MERIT RATING OF STORE PERSONNEL
IN THE FOOD CHAINS

Thai: for the Dam of M. A.
MICHiGAN STATE COLLEGE
Wiliiam E. Bayer
1954

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled
MERIT RATING OF STORE PERSONNEL

IN THE FOOD CHAINS
presented by

WILLIAM E. BAYER

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Master's degree in Food Distribution

/ . a 7- /W

Major professor

 

Date July 9L 1954

O~169

$9 5’54- '

was.) WTR 19

 

 

 

MERIT RATING OF STORE PERSONNEL
IN THE FOOD CHAINS

By
William E. Bayer

A THESIS
Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan
state College of Agriculture and Applied Science

in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTERS or ARTS

Department of General Business

Curriculum.in Food Distribution

1954

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The writer wishes to express his sincere appreciation to
Dr. Edward A. Brand, Director of the Curriculum in.Food Dis-
tribution and Dr. David J. Luck, Director of the Bureau of
Business Research,for their advice and assistance in the pre-
paration of this thesis.

He is also greatly indebted to the Kroger Company for its
financial support and assistance which have made this study
possible.

Grateful acknowledgment is also due to the food chains
who have so willingly contributed material and information for

this thesis.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER ‘ Page
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Purpose of Thesis . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Historical DevelOpment . . . . . . . . . . 2
Definition and Use of Terms . . . . . . . 4
Purpose of Merit Rating . . . . . . . . . 5
Benefits of Merit Rating . . . . . . . . . 7
Method of Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . 12

II. DEVELOPING THE RERIT RATING PLAN . . . . . . . . l4

Selection of a Rating Form . . . . . . . . 14
Selling the Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1?
Selection of Traits . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Final Rating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Supplemental Information . . . . . . . . . 45

III. ADMINISTERING THE RATING PLAN . . . . . . . . . 45

Who Shall Do the Rating? . . . . . . . . . 45
How Often Shall the Ratings be Made? . . . 47
Training the Raters . . . . . . . . . . . 50
The Employee Interview . . . . . . . . . . 54
Review and Appeal . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Checking Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

CHAPTER Page
IV. PROBLEMS INVOLVED IN MERIT RATING . . . . . . . . . 68

Opposition at Operational Level . . . . . . . 68
Limitations of the Rating Plan . . . . . . . 69
Validity of Ratings . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Reliability of Ratings . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Rater Tendencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

V. ILLUSTRATION OF SOME FOOD CHAIN RATING FORMS . . . 79

Colonial Stores, Incorporated . . . . . . . . 80
First National Stores . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Grand Union Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Henke and Pillot, Incorporated . . . . . . . 94
The KrOger Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

Company X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
IV 0 CONCLUSION o o o o o o o o 0 o o o o o o o o o o 0 104
BIBLIOGMHY o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 108

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE Page

I. Analysis of Traits Used in Store Employee
Rating Forms of 13 Food Chains . . . . . . . . . 27

II. Number of Trait Subdivisions Used in Store
Employee Rating Forms of 13 Food Chains . . . . 35

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE

I. Employee Interview Guide, The Kroger Company 57

II. Rating Guide for Employee Interview
Mental Reaction of Employee . . . . . . . . . . 62

III. Colonial Stores, Incorporated
Merit Rating and Employee Appraisal Forms . . 81

IV. First National Stores
Store Employees Quarterly Rating . . . . . . . 90

V. Grand Union Company
Personnel Progress Report . . . . . . . . . . 92

VI. Henke and Pillot, Incorporated
Factual Appraisal Report . . . . . . . . . . . 95

VII. The Kroger Company
Improvement Guide for Store Employees . . . . 98

VIII. Company X
Qualifications Inventory
Non-Administrative Employee . . . . . . . . . 103

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Purpose of Thesis

The food chains have deve10ped rapidly in the past twenty
years because of new merchandising techniques, mechanical in-
novations and increased Operating efficiency. Still, the
personnel which form the heart of a company will always be
the key factor that contributes to its success. The food
chains have been quick to make use of new methods of food dis-
tribution, but they have not always been ready to adopt new
personnel techniques so that they might make more efficient
use of their personnel.

The use of merit rating is an example of one important
personnel technique which has not been fully eXploited by all
of the major food chains. It is the purpose of this thesis
to point out the value that merit rating can have in food
chain Operation, and give an insight as to how it can be suc-
cessfully applied.

For the purpose of being more specific this thesis will
consider the merit rating of only store employees. Store
managers, supervisory personnel, and office personnel will
not be considered. It is readily understandable that all
groups of company personnel can not be rated in the same man-

ner. Some food chains now have merit rating of all personnel

2

except at the store level. It is the contention of this writ-
er that the peOple who work in the stores and actually perform
the final and most important step of the company Operation can
be materially benefited by the use of merit rating. Because
the store employees are such an important segment of the food
chain Operation, any technique that will deveIOp or improve
their efficiency and morale certainly deserves serious consid—
eration.

Information received from 15 food Chains now rating store

employees will form much of the basis for this thesis.

,4!" ‘

x“ J.-"" M;
L if 1 :‘w R X.
. '," l_-‘ \‘ 3 \.

fl . . .

Historical DeveIOpment ~s My“ ala—

,_|

 

‘lw-r—v

- ‘ _ ‘nll
‘u-I“ ”a.

To most people, merit rating is considered as something
new, even experimental. Actually, this is not the case.

Merit rating in one form or other has been used for
many years. Probably the military services were the
first to use any formal plan. During World War I,
and immediately following it, there was widespread
interest in a1 forms of improved personnel adminis-
tration. Merit rating came in for its full share of
attention, and credit for this is due largely to the
work of a group of psychologists who had been busy
before the war on a rating scale for both selection
of salesmen and evaluation of their work after selec-
tion. As soon as the United States entered the war,
this group began at once to revise its rating scale
to meet the needs of the Army. The result was thi
justly famous 'Army Rating Scale of World War I.‘

After World War I, the use of merit rating in industry

began to grow. "There has been wide acceptance Of systematic

 

1. George D. Halsey. Making and UsinggIndustrial
Service Ratings. New York: Harper and Brothers,
I§44. 149 pp.

 

i

5 2
§
merit rating devices. Surveys show that over half of the firms;

responding use periodic ratings of one type or another."2
During World War II, all branches of the Armed Forces
used merit rating and the Air Force particularly used merit
rating in the selection and evaluation of its flying person-
nel. E
In the post—war years, merit rating of personnel has been .
instituted by a large percentage of the major industries. Com- ;
panies such as the Proctor and Gamble Company and the General .
Electric Company have spent large sums of money and enlisted g
the services of highly qualified men to devise and test the f

I
I

various rating systems that they employ. =»--mnai~Maw.
To the food chains, the whole idea of merit rating is :3?§{V
comparatively new, especially when conducted at the store
level. Since the end of World War II the food chains have
increased the size and authority of their personnel depart-
ments. Because there has been more emphasis placed on the
personnel administration in the food chains, it is only nat-
ural that competent personnel men have been the instigators
of the use of merit rating of store personnel.
In response to a questionnaire concerning the use of

merit rating of store employees, thirteen major food chains,

out Of a total of 21 contacted, stated that they now use some

 

2. Scott, Clothier, Mathewson, and Sprigel, Personnel
Mana ement. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company,
I94I. 234 pp.

4

form of merit rating for store employees. A large percentage
of the rating plans now in use have been instituted within
the past four years. It seems that the use of merit rating
of store employees by the food chains is just now beginning
to deveIOp to an appreciable extent. Although the rating
forms and techniques used by the food chains are elemental

in comparison with those of some industrial companies that
have the advantage of years of eXperience in merit rating,
the chains are learning fast and are willing to experiment

to find what rating system best fits their need.

Definition and Use of Terms
Merit rating is an orderly, systematic method of evalu-
ating the present and potential usefulness of a store employee
to his organization, usually made by the store manager, super-
visor, or someone in a position to observe his performance.
<i:5m$5° term ”merit rating" will be used throughout this
thsis; however, many companies prefer to use other terms

even though they have the same meaning as merit rating. Some

.t t ’1‘“ a. 'I‘
u , w‘d

examples of terms being used in the various fosdxchains are:
review of service, employee progress report, factual appraisal
report, qualifications inventory, personnel progress report,
and employee deveIOpment program. Some companies feel that
the words "merit rating" imply that employees are actually
graded and placed in a certain bracket which may make them

suspicious or resentful of its use. The words "personnel

-_
§

.- www.ckufi .~-_’

‘ " \."'-~I~‘~'n‘-‘I¢"'O"

5

*u“

progress report',on the other hand,have a much better connota-

tion, even though they may mean the same as merit rating. 3

Purpose of Merit Rating

Actually rating of store employees is going on at all
times. Unconsciously, a storetmanavgnf;ill compare one em-
ployee against another. Impressions are made and conclusions
drawn. Sometimes, however, such conclusions are based on su—
perficial evidence, and frequently a very recent experience
dominates such an appraisal. Ratings are frequently made on
skimpy and inadequate evidence, and such conclusions without
foundation in facts are likely to be misleading. Merit rat-
ing of.d;anef employees will overcome these deficiencies and
aid in rating employees on a systematic and orderly basis.

In addition to placing rating on an orderly basis, there
are two main purposes of employee rating:rnwthswfoodwchainsr

;:__Qeve10pment of personnel. Probably the most impor-
tant purpose of merit rating is to use it as a device for car—
recting, improving, and in general raising the level of the 5
performance of the employee on his day-to-day job assignments. :
Through the use of the employee interview, after the rating
has been made, the Asst. manager or supervisor can give guidance
and correction to employees. One ifiséé"}033~§aa;s in Califor-
nia uses merit rating for the sole purpose of forcing a discus-j
sion between the stefeimanager End the employees so that the :

good points and bad points of that individual may be discussed.

6

All too often employees are definitely justiIied in complain-
ing that their-stsreimanaga;szail to let them know how they

are getting along or what they can or should do to improve their
performance. The use of merit ratings provides an excellent
device which the storeamanagar_may use in approaching employees

for the purpose of guiding them constructively in the direction

of better work. The ratings are also a reminder to the store

' .: ".1 F; 5’ I ' akv‘? ‘

manager of the need for such action.

2. Egaluation of employee performance. Management is in
the habit of taking regular and careful inventories of all its
physical assets such as store inventories and equipment. But,
unless there is an equally detailed inventory of a chain‘s TSSt,
important asset - its peOple - something will be lacking. StO;e
employees are the one asset in a;:eedugh;:;’which-Iigures most
immediately and directly upon its success or failure. Because
of the size and complex organization of most Ieéeieaainsf’it is
necessary that the human assets are appraised as carefully as
the inventory of other assets. Certainly the merits of each.$ in-
dividual employee can not be kept in the heads of the s£ore
managers or supervisors. There must be an orderly system of
recording each employee's individual merits so that the company
has some concrete basis for selection of personnel in any ac-
tion they may institute. A review of past merit ratings will,
in conjunction with other background data, enable supervision
more intelligently to select persons for promotion. In the

LIMP-i .‘l‘

past flew years with many companies Iaced with a shortage of

a.-'~“"'

_, t w- ‘-“V‘*"~‘-r_~,_l -_- ”ianq-n-v-J

7

trained personnel, there was a tendency for some companies to
use a "plug the hole" type of promotion. Department heads
and.§£2¥e managers were needed and management did not know

the qualifications of its personnel, so that the most compe-
tent person was not always selected. Once a man is promoted,
it is very difficult for both him and the company if a mistake
in judgment has been made. It is the purpose of merit rating
to make sure that the most competent personnel available re-
ceive promotions. Because of merit rating, these personnel
qualifications are on file and positions can be filled quickly

without the use of hasty judgments which may result in an un-

pleasant situation for both the company and the individual.

Benefits of Merit Rating
Besides the deve10pment of personnel, which improves job

performance, and evaluation o.f employee performance, which aids

"\
l

in selecting for promotion, there are other benefits a feed
chain~may receive from an employee merit rating plan.
l;__§mployee Morale. When a merit rating program has been
prOperly planned and presented to the EtOr; employees, it can
help to increase morale and conIidence in the fairness of man-
agement. When employees realize that their work and attitudes
are under constant but impartial scrutiny, they feel more as-

sured that advancement will be based on demonstrated merit and

not favoritism or influence.

' i H) n

8

With this security in mind, the employee is motivated to
improve his job performance for financial gain and recognition.
The impartial ratings furnish something definite upon which to
base future efforts. As periodic ratings are made, the em-
ployee is kept informed as to his progress. When he asks,
"How am I doing?", the étggh manager or supervisor can confi-
dently give constructive guidance toward better work, knowing
that a fair, impartial record is available on which to base
his suggestions.

An employee who has ambitions for promotion or unsuSpect-
ed talents which deserve encouragement may be discovered in
the rating process. Bringing an employee's hidden abilities
into the Open not only benefits management, but increases em-
ployee satisfaction and prevents any bitterness that may re-
sult from the failure to recognize an employee's real worth.

To make a merit rating plan effective, the rater, whether

' v swam
he be a e manager or a supervisor, must have a genuine in!
terest in the improvement of each employee. Unless the rater
is concerned about the progress of each individual, the rating
plan will lose its full effect. Employees can not be treated
as a tool of management, but must be encouraged to progress with
the company. With merit rating, management can demonstrate a
sincere desire to assist its employees.

g. Aid to training and selection. A merit rating system
that is prOperly set up can aid in pointing out the particular
Job on which an employee is weak. He can then be Sent to any"

‘-

(f,

‘— m..-" f

---w.—.r-—r.—--——QA~—_— . ..

L

available company training schools which would help improve
his job performance.

Likewise, men who have completed formal training courses é
offered by the company should be a good criterion of the value ?
and effectiveness of such training programs. Store personnel L
that have attended company training schools and are subsequent-é
1y rated inferior on the job for which they were trained, a
would indicate a serious defect in the-training program.

New employees who receive favorable merit ratings after
their initial performance on the job would certainly provide
an accurate validation for the selection tests that are being
used to select and place new employees.

In all of these cases, merit rating is an excellent means
of cross checking certain aspects of company Operation.

3. Benefit to sgsggfimanager. The Operation of a rating
plan will help agugdnanagers to think analytically and con-
structively about their employees and help them assume a
greater degree of consistency int:ff handling of employees.

It is usually easy for a manager to judge an emp
ployee as good or bad, but unless he has a rating form with
all the desirable traits of a good employee, it is difficult
for him to determine immediately the particular weakness that
accounts for all, or nearly all, of the employee's undesira-
bility upon a certain job. Once a stOre hanageégdztgrminOs why
an employee is unsatisfactory, it is easier for him to assist

the employee to overcome hisweakness and do a better job.

