work is to take care of his
people and his behaviour and his performance directly influences the performance of others.
Another behavioural trait that has been indicated in the case study is excellence in
management, he is a person who has been with the organisation for long and has been excelling
in his position. His team has been among the top performing team consecutively, this shows that
he has the potential to understand people and their advantages and encourage them to work in
their own forte to achieve the objectives. It has also been said that he is a modest person, and the
self-evaluation of his performance appraisal from also suggests the same as he has deemed
himself to be an “Average” even after his achievements and the achievements of the team in the
past year. He has also not applied for a higher post while he is quite capable of the position.
It has also been observed that he is a person who needs constant appreciation of his job
or else he tends to undermine himself, therefore it is important for the management to
understand that he needs support and motivation to be able to apply to a higher post which he is
capable of (Deci and Ryan 2014). This can be confused with lack of confidence, however, that
is not the case. Charles is a modest and shy person he is ambitious but he doesn’t let his
ambition overpower his sense of judgement. But this is also a negative aspect as he will not be
able to move up the ladder if he doesn’t stand up for himself. His behaviour and his skills are
responsible for the success of the team and he understands the same and thus maintains his clam
and composed nature for the team and the achievements of the team.
Similarities in between Lea and Charles behaviour
One of the most important similarities in between the two people is that they are both
hard working and share the interest of the company. Lea and Charles though are very different
7

ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
from one another they both are hard working and their intensions of their actions are for the
betterment of the company. Hence it can be said that they both has a passion for the company
and is a content employee which is an asset for the company. Their dedication for the company
will help the organisation in achieving the objectives of the business. Another aspect of
similarity in the behaviour of both these people are a lack of self-awareness, which is important
during performance appraisal.
It can be concluded that though Lea is not directly responsible for the performance of
other people but her individual performance can lead the team to have a poor overall show. On
the other hand the behavioural traits of Lea suggest that her performance incompetency will
impact others in the team as well. While the performance and the behavioural traits of Charles
impact the performance of the team he is responsible for this difference is because of the job
role that the two performs.
8

ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
2. Advice to Lea and Charles
Advice for Charles
Charles is a person who has been associated with the company for a while now; he has
an idea of how the performance appraisal process of the company is conducted every year.
However, the new policy that the human resource department of the company has come up with
has provided people like Charles with opportunity to achieve significant career development. In
order to get rated in the top 20 percent, it is advised for Charles that he documents his
achievements and performance ratings of the previous years in a document. This he can use
while filling the self assessment from. This will help him be more rational and assess himself
effectively. He is usually a person who is modest in nature and thus has been looking through
the opportunity that lie ahead, by documenting his achievements and answering the self
assessment from he will be able to keep a rational understanding of what he is capable of and
how his performance has helped the company to achieve the objectives.
Another advice to Charles is that he should do a self-assessment of his strengths and
weaknesses and try to align them with the threats and opportunities that the he has in his career.
This will also help him get an overview of his capabilities (Mone and London 2018).
He is by nature a modest person and hence he will have to understand his capabilities
and put across his message to the evaluation panel professionally.
It is advised that during the evaluation meeting with the managers and others, he show
these data points to ensure that the evaluation team is clear of his achievements in the past year
as well as are aware of his track record (Sansó et al. 2015). This will also help in gaining the
confidence of the team because they will know that he has been associated with the organisation
9

ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
for a long time and has improved and proven his capability. Another advice for Charles could be
gathering appreciation from the people he has been working with, the managers and the
supervisors and present it to the evaluation team during the process of appraisal. Charles is also
advised to work upon introspection of his abilities so that he does not undermine himself. He
should be able to clearly understand what he is capable of and what he is not, he should be more
ambitious; in case he is going through a problem with understanding he can speak with the
seniors and ask for advice. It is always good to take advice from the seniors while considering
options for career.
Advice for Lea
Lea is a person who is not responsible for a team; she is just responsible for her own
actions. Thus it is advised for her to look in to her progress report, which will indicate the data
and information regarding her success rate in her tenure. As she is an enthusiastic person she
can make room for improvement in her performance. It is also advised for her supervisors to
meet her and state the data points and point out the sections that she has been lagging. Since she
is in denial of her performance, she should be made aware by the seniors. This could break her
confidence but as she is naturally confident she will re-gain her confidence once she delivers a
successful task hence it is advised to take feedbacks seriously and listen to what the seniors or
the supervisors have to say. Lea should be proactive in taking regular feedbacks from the people
around in order to understand the progress. It is also advised for her to stop volunteering for
work for the next three months and focus on her personal development and the work that she has
been assigned by the seniors. This will help her to focus on her strengths rather than exploring a
number of prospects at one time.
10

ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
Lea is also advised to take some psychometric tests which will help her understand the
traits that she has and will also help her in understanding her shortcomings. In such case of
denial these tests may help a person in understanding their strengths and weaknesses. This will
help her develop he strengths and work on her weaknesses (Sansó et al. 2015).
Motivation is needed for Lea at every step and hence she is advised to not lose hope and
ensure that her work and her performance are monitored by herself. Not only that she should
keep an open mind and should try to learn from the past mistakes that she has made (Ganta
2014). Her confidence is her positive aspect she is also vigorous and enthusiastic she just needs
a little time to settle in and understand her shortcomings.
The human resource department can also appoint one of the senior members of the team
to guide and support her. For Lea it is advised to keep an open mind while she is being critically
evaluated as she will gain from being patient and understanding her performance issues. The
supervisors will be able to point out the areas in which she can work upon in order to improve
her performance. As a fairly new employee Lea should be provided with a chance to get
feedbacks and rectify her and develop her skills. This is her first year in the organisation and she
should be provided with time to learn as well as unlearn things from the past year (Mone and
London 2018).
11