Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
Ethics and Performance Evaluations
4.8 ethics and Performance evaluations
Your city workforce has been experiencing a rash of ethical lapses. It seems as if nearly everyone, from the janitorial staff to the department managers to the deputy directors, has had an ethics miscue over the past year. As the director of human resources, you feel strongly that it is time to put an ethics component in the annual evaluation of hourly workers and managerial/professional employees. You realize, of course, that your boss must agree and begin to think about how you will make the case to evaluate the ethical behavior of employees. Ah, you have it, why not collect information from cities like yours to identify what others are doing? After a few weeks of telephone calls and e-mails, you discover that very little is being done, but you do find one municipality that has an ethics component in the annual evaluation of the city manager, the city clerk, and the city attorney. The evaluation instrument asks the evaluator to rate the city manager/clerk/attorney as Excellent, Fully Satisfactory, Satisfactory, or Unsatisfactory in response to the statement: Conducts self in accordance with the ethical standards of the office of Charter Officer. Disappointed by what you learn, you decide to form a committee to draft language that could be placed on the form to evaluate professional/management personnel. You decide to do the same thing with the hourly employees evaluation language but at a later date. The committee takes their assignment to heart and produces the following set of evaluative statements:
Demonstrates an ethical approach in the discharge of duties.
2. Displays ethical behaviorpromotes an environment that is open, fair, tolerant, trustful, and respectful. Values public interest over self-interest and is accountable.
3. Clearly understands and communicates ethical practices, policies, and goals relevant to the community.
4. Shows respect for the views of others, takes pride in work products, places public interest over own self-interest.
5. Demonstrates integrity in all aspects of work.
6. Adheres to the citys ethics code.
7. Demonstrates a clear ability to identify, evaluate, and resolve issues related to ethics. 8. Demonstrates sound ethical judgment and encourages ethical behavior in others.
9. Complies with rules and laws defined by the city Personnel Manual and professional standards and conducts self with integrity while avoiding undue influence.
10. Displays proper attitude toward organizational transparency and has sufficient knowledge of citys ethical standards.
11. Demonstrates ethical judgment as defined by the city code of ethics or applicable professional standards.
Discussion Questions
1. Which of these eleven statements do you like the best? Like the least? Why?
2. Rank order three statements, with one being the best.
3. Would the list differ in any significant manner for hourly employees?
4. In forming the committee to draft language to be placed on the performance evaluation, what should be the key criteria for membership?
5. Do you anticipate resistance from the workforce about including an ethics component in the annual evaluation? Why or why not?
6. Do you believe that the ethical performance of an employee can be evaluated fairly and accurately? Why or why not?
7. What do you say to persuade your boss that the city should place your preferred statement on the annual performance evaluation form for managerial/ professional staff?
Ethics and Performance Evaluations
RUBRIC |
||||||
Excellent Quality 95-100%
|
Introduction
45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Literature Support 91-84 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met. |
|||
Average Score 50-85% |
40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided. |
83-76 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration. |
52-49 points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met. |
|||
Poor Quality 0-45% |
37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided. |
75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration. |
48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met |
|||
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow |
Ethics and Performance Evaluations