10

With the use of merit rating and a frank discussion of
the rating between the store manager and the employee, the
sinus manager can more fully understand the character and
complex psychological make-up which affects each individual's
actions. Many times, there are important reasons for the ac-
tions of certain employees which are not readily apparent on
the surface. Through the discussion of ratings, a ’vfihhfman-
ager can learn how to handle his employees more effectively
by understanding their problems and be the source of closer
human relations between management and the~é£2¥ezegployaas.

4. gransfer,demotion or discharge. Over a period of
time, if it is ascertained that an employee is not performing
satisfactorily on a given job, it is necessary that some ap-
propriate action be taken in regard to the individual. A
merit rating system may aid in bringing out qualities that,
might be more effectively used in some other job. By trans-
ferring this individual to another job it eliminates the re-
grettable task of discharging an employee and may contribute
Ito general employee morale by implying that the company is
trying to go over half-way in placing employees.

When demotion or discharge is in order, the company will
be considered more fair and just if it is in a position to jus-
tify its actions in terms of employee performance. An employee
who has been notified of certain weaknesses and refuses the

WM... f "
help of the figure manager in taking corrective measures has
only himself to blame.

"‘-__....._,.._ _.».,4. a. _ __
‘ ‘ ..-

ll

j§____reventsg_ievances. A merit rating plan stimulates
inuw ”managers to talk over with the employees possible
sources of grievances before serious problems have a chance
to arise. The 322;: manager can "nip in the bud" situations
between individuals that may ultimately become eXplosive and
be hard to handle.

The employee can be encouraged to voice his Opinions and
feelings on how certain company policies and decisions affect
him. e should also be encouraged to give suggestions on
E;§§e0peration and how it is managed. A smart '“&'man-
ager can\profit from this type Of upward communication and
the employee will assume a sense of importance in the company
Operation.

6. Ultimate Objective. Of course the ultimate objec-
tive of the merit rating of.stnee employees is to result in
a more efficient Operation and thereby increase profits.

With competition becoming more keen with every passing year,
the progressive fgggggiggg must use every technique at its
‘command to perform a more efficient Operation and keep sell-
ing costs competitive. A competitor's new sgaégé, equipment
and merchandising ideas can be COpied or duplicated, but a
company' s personnel can not. It is the job Of the progressive

QawprWv

fundachaig to make sure that its personnel are advancing and
keeping pace with all of the other technological advances that

”Ly”; 1&11‘14 d h {Z‘JC-‘M {flux/$.40

have taken place to make fosdaatanedoperation more efficient.

.. ., . ‘
. -nm-oijt-s- -.,n._w..,‘_. 1'43 ‘ -,

12

More profit, however, is not the only objective in to-
"J; rJ+1JA/fi-k9xfl.
Companies are stressing the use

day's leading feed—ehains.

Of human relations in their dealings with their employees.

Aafaadwehaants very existence Oepends on the peOple who are
High profits which are attained from

Wfiaetwe s -
flow Ms? 1;.
feadnaianes staffed by unhappy people will not oe lasting

profits. .
Thus the use of merit rating of store employees has a I

two-fold ultimate Objective--to increase employee eIIiciency,
g

thereby raising profits, and to act as a tool in implementing
Each objective is equally /
1

human relations among employees.
thy?“ f’vsfi't'
s eXpected to grow

dependent on the other if a fined -chain

 

and become strong.

Method of Procedure
To Obtain information for this thesis, 21 Iood chains

were requested to furnish rating forms and other additional

information, such as rating manuals and pamphlets concerning ‘
the rating of store employees. Thirteen companies sent rat- ‘

ing forms and other material which were presently in use-

seven replied that they were not rating store employees. one

company did not reply.
InterV1ews with six food chain personnel executives pro-

V1Oed valuable information on how merit rating is being applied

at the store level.

13

Although this primary information gave a picture of merit
rating in the food chains, it was necessary to secure other

information from secondary sources. Books, periodicals and

a?

i

n

pamphlets were reviewed so that the more basic and underlying
factors of merit rating could be interpreted, and their appli-

cation applied to food chain use.

CHAPTER II \ ‘
DEVELOPING THh‘ MERIT RATING PLAN

The personnel responsible for developing a rating plan
must remember that in the selection and design of a rating
plan, all levels Of management must be convinced Of its value.
To sell the plan and gain acceptance from all concerned, the
form itself should be soundly constructed. There are many
factors to be considered in developing such a rating plan.
This Chapter will point out the important considerations in

developing a rating plan, particularly those which deal with
the design Of the form itself.

selection Of a Rating Form
When examining the rating forms now in use by the vari-
ous food chains, it is difficult to classify them into groups
or assign them to~certain categories for purposes of compari-'
son. ”Still, there are perhaps three basic forms that are a-
vailable to thegfcod chains or any«cther industry.
1. Rating scale; where general traits like "dependa-

bility" are defined and the rater is asked to mark on

a sca e the degree to which the person possesses this
trait.

2. Behavior check list; where a number of statements
of specific activities involved in doing the job are
given and the rater is asked to check simply whether

the person does them, or he may be asked to estimate
how well the person does them.

.fiafli

“
.7" 1%" ‘F

u- WI; -'v-O '-

15

5. Banking; where the rater is asked to list his
peOple in rank order from "best" down to "poorest"
on over-all ability or some other defined character-
istic.

Of these three basic types of rating plans, the food
chains generally use the basic construction Of the rating
scale; however, there are numerous variations of style and
‘design Of the rating scale type form.

The "behavior check list" type of form is seldom used
because it is difficult to devise so that it may be used in
rating employees who work in different departments with vary-
ing levels of responsibilities.

The "ranking” method of rating is unwieldy when there are
large numbers of employees in a store, and it does not furnish
specific information concerning employee ability to success-
fully conduct the employee interview. The Kroger Company ranks
its employees in each store from "best" to "poorest , but this
is merely a supplement to their rating scale type Of fopfszyggiy

Of the 13 chain rating forms, all have the basic construc-
tion of the rating scale, but each varies in style and content
to a significant degree. This points out the fact that each

rating plan must be carefully adapted to the specific need of

the food chain concerned.

 

1. Reign Bittner. "DevelOping an Employee Merit Rating
Procedure," Rating Emplgyee and Supervisory Perform-
ance. New York: american.Management Association,

I955. p. 26.

 

16

There is no assurance in any case that the plan success-
fully used by one chain will necessarily be the most desirable
one for any other chain. This same point of view was express-
ed for industry as a whole by the National Industrial Confer-
ence Board as follows: "It may be said categorically that
there is no such thing as the 'one best type of rating form”.
Those that have been most successful have been tailor-made to
suit the particular conditions, jobs, and objectives of the
organization in which they were to be used."2

Even though a rating form should be devised to fit the
particular needs of a food chain, a company which is contem—
plating the use of such a plan could gain valuable information
by examining the forms nOw in use by some of the other food
chains. Some proven desirable features combined with a com-
pany's individual needs could be molded into an effective rat-
ing plan at a minimum.of expense and preparation.

At the present time the use of the rating scale method
with individual adaptations is definitely the most widely used
rating form in the food chains. Basically, this form consists
of a list of traits or attributes peculiar to store employees,

each being accompanied by a scale on which the rater is required

to indicate the degree to which the employee possesses that

 

2. National Industrial Conference Board, Incorporated.
"Employee Rating," §tudies in Personnelgplicy,
NO. 39. New York: 1942. p. 5.

17

trait or attribute and displays it in his work, such as the

following illustration:

Friendliness: (cheerfulness and consideration toward
customers and fellow employees) '

CECIL-11:3 1:] E:

Poor Fair Satis- Very Good Excellent
factory

This type of rating is pOpular in the food chains because
in principle and in mechanics of use it is readily understood
and more easily sold both to the supervisors and store man-
agers who must be the raters, and to the employees who must
be rated. In addition, this type of rating is not time-
consuming for the store manager who always seems to be "short"
on time. A rating scale also provides a comprehensive illus-
tration of performance traits which serve as a guide in the

employee interview.

Selling the Plan
It may be well at this time to point out one of the most
important considerations in develOping a merit rating plan,
and that is actually selling the plan to the rest of the com-
pany. As previously stated, the food chains have begun to
attract highly qualified men in their personnel departments.

Sensing the value of merit rating to food store employees,

18

some Of these men have managed to inaugurate a rating plan
with all the qualifications for success, except one thing--
they themselves were the only peOple convinced of its worth.
Sure, the president or Operating staff gave their "0. K.",
but only because some of the other chains were using it. It
takes more to.generate the success Of a rating plan than just
setting up the machinery with tOp management's approval.

Most of the personnel in a food chain, from the store
employee to the store manager, and even into the supervisory_
ranks, do not know the "why's and wherefore's" of a merit rat- '
ing plan. These are the peOple who must carry out the plan
and unless they are convinced of its value it will be impos-..
sible to enlist their support. Many store employees, store
managers and some supervisors have been in the food business

for many years. They can understand new Operating methods

which call for new supermarkets and merchandising techniques,i

because the results of these changes are readily apparent.
But when a rating plan is started, these same people find it

hard to understand its value since its benefits take time to

accrue and are difficult to perceive, important as they may 5

(”a ;': ,i. ' i
be O 3"“; 4.3; '.. '.
“2'”. '

IM,»’”7§Or a merit rating plan to be fully successful there are

three groups of company personnel which.must be convinced of

its value as a tool for the improvement of Operating efficien- 5

cy and personnel relations. These groups are as follows:

.0"

19

l. TOp Management. Since any plan of Operation requires
the OOOperation Of all affected personnel, it is only natural
that it start with tOp management, which must strongly support
the endeavor. Although this is true of all Operational plan-
ning, it is particularly true in the case Of employee merit
rating, because Of the unlimited amount of dissension that
may result from an unsuccessful installation. Failure of tOp
management to give wholehearted support to a merit rating
plan is easily detected by supervisors and Stg;; managers.

It seems that the degree of enthusiasm for any project on the

part of the store managers is prOportional to the support given:-

the project by tOp managemenzy/h

"Probably no rating sys em can succeed unless those who
are intended actually to perform the rating Operations are
aware that the top management is vitally interested in the
success of the program. If this is not the case, the interest
and effort necessary for its success will be so lacking that
the inertia of the group will be sufficient to vitiate the re-

sults."3

2. Operational Manggement. Actually the most important
group that must be sold the value of a merit rating plan is
the supervisors and iiééé managers. These men are the very
”guts" of the whole Operation, and success or failure of the

rating plan rests very largely in their hands. Probably the

 

3. Ibid. , p. 60. 8 q i. ‘ .7‘ ‘11- .‘ “i.

<1...
‘1‘"
A\ u a

n...-.
’ "" ”news We... ~91,

20

most effective way of enlisting their support is by having
them take part in making up the form and establishing pro-
cedures on how it is to be administered.‘ By having small con-
ference discussions, various groups of étore managers and su-
pervisors can take part in formulating a merit rating plan.
Since these men will actually be doing the rating, they will
take more interest in a plan which they themselves have helped
to institute.

3. Employees. Unless employees are told the truth on
why merit rating is started in.a:iogéésgé;e, there will be
suspicion and distrust on their part in regard to the plan.
Regardless Of a company's intentions in regard to its employees,
the 3&323Hpersonnel can not guess what these intentions are.
The company should state clearly just what it hOpes to accom-
plish in the use Of merit rating and emphasize the fact that
its chief purpose is the develOpment of its-store personnel.
Any reasonable employee can be sold on a plan whose chief Ob-
jective is primarily tO their benefit. The company in turn
should suggest and encourage that constructive criticism and
ideas for improvement of the plan be relayed to the personnel
department.

In this writer's Opinion most of the failures in employee
merit rating are caused by the lack of interest and understand-

ing at all levels of management. If the program can success-

fully be sold to these three levels, most of the other Operating f

problems will in turn be solved, and the Operation Of the plan

will progress smoothly.

4'
I

21

Selection of Traits

Since almost all of the rating plans used in the food
chains are of the rating scale type which involve the selec-
tion Of significant employee traits, it would be well to cover
the various sepects that must be considered in the selection
of these traits, since they comprise the major portion of the
rating form.

ngectives Of the ratingpplan. Before a logical deci-
sion can be made as to what items or traits are to be included
in the rating form, management must definitely come to a deci-
sion as to the fundamental Objectives or purposes Of the plan.
This decision will help in selecting traits to be used on the
rating form. As an example: Are the rating results to be
used when a clerk is being considered for promotion to depart-
ment head or some other position where evidence of leadership
or organizing ability may be Of importance? Most food chains
like to think that the majority Of their store employees have
potential abilities in excess of their present positions. This
must necessarily be the case, since most food chains are still
growing and must promote from within the organization. Certain-
ly evidence Of such abilities would have to be included on the
rating form.

If the other purpose was develOpment Of personnel, the
form would have to include traits which pertain to efficient
job performance so that the good and bad features Of employee

performance can be discussed in the interview.

22

if the Objectives are limited to these two Specific pur-
poses, one rating form can effectively fulfill the job it was
intended to do. Any attempt to have the rating form accom-
plish too many functions will cause it to become undesirably
bulky for the raters and lead to ultimate confusion in estimat-
ing the results.

Type employee to be rated. lt is easily understood that
a rating form will lose some of its value if employees on all
types and levels of store jobs are rated on the same traits.
A meat cutter in a self-service meat market would certainly re~
quire different capabilities from those of a head cashier who
was in charge Of the checkers in a supermarket. Customer cour-
tesy and friendliness would be less important for the meat cut-
ter than for the head checker, while quantity of work would be
more important for the meat cutter and less important for the
checkers. Still, most Of the store employees below the store
manager's level have many personal qualities and abilities which
are equally important, regardless of the position they may fill.
Apparently most of the food chains feel this way. Of the 13
companies now rating store employees, only three make any at-
tempt at segregating employees for rating purposes. The addi-
tional work Of having two, three or even four types of rating
forms may complicate the rating procedure to the detriment Of
the over-all plan. However, some breakdown of the rating form
to cover certain positions probably has value in the particular

companies in which it is used.

23

The Kroger Company and Colonial Stores differentiate between
their regular full-time employees and the employees in charge
of the various departments of the store. Loblaw, Incorporated,
has a rating form Specifically for apprentice meat cutters and
for apprentice store managers.

Since merit rating is comparatively new to the food chains,
a company which originally initiates a merit rating plan for
store employees will ordinarily use one form for the whole
store group. As the company gains experience in the use Of‘
rating, it is in a better position to determine what additions
a1 forms or variations of forms would be necessary to improve
the rating procedure. If a food chain can accomplish its O-
riginal Objective or purpose with one form for all of its
store employees, there would seem to be no need for additional
forms. As the rating procedures of the chains become more re-
fined and its purposes of rating more clearly outlined, the
trend will probably be toward having the rating forms approx-
imate the job performance as nearly as possible and still be
consistent with good Operational management.

-///what traits to measure? There are two primary considera-
tions to be kept in mind in deciding what traits should be in-
cluded in the rating scale of store employees. First, the
traits should be those which are related to performance on the
jobs of the employees to be rated, or of the jobs to which they
might be considered for promotion. If only one rating form is
used for all store employees, it is important that each trait

apply to each individual regardless of whether he works in

24

grocery, meats or produce. In the second place, the traits
should be as objective as possible--that is, they should rep-
resent aspects Of a clerk's personality or performance that
can be most readily Observed by the rater, who in most cases
will be the store manager.

A thorough analysis Of the jobs to be covered by the rat-
ing procedure should be the basis for develOping a preliminary
list of traits. In the develOpment of most rating scales, the
traits to be included usually are selected through conference
discussions which include members Of management, district su-
pervisors and store managers. The personnel manager, even
though he will eventually be responsible for the merit rating
plan, would hardly be capable of deciding what traits would
have the most value in measuring employee performance. This
is the point where the chain's supervisors and a selected
group of store managers would prove of valuable assistance in
making up the form. These are the men who know the Operations
Of the business and have a clear conception in their minds of
the traits most desirable to the employees to be rated by them.
It is the job Of management to furnish an Opportunity for
group discussion so that these men can agree on what traits
should be included on the rating form. As previously stated,
the supervisors and store managers who actually administer the
plan will have more interest and enthusiasm for a plan which
they themselves have formulated. A rating plan which is "lifted"

from a competing chain and nonchalantly tossed to its Operations

25

managers to be carried out, will have little if any chance of
success.

Since it will be necessary to select traits which include
requirements that are common to many Of the jobs in a food
store it will be important to select them with some standard
in mind. In a situation similar to this, Reign Bittner sug—
gests that the final traits to be included on the rating form
should be selected on the basis of the following criteria:

1. Observability. Can the rater actually Observe
this trait in action? Is the worker's possession

Of this trait clearly evident to the rater in what

the worker does? These are the questions to be an—
swered in considering whether a trait is observable.
2. Universality. Is the trait under consideration
an important characteristic in successful performance
Of all the jobs to be rated? Obviously, it should be
if the rating procedure is tO be generally applicable.
It is unlikely, too, that the trait could even be Ob-
served when the job does not call it into play.

3. Distinguishability. Is the trait under question
clearly distinguishable as meaning something different
from another trait with a different name? Do they
overlap so much in meaning that ratings on the two
would be nothing more4than two ratings on the same
basic characteristic? ’//,w’

The food chains today are not all agreed on just what
traits to use in rating their store employees. Since all food
chains do not Operate the same, it is probably natural that
there should be divergent Opinions. As stated before, a suc-

cessful rating plan must be tailor—made for each individual

4. Reign Bittner, 2p. cit., p. 26.

26

food chain. There is a wide range of Opinions as to what
traits constitute the ideal clerk performance. In this re-
gard, Table I gives an analysis of the traits now being used
by l3 major food chains.
///'flgightingof traits. It is reasonable to assume that if
a rating scale for store employees is composed of ten traits,
that one or more Of the selected traits will be significant-
ly more important than the remaining traits. A rating plan
can OOpe with this problem by assigning different weights to
the items according to the relative significance which they
are judged to possess. Some companies contend that equal
weighting Of each trait would lead to a distorted total rat—
ing, if certain traits are, from the standpoint Of management,
considerably more important than others},r

On the surface it would seem like a simple matter to cor—
rect this fault-—for instance, by assigning twice the point
value to "initiative" as to "appearance", if management might
consider "initiative" twice as important. Just double the
weight of "initiative" in relation to "appearance" and the
rating problem seems to be solved in arriving at the total
point score of an individual rating. Actually, the weighting
Of traits is not a simple matter and personnel men who use them
in their rating forms may not understand the effect that the
weights may have on the final point score.

The true weight of a trait is determined by the variability

of the ratings on that trait. By variability is meant the

TABLE I

27

ANALYSIS OF TRAITS USED IN STORE EMPLOYEE

RATING FORMS OF 13 FOOD CHAINS

 

“—

 

Traits

Number of
Companies Using

 

Dependability . .
Appearance . . .
Attitude . . . .
Adaptability . .
Quality of work .
Quantity Of work
Initiative . . .
COOperation . . .
Job knowledge . .
Leadership . . .
Personality . . .
Judgment . . . .
Friendliness . .
Enthusiasm . . .
Courteousness . .
Health . . . . .
Character . . . .

Performance . . .

Personal fitness for the job

Attendance . . .

Follows instructions

. . . 11

O
H
O

O
mmmmmmaaammmmqqmmmm

TABLE I (Continued)

28

 

Traits

Number Of
Companies Using

 

Possibility for future growth . . . . .

Cost control . . . . .

Organizing ability . .

Willingness to work at self—development

Seeking and accepting responsibility

Interest in selling . .

Interest in a career with the

Honesty . . . . . . . .
Personal habits . . . .
Alertness . . . . . . .
Tries to improve self .

Housekeeping . . . . .

Complies with company policy

Displays self confidence

Gives constructive criticism

Calm under pressure . .

Relations with others .

O O O 0

company

0
O
O
O
F4 r4 F4 i4 F4 r4 F’ r4 a: +4 14 F4 14 F4 +4 F’ r4

29

extent to which the rating in a group of people tends to scat—
ter over the various degrees Of a trait scale.

For example, in the previously mentioned instance, where
employee "initiative" was to be weighted double the weight Of
"appearance", if it was determined thatall employees scored
pretty much the same on "initiative", there would be no dis-
criminant function in the trait regardless of the weight in-
volved. Whereas, if these same employees had a scattered dis—
tribution in their degree of "appearance", there would be a
greater variability on this particular trait and thereby
automatically assume a higher relative weight than "initiative ".

This degree of trait variability is known as the standard
deviation. This is a statistical measurement which is Often
very baffling to someone not trained in statistics, but on
close examination, it is more easily understood.

In order to establish the prOper weight of any trait or
to determine if a designated weight is valid, it is necessary
to apply the rating scale to a distributed prOportion Of em-
ployees and then statistically analyze the variabilities of
each individual trait. Most Of the food chains do not have
the trained personnel necessary to perform this involved pro-
cedure. This probably accounts for the fact that only two
of the rating fOrms out Of a total Of 15 received from the
food chains assigned any weights to the traits used on their

forms.

50

Grand Union has nine traits on its rating form for store
employees with all traits weighted equally except "friendli-
ness" which is weighted double the point value of the other
traits.

First National Stores uses a rating scale which has eight
traits. Four of the traits are weighted 50 percent heavier
than the other four traits. Both of these companies compute
a total score on the rating form.

In View of the fact that relative weights Of a trait are
statistically involved and difficult to determine, most food
chains assign equal value to all of the traits represented on
the rating form. Another reason most food chains do not use
weighted traits is that the purpose Of the rating form is pri-
marily devised for the develOpment of employees through better
job performance. It is not the desire of.most food chain man-
agement to put an exact rating score on the head Of each em—
ployee. For most food chains, merit rating is a tool for
employee develOpment, not a score card. NO doubt, though, the
chains that are presently using weighted traits receive the
benefit of both aspects and have enough experience to control
its use.

’/ Many industries outside Of the food chains have experienced
difficulty in the use of trait weighting. It is said that
raters become suSpicious Of rating forms in which they can not
understand the effect that weights have on the final score.
Reign Bittner gives six points which are important to keep in

mind about the weighting Of traits:

.we

 

31

1. The real weight of a trait is not the same as the
numerical factor you multiply the trait by in computing
a total rating score.

2. The real weight Of a trait depends upon its varia-
bility or standard deviation.

3. TO determine the real weight Of a trait, you.must
apply the scale to a group of men and then analyze the
variability Of the ratings on each individual trait.

4. Only after the real weights have been established
by analyzing the ratings made, can you determine the
multiplying factors which will make the traits have
weights which have been determined as desirable.

5. Making the real weights conform to a desired pat—
tern must be done by a central agency after analyzing
the ratings turned in, and this is a process requiring
a technician trained in statistics.

6. Any system Of weights determined arbitrarily in
advance of an analysis of the ratings turned in will
not be tge same as the true weights and will be mis- I
leading. /’

gubdivisions or daggee of each trait. Once the number Of

 

traits has been established, it must be decided how many sub-
divisions Of each trait will be needed. These subdivisions or
degrees actually form the scale or yardstick used in rating

the store employees. If the rating scale has too few sub-
divisions, it will be hard to differentiate between the various
employees. If the scale has tOO many divisions, the store man-
ager will be at Odds on where to rate the employee on each
trait, and develOp a tendency to guess or else rate the ma-
jority of traits the same. Furthermore, most companies find

it necessary to secure consistency Of interpretation by

5. Ibid, p. 28.

in“ ‘

 

 

52

- defining in writing each degree or subdivision on the scale.
This method automatically imposes a limit on the number Of
divisions in a scale, since it is almost impossible to define
a large number Of gradations from minimum to maximum in writ-
ing.

The various food chains use different subdivisions for
each trait. They vary from two divisions,which include a
satisfactory and unsatisfactory rating, all the way up to ten
subdivisions whichene now employed by one food chain.

Concerning the number of subdivisions for each trait,
Yoder states: "In any case, more than five divisions are in-
advisable, for most raters will be unable to distinguish more
than that many degrees in quality, and three divisions will
frequently be adequate."6

An analysis of trait subdivisions as used in the rating
forms of 13 food chains is presented in Table II.

Importance Of definition. Let us suppose that ten dif-
ferent store managers were to sit down at the same time to
rate one of their grocery clerks. The first trait listed on
the rating form is "initiative" with four subdivisions or
degrees: "unsatisfactory", "fair", "good", and "very good".
Immediately the store manager tries to interpret how that clerk

has displayed'finitiative" in terms Of his job performance. His

 

 

6. Dale Yoder. §§rsonnel.Management and Industrial
Relations. ew york: Prentice-Hall, Incorporated,
1912. Do 554.

53

 

 

TABLE II
NUMBER OF TRAIT SUBDIVISIONS USED IN STORE EMPLOYEE
RATING FORNS OF 15 FOOD CHAINS
Number Of

Companies Using

 

Two trait subdivisions .
Three trait subdivisions
Four trait subdivisions
Five trait subdivisions

Ten trait subdivisions .

F’ ~a (fl 14 ’4

 

13

 

34

mind begins to wander in search Of the meaning of "initiative"
and how it is meant to apply in this particular situation.

The store manager finds that it is an elusive word, whose in-
tended definition is hard to pin down. When he does fix the
meaning Of "initiative" in his mind, he is again faced with

the same problem, for he may not know exactly what is meant

by the word "fair", "good", or "very good". If all ten store
managers had a different understanding of the word "initiative",
the rating form would instill hopeless confusion in the raters.

There should be no doubt in anyone's mind that this type
of situation can exist, if there is no means of furnishing the
store managers with a uniform definition or interpretation Of
the meaning Of the various traits on the rating form, Much
of the success Of the rating plan is determined by the extent
to which the store managers have the same understanding of the
traits on which the store employees are to be rated.

"Because words and phrases do not communicate the same
meanings to all, there is an ever-present language problem.
This problem is doubly present in rating forms; first, in the
difficulty Of defining exactly such abstractions as "person-
ality", "attitude", and "COOperation"; and second, in trying
to establish a verbal unit of measurement of the degree to

7

which these traits are present."

 

7. Mary Wortham. "Rating of Supervisors." Bulletin 11,
Industrial Relations Section, California Institute
of Technology, 1944. p. 22.

_. —_.-..

55
One food chain solves this problem Of trait definition in
this manner:
Initiative: Extent to which employee performs job
without waiting to be told or shown

what to do.

Unsatisfactory: Lacks sufficient initia-
tive to retain in job without improvement.

Fair: Lacks initiative to attain required
job Objective.

Good: Exercises amount Of initiative re-
quired by the job.

Very Good: Exercises initiative beyond
job requirements.

The task of assuring consistency of interpretation of the
definitions Of traits and subdivisions of traits is certainly
a difficult one for the food chain that is planning a rating
form. The personnel manager of the company could not sit down
and merely write a set of definitions to apply to the rating
form. Here again, the men who will actually Operate the rating
plan should be consulted. These are the men who know what is
expected Of their employees and if they can arrive at a uniform
definition Of the various traits, consistent ratings should re-
sult.

Some food chains do not define the traits that are used on
their rating forms. In some of these cases the company may have
Operating or merit rating manuals in which the traits are defin-
ed. Others use short phrases, such as "catches on quickly"
which might be used in place of the ambiguous word "adapta-

bility", which would require a definition. still others give

36

a definition of a trait by means of a sentence, or even a para-
graph as in the preceding example Of "initiative".

The National Tea Company has an Operating manual which
thoroughly describes the meaning Of each trait that is used
on its rating form. This definition is condensed to one short
sentence when the trait is presented on the actual rating form.

Number Of traits. How many traits are actually needed on

 

the rating form? It seems that this question is best answered
in light of the original purposes the rating form is supposed
to fulfill. For the food chains who desire to develOp their
personnel in the various aSpects of job performance, it would
seem wise to include a sufficient number of traits so that the
store manager is mindful of all the important aspects of job
performance in his rating and subsequent interview. It is
this writer's Opinion that ten or even twenty traits may not
be tOO many, providing the rater's time is not a pressing prob-
lem. If the purpose Of a rating form is tO evaluate an employee
at a definite level in relation to other employees, then the
rating might be made on as few as five to ten traits. With a
prOper statistical analysis it can usually be shown that a
large number of traits is not needed, since it can be proven
by statistical methods that certain traits have little or no
effect in the point score of an individual's rating.

Most store managers who have no understanding Of the appli-
cation Of statistics desire a form which fully covers the quali-
ties Of a good job performance and this will involve the use of

at least eight traits.

57

The number Of traits on the rating forms received from the
13 food chains varies widely. The greatest number on any one
form was 25, the smallest number was 8, and the average was

10.

Final Rating

The advisability of calculating numerical scores for
final ratings has been a much debated tOpic, both in the food
chains and in other industries. There are probably three pos—
sible positions that may be taken toward this whole problem:

1. Calculate an over-all score that is the sum of the
scores on the individual traits and establish a total point
score which can be used for comparison purposes in personnel
evaluation. Another method is to group the total scores into
a number of categories, regarding all who fall in the same cat-
egory as roughly equal. For instance, all employees whose
total score fell within 90 to 100 would be rated excellent.

Some companies such as the Kroger Company do not give a
score on their rating forms, but have the store manager rank
each employee from "best" to "poorest", which has a similar ef-
fect as Over-all scoring except that the ranking sheet is kept
separate from the rating form and the employee does not know
his position in the ranking.

2. Disregard the use of an over-all score, but use instead
the scores on each individual trait. In this way there will be

no possibility that an over-all score may conceal differences

on important traits.

38

3. DO not score the form at all. _

Merit rating forms now in use by the food chains may use
any one of the above methods of scoring. A more detailed des-
cription Of the three methods may be helpful since there is
no uniformity among the rating forms now in use by the vari-
ous food chains.

Over-all scoring. In setting up over-all scores for rat—

 

ing forms it is customary to assign a numerical value to each
subdivision of each trait used. Each successive subdivision
from the "poorest" to the "best" is increased by a predetermined
progression. The score Of each trait is then added together to
form a final_score. The company which uses this method Of final
rating must be extremely careful so that too much importance is
not attached to the final rating, either by the employee or

the company.

Suppose, for example, a grocery clerk receives a numerical
rating of 85. He makes up his mind after his interview with
the store manager that he is going to do better so that he can
attain a higher score on the following rating. He may attend
a company training school and in every way make a sincere ef-
fort to improve himself. At the end of six months or a year,
the ratings are repeated and this grocery clerk finds that his
total rating score is only 81. When told that his rating has
drOpped four points, this employee is apt to give up in disgust,
for he has tried everything possible to improve himself so that
he might improve his performance in the company's eyes. This

can indeed be a sore point in employee relations in which the

59

employee might feel perfectly justified in finding fault with
the total score that is given him. Anyone familiar with the
use Of merit rating knows that rating scores can not be re-
liable tO the extent Of constantly predicting an employee's
score within 10 or even 15 points. Ratings are merely Opinions
which have been organized and guided by the rating form and as
such will never have a fine degree of accuracy in evaluation.
In a situation such as this, the store manager may try to
force the final rating so that the employee receives a higher
score than at the last rating. In either case, considerable
damage may result which might not have been necessary.

This particular problem can be remedied in part by group-
ing the final ratings into categories such as 90 to 100 -
group I, 80 to 90 - group II, etc., or by assigning a final
rating into an adjective or adverb group, such as "poor",
"satisfactory", "good", and "excellent". This method avoids
controversy among employees who might score a few points high-
er Or lower than their fellow employees.

An analysis Of the 15 food chain rating forms shows that
only three companies make use of the total score and five com-
panies use the "adjective" or "adverb" method of determining
a final rating.

Trait scores.. Outside Of the food industry, there are a

 

number Of companies which use only part scores, which is the
individual score for each trait. Although this method makes
it more difficult for the rater and management to summarize

rating results, it does have the advantage that store employees

40

who are outstandingly superior or inferior in certain traits
will be clearly recognized. None of the 15 food chains are
presently using this method of scoring.

NO scoring or final rating. Some food chains do not as-
sign a score either to the subdivisions Of the traits or to
the final rating. Their apparent reasoning is that they do
not wish to place a specific point score or grade on the head
of each of its employees.

If the primary purpose Of the rating plan is to develOp
the performance of its personnel, the traits alone would fur-
nish a guide for store manager action and assist him in the sub-
sequent interview. Certainly after rating all employees on
each trait, the store manager would have a good idea Of the ac-
tual relative standing on each employee, even though a total
point score is not computed for him. The important advantage
gained by not scoring an employee is that it eliminates undue
controversy and hard feelings that may result. A store employee
will readily agree that he could improve on certain aspects Of
his performance, but he will not approve a final rating that
says he is only fair or that he has received one of the lowest
scores in the store. When over-all point scores are used on a
rating form, the employees who receive the lowest point scores
are put on the defensive and the employee rating interview is all
the more difficult for the store manager. Human nature being
what it is, no man enjoys being told, or subsequently finding out

through the store grapevine, that he has received the lowest

41

rating in the store. As long as the company informs its em-
ployees Of their total rating scores, it would be naive to
suppose that they would be kept confidential. The ratings

of each employee soon become common knowledge which may cause
some embarrassing situations and complaints as to the validity
of some scores.

The prOponents of no-score rating forms claim that they
can use a rating plan as a tool or wedge with which the store
manager might know and understand his employees better by
"forcing" him, as it were, to carefully examine his personnel
for the purpose of helping them to overcome weaknesses and im-
prove existing abilities to the advantage of themselves and
their company. Advocates of this method argue that since a
total score rating is at best an "educated" guess, its advan-
tages will be outweighed by its disadvantages.

Still others will argue that an employee in today's food
chain store wants to know more than anything else the answer
to the question, "Where do I stand?" Will a discussion Of a
clerk's good and bad points tell him where he stands? It may,
but not in tOO definite terms. One must also consider the
fact that the rating form is not for the use or benefit Of the ’
store manager alone. If there is no scoring or final rating
whatsoever, he may know his employees' relative merits, but
what about higher management? Certainly, they will want to
make use of the forms when deciding various personnel actions.
Some type of final rating would help them to Speed up their re-

view Of the large number of forms.

42

Whether to score or not to score is a decision that can
be more easily decided when the primary purpose Of the rating
plan is fully considered.

General Foods Corporation is one company that does not
use a final rating Of any kind in the evaluation Of its em-.

ployees. The National Industrial Conference Board makes the

following Observation:

It will be noticed that no numerical values appear

on the forms. None are used after the forms have been
filled in, nor are the forms subjected to any sort Of
statistical evaluation, the management believing that
it is neither desirable nor possible tO reduce records
of judgment on human values tO exact figures. They
are recognized as being approximations only. Further,
it is not believed that any total numerical score
would be indicative of an individual's job behavior
as is the picture revealed by the form itself, on
which each pergonal characteristic is a separate and

distinct item.

The food chains,more than any other industry,have made use
Of the no-scoring type of rating plan. 0f the 13 food chain
rating forms, five use no final rating whatsoever.

Outside Of the food chains, the no-score method is used
only where the prime function of the rating is to provide a
basis for discussion between the rater and the employee. Be-
cause the use Of some scoring method vastly facilitates fur-
ther analysis and action by higher management, most firms out-
side of the food chains have clung to the use of scores even

though it is recognized that they may be misleading if not used

with.care and discrimination.

 

8. "Employee Rating", pp. cit., p.72.

43

Supplemental Information

In addition to the traits, their subdivisions, and the as-
sociated definitions, all of the 13 food chain rating forms
provided space for additional information such as:

1. Name Of employee being rated.
2. Store number and department.
3. Age and sex.

4. Job classification.

5. Length of service.

6. Date of rating.

7. Signature Of rater.

In addition to the above type of information, other infor-
mation Of various sorts is Often considered desirable. The
rating forms Of some food chains contain a series Of questions
designed for additional information. An example of some Of
these questions is listed below:

1. All in all are you satisfied with the employee and his
progress? EXplain.

2. DO you recommend promotion, demotion, transfer, dis~
charge? Explain.

3. Isthis employee well suited for the type of work he
is now doing? If not, for what other line Of work?

4. Plan for improvement.

5. Does he have a future with the company?

6. Has the employee shown any outstanding accomplishments

or abilities in performing his work? What are they?

44

7. What is employee doing at present to improve himself,
such as attending school, studying at home, etc.?

8. General comments.

9. What is his strongest point?

10. What is his weakest point?

Such questions are designed to lead the store manager to
the formulation Of conclusions about the employee and thus
force the store manager to think about the rating in an or-
ganized and constructive manner. Some companies furnish a
space for additional comment after each trait, so that the
store manager can explain and justify his rating to the em-
ployee during the interview. This procedure, however, becomes
very cumbersome to a store manager who is almost always short
on time. It may be well to leave Space for additional com-
ments after each trait, but not require that it be used. In
,this way the store manager can extend his expression of em-
ployee ability beyond the trait scale only when he deems it
necessary. Store managers are inclined to object to rating
forms which ask too many questions in the supplementary infor-
mation section, and may lose interest if written answers must
be lengthy and detailed.

In the final analysis, the supplemental information on
the rating form will depend on the purpose Of the rating plan
and the specific information that each food chain might con-

sider most important.

CHAPTER III
ADMINISTERING THE RATING PLAN “1

'/’After the rating form has been develOped to the satisfac-
tion Of all concerned, there remairaa number of very basic
policy decisions to be solved before the plan can be put in-

to actual Operation.

Who Shall DO the Rating?

-The principal requisite for the person who is to rate a
store employee is that he must be in sufficiently close con-
tact with him and his work for a long enough period of time
so as to be able to rate the store employee fairly on each of
the traits or items included in the rating plan. The store
manager is the man who does the rating Of store personnel for
most food chains.//Because his position requires that he give
close supervision to everyone in the store, he cannot help but
become familiar with the most minute qualities of his person-
nel.

For a store with a weekly volume Of less than $50,000, it
would seem apprOpriate that the store manager handle all of the
.rating; however, there are some exceptions to this rule. Some
companies have dual management in their store Operation; the
Ineat manager is in complete charge of his Operation, subject

only to his supervisor. The store manager may be responsible

46

for only grocery and produce. In this case it would seem rea-
sonable to let the meat manager rate the personnel in his de-
partment and the grocery manager rate the remaining employees.
These two in turn would be rated by their supervisors.

In stores with weekly volume in excess Of $50,000, it may
be wise for the store manager, even though he has complete
authority over the whole store, to delegate some Of the res-
ponsibility Of rating to his department heads. Some of the
high volume supermarkets will have Over 100 employees and the
time‘involved in rating may become burdensome for the store
manager. The task of merit rating might be fulfilled even bet-
ter by an assistant manager or a department head who is closer _
to the store employees and therefore more qualified to judge
the merits of each individual. It must be pointed out here,
however, that it is most important that the ratings be made by
competent personnel who fully understand the "how" and "why"
of merit rating. If the store manager is the only man capable
of performing an intelligent, conscientious rating, then he
will have to do the ratings himself, regardless Of the size Of
the store.

Although the store manager does the rating of store em-
ployees in most chains, there are exceptions to this rule. A
few companies prefer to have their supervisors rate the depart-
ment heads, instead Of the store manager. This would probably
give the supervisor a better "feel" of his key store personnel

and aid him in making future decisions.

47

Colonial Stores have all Of their full-time store person-
nel rated by the supervisor. NO rating is performed by the
store manager.

The individual organizational. setup of each company
would have much to do in determining who is going to do the

rating.

How Often Shall the Ratings be Made?

Because the Operation of a food store carries on at such
a fast pace with conditions and peOple ever changing, manage-
ment must decide how often its store employees are to be rated.
The problem is one Of arriving at a sensible rating interval--
short enough to keep pace with changing conditions, yet long
enough to be Operationally feasible. There is probably no food
chain which has adOpted a merit rating plan in earnest that
rates its employees less frequently than once a year. This
is probably the maximum time interval that should be permitted
to elapse between ratings.

It is difficult to determine the minimum interval that may
elapse between ratings. Too frequent ratings will fail to re-
flect any appreciable changes in employee performance, andJas a
consequence of this, the process Of rating may tend to become
highly mechanical, with the rater being unduly guided by the re—
sults Of previous ratings. In addition, too frequent ratings

impose a very real hardship on the store manager who is pressed

48

for time, thereby resulting in hurried ratings, imprOper in-
terviews, and a resentment against the whole program;/,

Of the 13 food chains, one company rates on a quarterly
basis, one rates only new or probationary employees at this
time, seven rate semi-annually, and four rate on a yearly
basis.

Another question which must be considered is whether em-
ployees should be rated all at one time, or on a staggered
basis. It is claimed that by staggering, the store manager
will have an easier task, especially in large stores where he
is responsible for so many employees. Still, most food chains
prefer to rate all employees at the same time because it is
felt that better control can be exercised over the rating pro-
cess if the rater or store manager is given a designated length
Of time in which to accomplish his ratings. With the company
setting a designated time for all ratings, the process can be
regulated to avoid busy holiday weeks or peak selling seasons
in which the store manager would have little time for ratings.

Although the rating interval will be constant for full-
time regular employees, new employees who are on probation may
be rated initially on a much shorter interval. It is usually
best to consider probationary employees as belonging in a sep-
arate category. Most Of the large food chains have unions at
the store level, with union contracts providing that for a
specified time,(usually ranging from 30 to 90 days), new em-

ployees are considered to be on probation. This means that

49

the company can discharge the employee during this time for any
reason, without fear Of union action. Since the purpose Of a
probationary period is to provide a trial interval during which
the employee is expected to demonstrate whether or not he can
satisfactorily meet the requirements Of his joo, it is Of ut-
most importance that management have a tool with which to prOp-
erly evaluate its new employees just prior to the expiration
of the probationary period. Once an employee completes his
probationary period, the company is in a potentially difficult
position as far as discharge is concerned. Unless a store man-
ager has a guide such as the rating form, which "forces" him to
sit down and take an analytical view of a new employee, he is
apt to let the probationary time slip by and "wake up" too late
to the realization that he has "deadwood" in his organization,
on which the union may not agree.

It is this writer's Opinion that a rating form can be a
very useful tool in evaluating new employees during the proba-
tionary period. TO the company which is contemplating the use
Of merit rating on a full-time basis, this would provide an ex-
cellent Opportunity for introducing a plan on a limited basis.

The most important factor to consider in establishing the
frequency Of ratings is the amount of time that the store man-
ager or rater will be able tO devote tO the rating plan. A
rating that is thoroughly executed once a year is of much more
value than a hurried rating that is done semi-annually or quar-

terly. The frequency Of ratings, just as every other rating

50

plan decision, should be decided from the vieWpoint Of the
people who will carry out the plan. Unless the plan receives
their acceptance by having a smooth Operation, it will be doom-

ed to failure even though it may be Operationally sound on paper.

Training the Raters
z/The success of a merit rating plan hinges primarily on
the following four points: (1) develOping a sound plan;
(2) selling the plan to the three levels Of company Operation;
(3) making fair and equitable ratings; (4) using the ratings
constructively.

The first two points were thoroughly considered in Chap-
ter II.' Now, in order to carry out the Objectives Of points
three and four, it is absolutely necessary that the raters be
trained so that they are capable Of performing their part of
the rating plan.

A food chain that establishes a merit rating plan and fails
to give instructions and training on how to rate, will find lit-
tle success, regardless Of the type rating form used. Reign
Bittner mentions the importance Of training the raters and his
ideas could very well be applied to the food chains.

A merit rating program must include specific
plans and procedures for training the raters. In
my Opinion, lack Of training Of raters is the most
usual source of weakness in rating programs. I am
not nearly so concerned about the type of rating
form to use as I am about the training of raters
in use of the form adOpted. The feeling is all
tOO prevalent that the way to Obtain better rat-
ings is to get a better rating form. It is not
surprising that this feeling is common, for if a
tool doesn't work it is natural to lOOk for a de-

ficiency in the tool rather than for a fault in
the user of the tool. Nevertheless, I believe

51

that if all raters were prOperly trained, almost any
rating form would give reasonab y good results, prO-
viding it was chosen in the first plaie to conform to
the Objectives of the rating program.

Of course, the training Of store managers or supervisors
in the use of the rating plan is not as easy as it sounds.
These men are an integral part of a store Operation and it is
a difficult matter tO have them come to the main Office for
several training sessions in order to learn the use Of merit
rating. TOp management is Often sold on merit rating until it
reaches the point that its men must be "pulled out" of the
stores for instructions and training. The store managers may
also complain that they must sacrifice much of their time or-
dinarily devoted to other duties, to attend the training ses-
sions. This is indeed a crucial point in many rating plans,
and the eventual success Of the plan may depend upon whether
management will go to the extent necessary to formulate a sound
rating plan. There does not seem to be too much room for com-
promise On this matter. It is the writer's Opinion that the
store managers would have to attend at least one group training
session, lasting for perhaps one-half day, if the rating program
is expected to enjoy any degree Of success whatsoever./ By hav-
ing at least one training session, members Of tOp management

could make an initial appearance at the meeting and demonstrate

their interest in the project. The very idea Of calling all

 

1. Reign Bittner, _p. cit., p. 29.

52

store managers into a Special training session would be addi-
tional proof Of the importance that management was attaching to
the rating plan. During the training session, the raters could
be encouraged to ask questions and express their Opinions on
the Operation Of the rating plan. The following advantages
could be gained by one or more training sessions:

1. The purpose of the rating program could be clearly out-
lined to the store managers. Unless the purpose Of the rating
plan is understood, it would be impossible to generate interest
and COOperation in the raters.

2. A thorough discussion and review Of the rating form
would help the raters understand its use and help establish
uniform meanings for the various traits.

3. A discussion Of some common errors encountered in the
rating procedure would put the raters on guard and prevent many
Of the initial difficulties associated with a rating plan.

4. Instructions on how to conduct the employee interview
following the rating would be of value, since many store manag-
ers fail to realize the amOunt of tact and finesse needed when
constructive criticism is given to an employee.

Finally, as a further aid to training the raters, some Of
the food chains have devised a merit rating manual which gives
complete instructions on the use of merit rating and a statement
Of company policy in this regard.

A thorough training session combined with a rating manual

for Operational guidance would leave no excuse for rater

53

incompetence and go a long way in selling the importance Of
the rating plan to the people who use it.

The following is a list of suggestions for effective rat-
ing used by the National Tea Company in its manual Of instruc-
tion:

1. Remember that to get a "Satisfactory" rating in any
factor an employee must meet the same job requirements
for that factor which would be expected Of a fully
qualified and experienced employee.

2. New employees or those still in the trainee stage
for the job are rated against the same standards as ex-
perienced employees. The back Of the form provides

for evaluation of trainee performance.

3. Try to disregard any general impressions of the
employee being rated and concentrate on one factor at
a time. DO not let perfmmmnce in one factor influ—
ence ratings in another.

4. Consider the employee's performance over the entire
period of the preceding six months. DO not be unduly
influenced by recent or unusual occurrences. (favor-
able Or unfavorable).

5. For every rating below "Satisfactory" have Spe-
cific reasons in mind which show that the employee
has not met the full requirements Of his job.

6. For every rating above "Satisfactory" have spe-
cific examples in mind that show when the employee
has contributed more to his work than is expected
in meeting the full requirements Of his job.

7. Make sure you know why you rate an employee as
you do.

8. There are dangers of Over-rating employees of
longer service, those who get higher earnings, or
those whom the rater knows better personally. A-
void these by thinking only in terms Of job require-
ments and the employee's performance.

9. DO not hesitate to use high or low ratings if
they honestly describe the employee's performance.

54

10. Raters often have personal tendencies to rate

high or low. If most of your ratings are on the

high or low side, check them to see if the employee's

work actually fits the description on the forms.

11. Remember that you will discuss your rating with

the employee. You cannot help him to do better by

over-rating him, and may actually be recording false

information that will embarrass you later. On the

other hand, do not under-rate, because you will b5

expected to give him the reasons for your rating.

The Employee Interview

A merit rating plan of any food chain is not complete un-
less there is a provision made for an employee interview so
that the rater can personally discuss the rating with the em-
ployee. For the interview to be effective, the employee
should be told exactly how he was evaluated on the rating
form. The interview will thereby serve two important func—
tions. First, it will let the employee know where he stands
in the organization. One of the chief complaints of store em-
ployees is that the store manager or supervisor fails to ac-
knowledge their work whether it is good or bad. They want to
know what their "boss" thinks of them and what they have to do
to advance. Second, the interview makes possible the fulfill-
ment of the primary purpose of the rating plan-—the develOpment
of employee performance. What a golden Opportunity is present-

ed to the store manager when he can sit down with an employee

and intelligently discuss his job performance, with the purpose

 

2. "The Employee Service Review Plan," Manual of
Instructions. National Tea Company, Chicago,
Illinois. 1952.

55

of improving weak points and helping the employee advance. It
is through a merit rating plan that this very desirable situa-
tion (employee interview) is possible, in which the store man-
ager or rater can meet with the employee under ideal conditions
and arrive at a mutual understanding. What better Opportunity
for employee training could be presented to the store manager?
It is very doubtful that such Operating advantages could be
gained by any other procedure besides a rating plan.

Opposed to these important advantages, some store managers
claim that the employee interview does more harm than good.
They say that a frank discussion of an employee's weak points
forms the basis for arguments between the employee and the
store manager, with hard feelings and decreased morale the
result, rather than employee improvement. Raters may also
be inclined to rate all personnel high in an effort to avoid
complaints during the interview, and thereby distort their ac-
tual ability on the rating form.

These complaints of the raters against the employee in-
terview should not be discarded lightly, for it is a serious
situation which exists in many of the food chains today and
is one of the chief causes of an unsuccessful rating plan.

The situation is not hOpeless; however, it does demand atten-
tion to the fact that the raters must be trained and guided in
the techniques of skillfully handling the employee interview

so that maximum benefits can be derived.

56

The Kroger Company, which realizes the importance of the
interview, has prepared an outline to guide its store managers
so that they might know how to skillfully use the "improvement
guide" (Kroger's rating form) in conducting store employee in-
terviews. This outline which contains many helpful points is
presented in.Figure I.

The importance of the employee interview can not be over-
emphasized, and the success of the rating plan will usually be
in direct prOportion to the rater's skill in handling the in-
terview. Figure II gives an additional guide to follow in
planning talks with employees and illustrates the mental re-

action of the employee.

q.—

 

 

 

57

FIGURE I

EMPLOYEE INTERVIEw' GUIDES

 

How to Prepare for the Interview

1. Carefully complete the "improvement guide" as it applies to
the individual.

- In each section enter Specific examples or figures
which will aid in reviewing his job performance with
him.

- Make each rating on the basis of provable facts.
Avoid these errors: (1) over-rating him because of
long acquaintance or because he is likeable; (2)
over-rating him because of his long experience, or
because he has a large store, department, or sec-
tion; (3) being swayed by one dramatic incident--

a single unusual success, or one serious error;

(4) being inclined to be too tough, too easy, or

a fence straddler.

- Make your ratings accurately describe his perform-
ance. Avoid trying to make him look bad or look
good, but truthfully show his performance as it is.
Avoid hurrying--if there are points you are not

sure of, get the facts before entering your rat-

ings.

- Rate him strong on points on which you can give
him honest compliments. Your weakest man probably
has some strong points.

- Rate him weak on points on which marked improve—
ment is needed. Your strongest man can probably im-
prove On some points. (Bear in mind that our a-
bility to further strengthen men who are a ready
stro is the best guarantee of your own future suc-
cess.

3. "How to Use the Improvement Guide to Conduct a
Performance Review Interview," The Kroger
Company, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1955.

58

FIGURE I (Continued)

2. Establish a desire for the interview.

- Capitalize on his natural desire to know how he
stands. Advise him that you have appraised his per-
formance.

- Get him to tell you that he wants to know where
he is strong and where he is weak.

3. Provide time and privacy.
- Provide a time at which both of you will be un-
hurried and free from pressure.

- Get away from other peOple and away from job sur-
roundings. Allow no interruptions.

How to start the Interview

1. Emphasize that the interview is to help him to help
himself.

- Purpose is to review and discuss his performance--
it is not to prod, needle, or put him "on the spot."
Advise him that all of your men are getting this
same Opportunity.

- Let him know that you are not going to give him
advice. (Giving advice will cause him to depend on
you; one of your aims is to encourage him to depend
on himself.)

2. stick to his job performance.

- Discuss only his responsibilities and his job ac-
complishments. It is dangerous to compare him with
other men-~it invites differences Of Opinion, hard
feelings, and the implication of favoritism.

- Never raise a question as to his over-all ability,
judgment, or willingness. To him this will mean that
you lack confidence in him; you may kill his confi-
dence in himself. (Discuss sales, Operations, or ex-
penses, BUT NOT ability, judgment, or willingness.)

'3- Start the interview with an honest compliment.

59

FIGURE I (Continued)

 

 

How to Handle Strong Points
1. Encourage him to discuss his strong points.

- Compliment all of his extra or unusual accomplish-
ments. Be specific--use examples or figures; do
not use "soft soap."

- Find 2 or 3 points Of agreement with him and in—
troduce the "Improvement Guide" to show your agree-
ment. Encourage him to talk.

- Refer back to his strong points throughout the in-
terview if it is necessary to encourage him.

How to Handle Weak Points

1. Get him to "see for himself" the points on which he
needs to improve.

- Do not try to fool either him or yourself--simply
telling a man what he "should" or "ought" to do sel-
dom gets results.

- Refer to apprOpriate "Improvement Guide" headings
and get him to tell you what should be expected of
him.

- Give him facts or figures--or ask him "WHAT" and
"WHY" in order to lead him to see his own weak
points. Refer to specific items on the "Improvement
Guide."

- Assist him in comparing his own performance with
what he himself states, or agrees, should be ex-
pected of him.

- Get him to agree with your ratings. (If he can
demonstrate that you should change the ratings on
2 or 3 points--make the changes at once. Be fair
with him.)

2.

3.

1.

2.

FIGURE I (Continued)

 

Get him to express a desire to improve.

- Ask him to state the advantages of improving.
Help him along.

- Encourage, stimulate, or challenge him, but get
a clear-cut eXpression of desire to improve. (if
he doesn't WANT TO IMPROVE, he won't improve.)

- Do not rush him to Step 5. Be certain that un-
derstanding and desire are present.

Assist him in making plans for improvement.
- Handle each point as a problem to be solved.
Get him to tell you "HOW." Stick to "Improvement
Guide" items.
- Put your own suggestions in the form of ques—
tions, such as-—Will this help? Can we do this?
How to Conclude the Interview

Summarize plans on the "Improvement Guide".

- Write down the principal points on which he is
going to make Special effort.

- Under each point list Specific steps for accom-
plishment. Note dates, amounts, names, etc.

- Get his approval, comments, and signature.
Summarize his progress; leave him encouraged.

- Give him a general idea of where he stands, but
not to the point of promises or threats.

- Encourage him to act on his own, to make his
own decisions, and to depend on himself for suc-
cess.

- Guarantee him your support and backing.

60

fl

61

FIGURE I (Continued)

 

 

Follow-up
1. Help provide Opportunities for him to develOp.
- Specifically check the points on which he is mak-

ing special efforts in your further contacts with
him

- Help him "grow". If he isn't growing, he is
slipping.

- Correct errors when they occur; use the steps
outlined under "How to Handle Weak Points."

2. Give him credit when it is due.

- Recognize his accomplishments and let him know.

 

 

62

FIGURE II

RATING GUIDE FOR EMPLOYEE INTERVIEW4

—__“
1*

 

Step I Step II Step III
Start out by stress- Follow up with Repeat and conclude
ing good points of what's wrong with other good
your rating with the record points in record
Talk This way
-———> ‘—-——> -———a» ---—9 --—4>
Good Worker Attendance Poor Knows His Job

 

Example of planned talk: "John, you are a good worker; in—
deed, your record on that score is perfect. I wish I had a few
more like you. Is there anything I can do to help you straight—
en out your attendance? That is the only spot in your record
which prevents me from turning in a good report about you. Know-
ing you as I do, and knowing the ability that you have, I can't
understand this phase of your experience here. What's the story,
John?"

MENTAL REACTION OF LISTENER

ft UP m UP

fié‘é—é —'>—-9-)
A "i DOJN 1 c
—->-->-—9—9—)

Appeal to his pride. B His ability as a
Good worker--record worker. Puts
perfect. "I wish I Attendance poor-- firoblem up to
had a few more like only bad spot on im.
you." record.

 

4. T. 0. Armstrong. "Talking Your Ratings," Ratipg
Emplgyee and Supervisorngerformance. New York:
American Management Association, 1952. p. 152.

 

63

Review and Appeal

All of the 15 food chain rating forms require that the
employee ratings be reviewed by someone other than the rater,
and have space provided on the form for the reviewer's sig-
nature. In the majority Of food chains, the reviewer will be
the rater's immediate supervisor, usually the district super-
visor. Some Of the smaller chains may have the rating forms
reviewed by merchandise managers, Operations managers or the
company personnel manager. It is most desirable that the re-
viewer have some knowledge of the employees who are rated.
Because of this fact, company supervisors who make frequent
contact with the stores are given the job of reviewing the
rating forms.

Such a review is valuable as a device to control, inso-
far as possible, the effects Of favoritism or lack of under-
standing of the plan on the part of the rater. The reviewer
also receives an Opportunity to "tap the pulse" of the store
employees and arrive at a better understanding of their needs
and desires which are certainly important when striving for
good human relations with company personnel.

The reviewer, even though he may have final authority,
should never change a rating form unless he has first consult-
ed the rater to arrive at an agreement. This is most impor-
tant in order to maintain the authority and prestige of the
rater, since he is primarily responsible for the rating in the

first place.

 

 

 

 

64

No matter how smoothly a rating plan may Operate, no mat—
ter how fair the raters may be, sooner or later some store em-
ployee will Object to the rating that he has received and the
rater will find it impossible to convince the employee that he
has been fairly rated. The question immediately arises: Must
the employee accept the rating, or may he appeal it? Any food
chain interested in the fair treatment of its employees will
definitely provide the right to appeal a rating. Since the
rating form becomes a permanent part of an employee's person-
nel record and may be the basis for future personnel decisions
such as promotion, transfer or discharge, it is no more than
just that the employee have the right of appeal in such an im-
portant personal matter.

A store employee should always feel free to contact a
higher authority concerning any decision that to him is per—
sonally unjust. Although this situation should not be encour-
aged, it should never be stymied by management. In the case
of merit rating, appeals can be made to the reviewer or to the
personnel manager. These appeals should be handled in a very
thorough manner so that the employee is treated justly and the
rater's authority and respect are not destroyed. If the raters
are prOperly trained in the techniques of the rating interview,

few of these problems will develOp.

65

Checking Results

Merit rating forms that have been filled out and sent in
to the personnel office to be filed and forgotten may not jus-
tify the amount of time and money Spent on them. It is true
that the employee interview following the rating may deserve
the most value in a food chain rating plan. Still, there are
many other uses that management can make of the ratings after
they are sent to the personnel department.

Colonial Stores, Incorporated, uses the results of their
rating plan so that they can place the highest rating employees
in a special reserve group. "When an employee's name goes on
the reserve list, he should fall in line for some very Special
attention from all members of management with whom he comes in
contact. This group should receive full consideration as a
reserve inventOry of personnel available for early promotion."?’

Any other food chain could use the rating results to a’//
similar advantage. Employees who rate the best could be seg—
regated and receive first consideration when promotions or
transfers are to be made. Without some tangible evidence of
employee merits, management must promote solely on the word
of a supervisor or hearsay, and many qualified employees may

not be given consideration.

5. "Merit Rating and Employee Appraisal Manual."
Colonial Stores, Incorporated, Atlanta, Georgia.
1953.

/{

V

s”' 66

l‘ ,.
fi.
.

fjThe/results of the rating plan can also give management
an insight to future training needs. If all employees seem to
be weak on a certain aspect of job performance, such as friend-
liness, it will be up to the company to emphasize its impor-
tance in their training schools, and alert its store managers
to the problem. Likewise, the rating results could be used to
detect flaws in present training programs and eliminate any de-

ficiencies exposed by the rating resultsgp
/"

‘yf5//Another type of evidence, extremely difficult to develOp

but worth intensive effort, is a demonstration that decisions
made with the assistance of rating results have been better
than those made without the use of ratings. Follow-up studies
Over an extended period of time are required to accumulate
evidence of this type. A decrease in the number of employees
who fail upon promotion to the next step, a decrease in the
number of grievances and absenteeism, or individual cases
where a store has increased Operating efficiency and improved
employee relations, are the type of evidence to be develOped://
Once sound evidence of the rating plan is identified, it
should be made known to the rest of the company so as to
bolster their faith in the plan. If three of the top store
managers in a company or one of its branches could honestly
attest to the success of the rating plan in their stores, the
other store managers would diSpel much of the doubt in their
minds regarding the plan, since men from their own group have

endorsed it. Of course this is just another means of selling

67

the plan to those reSponsible for using it, but proven results
can be a rating plan's best salesman, for "nothing succeeds
like success".

/ Another advantage to checking the results of a merit rat-
ing plan is that it furnishes a periodic re-evaluation of the
entire rating program. A rating plan that has been in Opera-
tion for only a year or two will certainly require some changes
if it is to profit from the eXperience gained from its initial
Operation. Rating plans must be improved primarily by means

of trial and error methods. To arrive at an improved rating
plan, management must keep a close check on it so that its de-

fects may be discovered, and institute any changes needed to

keep the plan up to date with the progress of the company.
,2

CHAPTER IV
PROBLEMS INVOLVED IN MERIT RATING
Opposition at Operational Level

At the present time, the establishment of a rating plan
at the store level is an extremely difficult prOposition.
True, a rating plan can be easily installed, but what de-
gree of success will it have? An inherent difficulty of any
retail chain system lies in the fact that a large number of
(retail stores in widely scattered areas are under one person-
nel department. Even a branch office may have as many as 150
stores. Control of the rating plan is difficult at best,
when compared to the Operation of a rating plan in a manu-
facturing plant where all of the employees are grouped in
one location under the "nose" of the personnel department.

In addition to this handicap, the personnel responsible
for store Operation, which includes clerks, store managers
and some supervisors, unless prOperly introduced to the rating
plan, do not want anything to do with it. This Opposition
stems mainly from the personnel responsible for making the rat-
ings, which in most cases is the store manager. They see a
rating plan as an additional job, timeiconsuming, and a source
of employee unrest. These men cannot visualize the benefits

of a rating plan because its results are too intangible. They

\

69

are used to evaluating new methods in terms of higher sales and
profit where results can be accurately gauged. There is a ten-
dency for them to think of merit rating as an academic or per-
sonnel procedure too far removed from their job of store Opera-
tion to be of any value.

This Opposition should not come as a surprise, for merit
rating as a tool for improved Operation is a mere baby in the
food chains. Since the rating of store employees is a post~
war product to the chains,and on the average only a few years
Old, Opposition can be expected.

When a rating plan is contemplated, it is very important
that the company is fully aware that this Opposition actually
exists and does not underestimate it. Unless it is overcome
by an educational process which can successfully sell the plan
to those who must administer it, there will be little chance

for the plan's success.

Limitations of the Rating Plan
Important as it may be to sell the rating plan to all
levels of Operation, it is equally important that exhorbitant
claims are not made in its behalf. Some companies make impos-
sible claims for the rating plan in an effort to create en-
thusiasm and interest. When these claims fail to materialize,
there is a considerable lack of faith in the plan or any other

rating plan that may be prOposed in the future.

70

A rating plan is just one tool in the hands of management
which must be used in conjunction with other means to attain
the desired results. Take the case of a pending promotion or
discharge. The rating form should not be the only basis for a
sound decision. True, the rating form can certainly help in
determining an individual's qualifications for promotion, or
his lack of qualifications for discharge, but to utilize the
rating results as the sole criterion Of employee merit would
be foolish. ‘

The employee interview, an important part of a chain's rat-
ing plan, furnishes the store manager an Opportunity for devel-
Oping his personnel. Still,it does not infer that this process
is to last for just 30 minutes, once or twice a year. Develop-
'ing personnel is a full-time job and the rating plan merely
serves as a "kick off" or initial nudge to get the "ball roll-
ing". It does not solve the many problems that exist in store
Operation, but only serves to point them out so that apprOpriate
measures can be taken.

One general limitation of merit rating is that it is a
method Of obtaining Opinions, and is not a strict Objective
way of measuring performance. Even at its best, the results
should be considered as reflecting Opinions and should be used
as such. While there are ways of Obtaining Opinions that re-
duce errors in judgment, the end-results of rating cannot be
considered as precise. Numerical ratings for two different

employees of, let us say, 65 and 66, do not necessarily imply

 

 

71

that the second individual is better than the first. It is
only natural for peOple to think of measurements or scores as
being highly exact. It is possible to measure length, width,
and thickness with great exactness, but the measurement of
human traits and capacities is a long way from achieving this
accuracy. There is always a zone of uncertainty surrounding
any person‘s rating. For this reason, it is the writer's Opin-
ion that total numerical scores should not be placed on the
rating forms. Employees are inclined to take a score at its
face value and,being unaware of probable error or zones of un-
certainty, may draw false conclusions in comparing their ratings
with those of their fellow employees. Some of the causes for
this probable error in merit rating will be discussed in the

remaining part of the chapter.

Validity of Ratings

The validity of ratings relates to the extent that the
ratings actually measure what they are supposed to measure.
It is only natural for the management Of a food chain to won-
der if their rating plan actually measures employee performance
the way it is supposed to do. This question must of necessity
go pretty much unanswered, because there is no criterion with
which to compare the results of the rating plan. If an Objec-
tive criterion of employee performance did exist, there would be
little need for a rating plan in the first place. Since there

is no objective criterion for almost all of the traits rated

72

on the food chain rating forms, the problem of determining
validity is almost impossible. Since a rating plan is pri-
marily designed because there is a lack of objective criteria,
any attempt to determine validity by searching for Objective
criteria would be useless.

There are statistical methods for determining the valid-
ity of a rating plan, but these statistical methods provide
only a rough and, in some cases, very indirect approximation
of the validity of the ratings. The statistical methods that
can be used will not be considered here since they are quite
involved and not generally used by the food chains, at least
to the writer‘s knowledge.

Although the question Of validity is very important and
difficult to determine, it has not prevented the food chains
from develOping and using merit rating plans. Most of the
chains realize that statistical validity is difficult to Ob-
tain, with results that are uncertain. Faced with this fact,
they have been content to set up rating plans which possess a
logical or face validity. Logical validity implies that the
traits used on the rating form are indiSputably reasonable and
significant.

From this point Of view, a food chain rating plan most
likely to possess a high degree of validity would be the one
which most fairly represented judgments of a substantial group
of supervisors and store managers, who completely agreed that

the selected traits were an obvious criterion of job performance.

73

This type of common-sense judgment presumesvalidity of the rat-
ing plan in the absence of an acceptable statistical check.

A certain degree of validity can be determined in the food
chains, however, by follow-up procedures in which the progress
of certain individuals is traced for a period of time to see
how accurately the ratings actually predicted their success or
failure. Although the follow-up procedure is not sufficient in
itself to adequately predict validity of a rating form, its re-
sults are more concrete and readily understood by management
and can prove to be a valuable asset in promoting continued

faith in the rating plan.

Reliability of Ratings

In order to be reliable, a rating scale should give ap-
proximately the same results upon repetition with a given
group of store personnel as it did the first time it was used,
provided the group did not have time to change to an appreci-
able degree. If it could be determined that two different gro-
cery clerks working in different stores had the same qualities,
then their ratings Should be very similar even though they had
been rated by different store managers. For a rating scale to
be reliable, it Should consistently measure a clerk's performance
whether subsequent ratings are made by a different rater or by
the same rater.

Suppose a store manager would rate all Of the personnel in
his store,and upon completion of the ratings he would be trans-

ferred to a different store. A new store manager would take over

74

this store and in six months repeat the rating procedure. If
both sets of ratings were very similar, varying only in the
degree of change in the employees, the rating plan could be
considered as being highly reliable. Whereas, if the ratings
were at complete variance with each other, the rating plan
would be highly unreliable. In this particular case, there
could be one of two difficulties. It could be that the rating
form possessed reliability and one of the raters was incompe-
tent. Or it could be that the raters wereequally qualified, but
the rating form was incapable of providing reliable ratings.
In either situation, the difficulty must be determined and cor-
rected. If the rating form is at fault, it should be revised
to provide the raters with a uniform conception of the traits
and how they apply to employee performance. If the rating
form is not at fault, then it will be necessary to train the
raters so that reliable ratings can be attained.

It is not hard to visualize the importance of such con-
Sistency from a management point of View. An unreliable
rating plan, giving different results upon successive appli-
cations, could in a very short time lead both store employees
and store managers to a state of complete distrust of the rat-
ing plan. If this were to happen, the employees and store man-
agers could hardly be blamed since it is entirely reasonable
for them to expect successive ratings to be comparable. Un-
less ratings are reliable, the rater can never be certain as
to whether changes in ratings are due to actual changes in the

employee or to the unreliability of the rating plan.

75

Unlike the problem of validity, the reliability of rat-
ing scales is relatively easy to determine by means of statis-
tical techniques.

, The most widely used method of computing the con-

sistency of the rating method is to compare the rat-

ings completed at one time with those completed at

the end of a stated interval.

If there is little difference between the two
ratings, it may be assumed that the same thing is

being measured consistently; in other words, that

the ratings are reliable. It should not be expect-

ed, however, that perfect agreement will be achiev—

ed. The ratee is likely to change, or the attitude,

point of view, or method of the rater is likely to

be different. If the interval between ratings is

sufficiently short (probably not over six months),

these changes usually can be expected to be of in-

significant Size.

Most of the food chains, however, have not progressed to
the point Of using statistical methods for determining relia-
bility. The degree of reliability of their rating plans is
determined more by a sense of feel of the situation and by the
amount Of difficulty arising from this problem.

.The degree of validity and reliability in a rating plan
is difficult to determine for the average food chain. Since
these two factors are known to be lacking in some degree in all
rating plans, management should use caution before placing un-

due emphasis on the rating results.

1. Randolph S. Driver. "The Validity and Reliability
of Ratings," Pgrsonnel. 17 (March, 1941), p. 187.

76

Rater Tendencies

Some of the most troublesome problems in a rating plan
originate within the raters. Since each rater has his own
individual psychological make-up, it is not surprising to
find that they may form different tendencies in regard to
making the ratings. These rater tendencies cause immeasur-
able damage to a rating plan and it is necessary for manage-
ment to pick them out and eliminate them by educating and
training its raters so that they may be aware of their exist-
ence. The three most important rater tendencies are: halo
effect, central tendency, and leniency.

Halo effect. By halo effect is meant the tendency to
rate a given employee on the basis of the rater's over-all
general impression or by rating an employee on the basis of
one particularly outstanding quality, such as COOperation.
This rater impression has its effect on all of the traits in
the rating scale, in such a manner that the untrained rater
is completely unaware that it actually exists. How many times
has a store manager proclaimed a certain clerk his best man,
because he will do anything he is told to do? Valuable as
this COOperation may be, it does not eliminate the need for
other important performance qualities. It is most urgent that
all raters are aware of this tendency in evaluating store person-
nel.

Central tenden_y. As the name implies, "central tendency"

refers to the inclination of some raters to type their employees

 

77

as "average" to an unreasonably large degree. This tendency
could be caused by a poorly designed form, lack of rater train-
ing, or by a rater who is either in a hurry to finish the form
or else too lazy to perform the necessary work for a compre-
hensive rating. The "central tendency" suggests that the rater
did not take time to read the form, but merely checked it off
in the most expedient manner. Although it is possible for
ratings of this type to occur in some instances, an unusual
number of cases would warrant an investigation for possible
misuse on the part of the rater.

Leniency. The error of "leniency" is the tendency of the
rater to rate employees higher than they should be rated. This
tendency is particularly evident in the case of employees who
should be rated on the bottom of the scale for certain traits,
and instead are rated average or Slightly below. Most store
managers want to be "good Joe's" and be liked by their store
personnel. They hesitate to pass severe criticism on employees
whom they have known and liked for months or even years. Store
managers also fear that such adverse ratings may be the source
Of trouble in the employee interview. They would much rather
talk over ratings with an employee who is rated average or
above, than one who must be told certain aSpects of his per-
formance must be improved.

This tendency is probably the most prevalent rater defect
in the food chains. Still, ratings must be as objective as

possible if the desired results are to be attained. The

78

solution lies in training the raters and instilling confidence
in their ability to approach tactfully a subject which the

employee-—deep down inside-~knows to exist.

CHAPTER V

ILLUSTRATION OF SOME FOOD CHAIN
RATING FORMS

Throughout this thesis the writer has endeavored to point
out what is necessary in establishing an effective rating plan.
As previously stated, the rating form itself is an important
part of any plan. Store employee rating forms from six food
chains are presented in this Chapter so that the reader may
see forms now used in actual Operation.

The illustrated forms were selected because they all pre-
sent a different type of design, even though the basic con-
struction is of the rating scale type.

It is not the intention of the writer to criticize or
praise any particular form, but rather to point out the sig-
nificant features of each form. By referring to the previous
Chapters, it will be possible to determine which forms incor-
porate features that are considered desirable by the writer.

Although each food chain should design its own rating
form, adaptable to its own Operation and objectives, the fol-
lowing rating forms may provide constructive ideas in the for-

mulation of such a rating form.

80

COLONIAL STORES, INCORPORATED

Merit Rating and Employee Appraisal Forms

In 1955 Colonial Stores, Incorporated, adopted a rating
plan for its store employees and provided a rating manual to
aid in the use of administering the plan. The two outstanding
features of the plan are:

1. Separate rating forms are provided for full-time
clerks and the store department managers. Each rating form
has 12 traits which are listed as either performance traits
or personality traits.

2. A reserve group is established for both the full-time
clerks and the department managers. Employees who rate suf-
ficiently high are placed in a reserve group where they can
be more closely Observed and considered for future promotion.
Once in the reserve group, employees are rated on an employee
appraisal form, different from that used on employees not in
a reserve group. Thus, there are four different rating forms
in use for the rating Of store employees.

Other features:

1. All ratings made by the supervisor (none by the
store manager) every six months.

2. All ratings reviewed by Division Manager of Stores
Operations. I

3. No total point score is calculated.

a! Form 3037

cr

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

81
MERIT RATING
(Full Time Store Clerks)
(Excluding Reserve Group)
=
Employee's Name Store or Dept
Position I How long in this position?
DEFINITION OF TERMS
AVERAGE: Employee's perbrmance meets the iob requirements at
the time of rating. THIS IS THE BASIC STANDARD FOR RATING
ANY FACTOR BELOW.
FAIR: Employee's performance is below the requirements for the iob VERY GOOD: Employee's performance is beyond the ordinary require-
and must improve to be satisfactory. ments for good performance for the iob.
UNSATISFACTORY: Employee's performance is deficient enough to OUTSTANDING: Employee's performance is excellent. approaching the
iurtify release from present iob unless improvement is made. best possible for the iob. Should be considered for promotion.

 

E z E g
z 0 o 2 O
a: 5 o .2. 2" 8 ° 3
(PERFORMANCE TRAITS) 03 .f 3 8 2 (PERSONALITY TRAITS) 03 g 3 8 ‘2’
1': 9 g < " - a <
°°5=5>§ Eiisiaé
gastric 223:...)
QUALITY OF WORK D D EDD D APPEARANCE D C] DE": E]
Ability to perform accurately. neatly end com- The look of cleanliness, neatness end general
pletely all the duties of the iob. good grooming.
QUANTITY OF WORK C] D EDD D ATTITUDE TOWARD OTHERS E] C] DUB C]
Efficient use of time for maximum productivity. Ability +0 get along with others and maintain
DEPEND ABILITY D [I BUD Cl their respect and confidence. Courteous.
Extent to which employee can be counted on to
carry out all instructions conscientiously. report CHARAC‘I’ER ' El El EDD D
on time. stay on the iob. and fulfill responsibili- Possession of the principles of right and wrong—
ilflo honesty. sincerity. loyalty and ethics.
JUDGMENT D E] DUE] D
, , HEALTH I] D CIDCI CI
The intelligence and thought used Ill carrying . . .
out iob assignments. Ability to think and act The “F“ °I 5"“9 ”I'M! "‘ WY ”‘4 "““d'
calmly. logically and rapidly.
AMDITION AND ENTHUSIASM
KNOWLEDGE OF THE JOB E] D BUD D D D DUB D
Interest and enthusiasm in work. Desire for fur-
Understanding of basic fundamentals. techniques. fl.“ honor and attainment.
and procedures of the iob.
LEARNING ”"417 D C] DUE] D INITIATIVE AND RESOURCEFULNESS D [:1 DUB D
Ability to learn quickly and to remember what is Energy or aptitude to originate action and follow
Ieerned. Ease of ediustment. through in the absence of instructions.

FIGURE III. COLONIAL STORES, INCORPORATED

MERIT RATING

 

 

Does this empIOyae have a future with Colonial? .................................

‘Nhat are your plans for his future? (Be specific. include recommendation for Company Schools)

 

 

 

 

 

What is the employee doing at present to improve himself. such as attending school. studying at home. taking part in outside activities. etc.?.........._._-,__-_

 

Present Rating

SUMMARY (Check one): ...........-..._......has potential great enough to warrant being considered for the "Reserve" group

...._.....-........-.has some future potential
........................satisfactory in present iob
........................ should be replaced or transferred

(To where? ............

Previous Rating

.4...—.-...~-

 

 

REMARKS:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..........

 

 

Rated by:

 

 

Date

 

 

Reviewed with General Supt.:

 

Genl. Supt's Comments: ............

 

 

 

 

Route original copy to Div. Mgr. of Stores Operation»---I...”.................,....... I . I

then to Personnel Dept. (for filing in employee's personal record).

Dist. Supt. should leap a cOpy of this rating in his personnel files.

. ..-..-M............~w ~- I

 

a:

‘3‘

 

Form 3038

82

 

 

MERIT RATING
(Store Department Managers)
(Excluding Reserve Group)
:fl
me's Name Store or Dept-
on How long in this position?

 

 

 

DEFINITION OF TERMS

AVERAGE: Employee's performance meets the (ob requirements at
"' the time of rating. THIS IS THE BASIC STANDARD FOR RATING
ANY FACTOR BELOW.

: Employee's performance is below the requirements for the iob

oust improve to be satisfactory.

\TISFACTORY: Employee's performance is deficient enough to

'rsIease from present iob unless improvement is made.

VERY GOOD: Employee's performance Is beyond the ordinary require-

ments for good performance for the iob.

OUTSTANDING: Employee's performance is excellent. approaching the
best possible for the iob. Should be considered for promotion.

 

(PERFORMANCE TRAITS)

ANIZING ABILITY

:complishment of iob responsibility in orderly.
icient manner. Selection of right people to fit
as. training and development of those people.
logation of responsibility and authority to get
: iob done.

NLEDGE OF THE JOB

Identanding of basic fundamentals. techniques
4" Procedures of his iob.

’ERFORMANCE

plication to iob at hand and resultant pro-
ctivity.

IY TO INSPIRE AND INFLUENCE OTHERS

a faculty of inspiring others by conveying
m and plans and influencing them to greater
termination and unity of purpose.

IMENT

relIigence and thought used in arriving at
cisions, The ability to think and act calmly.
gicaIly and rapidly.

NO OPPORTUNITY

D TO OBSERVE

[j UNSATISFACI’ORY

e
a:
§8§
sfizg
.‘E’Efio

DUDE]

[IUD CI

DECIDED

E]

C]

L]

DEC] D

LZIDEI CI

 

(PERSONALITY TRAITS)

CHARACTER

Possession of the principles of right and wrong—
honesty. sincerity. layalty and ethics.

HEALTH
The state of being sound in body and mind.

EMOTIONAL STABILITY

Ability to control emotional expression and be-
havior.

VISION
Ability to formulate new ideas. utilizing facts
and past experiences. and to see future possi-
bilities.

AMBITION AND ENTHUSIASM
Interest and enthusiasm in work. Desire for fur-
ther honor and attainment.

INITIATIVE

Energy and aptitude to originate action and
carry out decisions. Courage to defend prin-
ciples and conclusions.

RESPONSIBILITY

Willingness to assume and discharge functions
of management.

=
E E .
Er§ 3 E
25: 302
m3?- 5":
3°§ 5:53
2935(30

DECIDED

DECIDED

DECIDED

DECIDED

DDDDC‘D

DDDDDD

MERIT RATING

Does this manager have a future with Colonial7.................._................

What are your plans for his future? (Be specific)

 

 

 

 

What is the manager doing at present to improve himself. such as attending school. studying at home. taking part in outside activities. etc.?...ww

 

Present Rating Previous Rating

SUMMARY (Check one): -hes potential great enough to warrant being considered for the "Reserve" group ,_._,_
-.........-...........has some future potential
........................ satisfactory in present iob

........................ should be replaced or transferred

(To where? ................ V . J

 

 

REMARKS:

 

 

 

 

 

 

What was the manager's reaction to this rating and these plans for his future?

 

 

 

 

Rated by: ........... Date

 

Reviewed with General Supt.:

 

Genl. Supt's Comments:

 

 

 

 

 

Route original copy to Div. Mgr. of Stores Operations

 

than to Personnel Dept. (for filing in employee's personal record).

Dist. Supt. should keep a cepy of this rating in his personnel files.

II

 

//

 

Form 3039

EMPLOYEE APPRAISAL
CLERK’S RESERVE GROUP

PERSONAL DATA

Name
last first middle

Present Class # Since Store #

 

 

 

 

 

CAPACITY FOR ADVANCEMENT

l. After appraising the above employee on the following pages. and after discussing the appraisal with him. fill in the following. Consider the
factors of age. health. overall ability. as well as the results of the appraisal.

A. POTENTIALITY FOR ADVANCEMENT—possesses capacity to assume greater responsibility.
D Can be considered immediately promotable to a position in the next level of responsibility.

I: Can be considered capable of assuming greater responsibility after training.

B. DOUBTFUL CAPACITY FOR ADVANCEMENT

I
Performing satisfactorily on this iob and well suited to it but probably more suited to this work or similar responsibility than to a
D position of greater responsibility.

C. ACTION RECOMMENDED:

 

 

II. A. If this man has potentiality for advancement. what. in your opinion. is his next step ahead?

 

B. Does this man have further potential beyond the next step?........-........................-.

If yes. for what position?

 

C. Is there any other work. regardless of department. for which you feel this man would be qualified?

 

Ill. Is there any condition of a business. personal or other nature which would limit this man's flexibility for advancement or relocation? ...........................

If yes. explain

 

Is this condition temporary or permanent?

 

 

 

 

 

 

' RECOMMENDATION
The above named clerk should be....-..........._.................added to I
................................... continued in the Reserve Group.
................................... removed 'from i
District Supt-
General Supt.
This recommendation is ............................. approved

by the Division Manager of Stores Operations
.............................. disapproved

To be effective

Div. Mgr-

 

 

Two copies of this form should be sent to the Division Manager of Stores Operations for approval. He will keep one and return one to the
District Superintendent.

If the employee is now in or is being recommended for the Reserve Group. this form should be used in lieu of Merit Rating Form 3037.

PERSONALITY

 

APPEARANCE

Definition: The look of cleanliness. neatness and general good grooming.

E) Occasionally appears sloppy. Dishevelad hair. Hands unclean.

E] Satisfactory appearance. Usas normal care in grooming.

D Takes pride in appearance. hair neatly combed. Clean-shavan. Clothes clean. Exercises care with store uniform.

E) Exceptionally neat. Vary favorable affect on customers and fellow employees.

Since last appraisal: Appearance has ............... Improved; a. .......... Not changed: ................ Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):

 

 

 

HEALTH

Definition: The state of being sound in body and mind.

Below average health. Explain:

 

Loses little time because of health. Has normal physical and mental vigor.

Wall and hearty. Possessas reserve energy. both physical and mental. Well adiusted—calm in emergencies.

DUDE]

Health and vigor stimulating to others. Never tires. Almost always relaxed.

Since last appraisal: Health has .. ........... Improved: ._ ....... mNot Changed: ...............Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):._...._y

 

 

 

CHARACTER
Definition: The possession of the principles of right and wrong—honesty. sincerity. loyalty. and ethics.
D Fundamentally honest. sincere and loyal. with good reputation. Conversation is clean.
D Thoroughly dependable. honest. sincere. Does not side-step blame. High degree of integrity.
D Scrupulously honest and loyal. Has moral courage. Highly respected. Work can be absolutely depended upon.

Since last appraisal: Character has ............... Improved: ............... Not changed: ............... Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):... a.--"

 

 

 

Assume that the boxes represent "Average." "Very Good." and "Outstanding." Check the most appropriate. Cross out or modify inappropriate
words or phrases that appear in that block. Underscore words or phrases appearing in other blocks that aptly describe the employee.

PERSONALITY 84

 

ATTITUDE TOWARD OTHERS
Definition: Ability to get along with others and maintain their respect and confidence.

Reasonably considerate and helpful. May have an occasional "off day." but generally acceptable. Usually receptive to suggestions.
D Greets people with a smile. Controls temper.

U Willing and eager to please. Works in harmony with others. Adaptable and tactful. Usually friendly. Cooperative. Smiles a lot.

E] Well liked by everyone. Very courteous and considerate. Almost always friendly and smiling. Goes "out of his way" to be helpful.

Since last appraisal: Attitude has ....-.........lmproved: - ......... Not changed: -.............Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be spacific):--......-...

 

 

 

 

 

AMBITION
Definition: The desire for honor. superiority and attainment.
D Has some personal desires to succeed. Wants to improve his standard of living. Has average motivation.
I] Continually seeking greater responsibilities. Eager to please. Enioys competition. Working to qualify for next iob ahead.

Has strong desire to acquire recognition and advancement and acts toward these ends without sacrificing performance standards. Vary
D energetic and industrious. '

Since last appraisal: Ambition has ............... Improved: ...............Not changed: ............... Gone back. Recommendation for improvement (be specific):......_.........

 

 

INITIATIVE. RESOURCEFULNESS. ENTHUSIASM
Definition: Energy or aptitude to originate action and follow through in the absence of instructions.
D Will voluntarily take action in normal situations. Can handle ordinary problems. but requires frequent supervision.
D Resourceful in handling most situations. Requires little supervision. Self-confident.
D Very self-reliant. persistent. positive. Usually successful in overcoming problems. Enthusiatic.

Since last appraised: Initiative has ............... Improved: ............... Not changed: ............... Gone back. Recommendations for improvements (be specific):...............

 

 

‘
k

Assume that the boxes represent "Average." "Very Good." and "Outstanding." Check the most appropriate. Cross out or modify inappropriate
words or phrases that appear in that block. Underscore words or phrases appearing in other blocks that aptly describe the employee.

PERFORMANCE

 

KNOWLEDGE OF THE JOB
Definition: The understanding of basic fundamentals. techniques. and procedures of the iob.

E) Satisfactorily acquainted with his job. Scope of experience and training is limited. Knows enough about I or 2 other (obs to be useful on
them in a pinch.

D Well informed. Needs assistance only occasionally. .Useful on several different (obs.

Thorough knowledge of basic fundamentals. techniques and procedures of the iob. Wide knowledge of most all iobs he is likely to be
E) involved in. Makes the most of his skill and experience.

How long has he been in his present type of work: ................ Less than 6 months: ................ 6 mos. to I year: .................I to 2 years: .............,....Over 2 years.

Since last appraisal: Knowledge has ...............lmproved: ............... Not changed: ...............Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):

 

 

 

 

 

QUALITY OF WORK
Definition: The efficient use of time for maximum productivity.
D Average worker. Works steadily. Shows ordinary interest and application in his iob. Does little work not specifically assigned.
[:1 Fast. efficient worker. Always does a full day's work. Keeps busy with out close supervision.
E] Exceptionally industrious .nd conscientious in work. on... himself hard. Usually a... more it... i. expected

Since last appraisal: Quantity has ............... Improved: ...............Not changed: .....,.........Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):.._.m.-_

 

 

QUALITY OF WORK

Definition: Ability to perform accurately. neatly and completely all the duties of the iob.
[3 Work usually passable. Some wasted effort. but most details satisfactorily attended to.

E] Usually thorough. Few errors. Careful. neat worker.

High degree of usefulness. Errors extremely rare. Exceptionally neat and orderly. Very thorough in attending to details without wasted
E] effort. Consistently does outstanding work.

Since last appraisal: Quality has ...............|mproved; ............... Not changed: ............... Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):....,..-..-.a....

 

 

 

.
i
_

Assume that the boxes represent "Average." "Very Good." and "Outstanding." Check the most appropriate. Cross out or modify inappropriate
words or phrases that appear in that block. Underscore words or phrases appearing in other blocks that aptly describe the employee.

Psnronmnucs 85

 

DEPENDABILITY

Definition: Extent to which employee can be counted on to carry out all instructions conscientiously. report on time. stay on the (ob and fulfill
responsibilities.

D Usually prompt and dependable. Average supervision required. Tries to follow instructions carefully.

E] Can be counted on for successful completion of work. A reliable and willing worker. Rarely needs any follow-up. Tries to be careful.

Deserves utmost confidence. Very little need to check work. Practically no time lost (3 days or less in 6 month period). Follows instructions
I] conscientiously. '

Since last appraisal: Dependability has ...............|mproved: ...............Not changed: .............. Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):

 

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

Definition: The intelligence and thought used in arriving at decisions. The ability to think and act calmly. logically and rapidly.

D Jumps at conclusions. Makes decisions on matters which should be referred to supervisor. His conclusions often need correcting.

Judgment dependable on matters of routine nature. Can usually be relied upon in normal situations. Adequate iudgmant for a satisfactory
[3 performance.

D Uses good common sense. Most decisions acceptable. Generally logical.

E] Sound iudgmant. Decisions based on thorough analysis. Consistently accurate in making wise decisions.

Since last appraisal: Judgment has ............. Improved: - ............ Not changed: ............... Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific): ...............

 

 

 

 

 

 

LEARNING ABILITY

Definition: Ability to learn quickly and to remember what is learned. Ease of adiustment to a new iob.

D Requires average instruction to do satisfactory work. Routine worker. Follows instructions wall. but seldom thinks for himself.

D Learns easily. Good memory. Grasps new ideas with minimum amount of instructions. Tries to plan work and suggests occasional improve-
ments. ~

D Catches on quickly. Seldom forgets. Needs little or no instruction. Plans work effectively.

Since last appraisal: Learning ability has ............... Improved: .............. Not changed: . .............. Gone back. Recommendation for improvement (be specific):

 

 

 

Assume that the boxes represent "Average." "Very Good." and "Outstanding." Check the most appropriate. Cross out or modify inappropriate
words or phrases that appear in that block. Underscore words or phrases appearing in other blocks that aptly describe the employee.

APPRAISAL SUMMARY
and
PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT*

 

In the light of the appraisal on the preceding pages. what are the individual's . . . STRONG CHARACTERISTICS?

 

 

 

AREAS REQUIRING IMPROVEMENT IN ABILITY?

 

 

 

Are there any limiting factors such as health. habits or character that would impede his results in carrying out greater rasponsibilities?....-.....-....-..... If "Yes."

explain:

 

 

 

TRAINING PLANS

 

To improve the individual in his present assignment or for advancement. what SPECIFIC training recommendations do you have?

 

 

 

 

 

DISCUSSION WITH THE INDIVIDUAL

 

What does he hope to achieve within the company? We

 

What is he doing to improve himself both personally and in relation to his present position? _-

 

 

As a result of your discussion. list the immediate steps or plans you have agreed upon for the individual's improvement

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appraisal discussed with
the individual by Position Date

 

 

"'All men resent being told they are doing a poor iob. but they welcome being told how to do better."

Form 3040

86
EMPLOYEE APPRAISAL

MANAGERS’ RESERVE GROUP

PERSONAL DATA

Name

 

 

 

 

CAPACITY FOR ADVANCEMENT

I. After appraising the above employee on the following pages. and after discussing the appraisal with him. fill in the following. Consider the
factors of age. health. overall ability. as well as the results of the appraisal.

A. POTENTIALITY FOR ADVANCEMENT—possesses capacity to assume greater responsibility.
D Can be considered immediately promotable to a position in the next level of responsibility.

D Can be considered capable of assuming greater responsibility after training.

B. DOUBTFUL CAPACITY FOR ADVANCEMENT

Performing satisfactorily on this iob and well suited to it but probably more suited to this work or similar responsibility than to a
D position of greater responsibility.

C. ACTION RECOMMENDED:

 

 

II. A. If this man has potentiality for advancement. what. in your opinion. is his next step ahead?

 

I. Does this man have further potential beyond the next step?m....m..-........m.........

If yes. for what position?

 

 

C. Is there any other work. regardless .of department. for which you feel this man would be qualified?

III. Is there any condition of a business. personal or other nature which would limit this man's flexibility for advancement or relocation?......_...-..............

If yes. explain

 

 

Is this condition temporary or permanent?

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION
The above named manager should be :c'dcc' to I
continued in the Reserve Group.
.......-.............-..-.-....removed from I
General Supt
This recommendation is ............................ approved

by the Division Vice President and Division Manager of Stores Operations.
......--..................disapproved

To be effective

 

 

 

 

Two copies of this form should be sent to the Division Manager of Stores Operations for approval. He will keep one and return one to the
District Superintendent.

If the employee is now in or is being recommended for the Reserve Group. this form should be used in lieu of Merit Rating Form 3038.

pan'sounurv

 

CHARACTER
Definition: The possession of the principles of right and wrong—honesty. sincerity. loyalty. and ethics.
D Fundamentally honest. sincere and loyal. with good reputation. Generally applies rules of the game.

D Rarely shows partiality or preiudice. Thoroughly dependable. honest. sincere and tolerant. Does not side-step blame. High degree of
integrity.

D Highly respected for fairness. Scrupulously honest and loyal. Has moral courage.

Since last appraisal: Character has ................ Improved: Not changed: l.....-....-....Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):

 

 

 

HEALTH

Definition: The state of being sound in body and mind.
D Below average health. Explain:
D Loses little time because of health. Has normal physical and mental vigor.

U Well and hearty. Possesses reserve energy. both physical and mental. Well adiusted.

U Health and vigor stimulating to others. Never tires.

 

Since last appraisal: Health has.........-......lmproved: .................Not changed: -.......-......Gone beck. Recommendations for improvement (be specific): _

 

 

 

EMOTIONAL STABILITY

Definition: The ability to control emotional expression and behavior.

E] Usually retains even keel. Emotional outbursts infrequent. Appears to possess a sense of humor.

D Maintains good behavior balance in most situations. Has a good sense of humor. Calm in emergencies.

E] Salt-possessed. Outstanding ability to adiust self to personalities and circumstances. Excellent sence of humor. Almost always relaxed.

Since last appraisal: Stability has ................ -lmproved: .................. Not changed: .................. Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specificlsw.

 

 

 

Assume that the boxes represent "Average." "Very Good." and "Outstanding." Check the most appropriate. Cross out or modify inappropriate
words or phrases that appear in that block. Underscore words or phrases appearing in other blocks that aptly describe the employee.

PERSONALITY

 

VISION
Definition: The ability to formulate new ideas. utilizing facts and past experiences. and to see future possibilities.
D .Usually considers all implications and possibilities. Thinks ahead on routine tasks.
D Open-minded. Alert in seeking new facts. Quick to grasp situations.
D Keen searching mentality. Extremely resourceful in developing new ideas. Plans ahead on regular and special tasks.

Since last appraisal: Vision has.............m.lmproved: ......-_......Not changed: .-..............Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):....._.......

 

 

 

 

AMBITION
Definition: The desire and will for preferment. honor. superiority. power and attainment.
D Has some personal desires to succeed. Wants to improve his standard of living. Has average motivation.
E] Continually seeking greater responsibilities. Eager to please. Enioys competition. Working to qualify for a higher position.

Has a strong desire to acquire recognition and advancement. and acts toward these ends without sacrificing performance standards. Very
D energetic and industrious.

Since last appraisal: Ambition has..-.............|mproved: ............m...Not changed: m..............Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):......

 

 

 

INITIATIVE
Definition: Energy or aptitude to originate action and carry out decisions. Courage to defend principles and conclusions.
El Generally exhibits strength of will and force in taking action on problems having a normal pattern. otherwise hesitant and cautious.

Resourceful in handling most situations. Self-starter. Persistent and positive. Faces facts squarely with conviction. Usually decisive in dif-
(:l ficult problems.

D Dynamic. independent and original. Assumes active leadership and is generally "one step ahead." Makes prompt decisions and backs them up.

Since last appraisal: Initiative has.-.......-......lmproved: ..-.......-.....Not changed: .................Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):....-

 

 

 

Assume that the boxes represent "Average." "Very Good." and "Outstanding." Check the most appropriate. Cross out or modify inappropriate
words or phrases that appear in that block. Underscore words or phrases appearing in other blocks that aptly describe the employee.

PERFORMANCE

 

KNOWLEDGE OF THE JOE
Definition: The understanding of basic fundamentals. techniques and procedures of his iob.
[j Satisfactorily acquainted with his function. Scope of experience and training limited.
D Practical knowledge of function above average. Well-informed on many maior new developments.
C] Thorough knowledge of basic fundamentals. Techniques ml procedures fortified by mud»... Outstanding grasp of future developments.

Since last appraisal: Knowledge has...............lmproved: .............-.Not changed; ...... ..... Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):

 

 

 

JOB PERFORMANCE
Definition: Application to iob at hand and resultant productivity.
U Applies himself favorably to most problems. Generally productive. Some wasted effort. but most functions satisfactorily attended to.
D Does a very satisfactory iob. Has good work capacity and commendable attitude. Few errors. Usually thorough.

Quality and quantity of work outstanding. Has large capacity and ability for original application. Errors rare. Thorough in attending to
details without wasted effort. Exceptionally industrious and conscientious.

Since last appraisal: Performance has.-.............lmproved: ............... Not changed: .................Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):

 

 

 

ORGANIZING ABILITY

Definition: Ability to arrange for the accomplishment of his iob responsibility in an orderly. efficient manner. Selection of right personnel to
fit iob requirements. training and development of these personnel. delegation of responsibility and authority to get the iob done.

C] Some attempt at delegation on normal routine affairs. Needs guidance on maior changes. Normally trains satisfactorily.

Successful in apportioning work load effectively. Needs little guidance in coordinating maior efforts. Appraises personnel rather accurately
D and builds efficient organization.

Delegates authority very effectively. Recognizes broad obiectives clearly and arranges for most effective accomplishment. Keen ability to
D select and develop subordinates. Efficient use of time.

Since last appraisal: Org. Ability has ...............|mproved: .-............Not changed: -....-..........Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):

 

 

Assume that the boxes represent "Average." "Very Good." and "Outstanding." Check the most appropriate. Cross out or modify inappropriate
words or phrases that appear in that block. Underscore words or phrases appearing in other blocks that aptly describe the employee.

PERFORMANCE 88

 

ABILITY TO INSPIRE AND INFLUENCE OTHERS

Definition: The faculty of inspiring others by conveying ideas and plans. and influencing them to greater determination and unity of purpose.

Conventional in manner. spirit and enthusiasm. Conveys Ideas but does not motivate entire group. Reasonably considerate and helpful.
Controls temper. Usually receptive to suggestions.

D Stimulates others. Employees enioy working with him. Adaptable and tactful. Cooperative. Works in harmony with the group.

Expresses self effectively. Commands high respect. Knows how to criticise and when to praise. High inspirational qualities. Gets excel-
D lent teamwork. Very courteous and considerate.

Since last appraisal: Influence has .................. Improved: ...........-.....Not changed: .................. Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

Definition: The intelligence and thought used in arriving at decisions. The ability to think and act calmly. logically and rapidly.

Judgment dependable on matters of routine nature. Can usually be relied upon in normal situations. Adequate iudgment for satisfactory
[3 performance.

[3 Picks out important facts and arrives at correct conclusions. Open- minded. Uses good common sense. Most decisions acceptable. Gen-
erally logical.

D Sound iudgment. Decisions based on thorough analysis. Consistently accurate in making wise decisions.

Since last appraisal: Judgment has .................. Improved: .................. Not changed: ..................Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):

 

 

 

RESPONSIBILITY

Definition: The willingness to assume and discharge functions of management.

D Generally accepts and discharges delegated responsibility willingly. Requires only general supervision.

U Willingly accepts obligations. Requires only minimum follow-up. Sticks with problem to satisfactory conclusion.

D Seeks additional responsibility and authority. Manages functions in an outstanding manner. Unruffled in the face of consequences.

Since last appraisal: Responsibility has ................. Improved: --..............Not changed: .................. Gone back. Recommendations for improvement (be specific):

 

 

Assume that the boxes represent' '."Average "Very Good." and "Outstanding. " Check the most appropriate. Cross out or modify inappropriate
words or phrases that appear in that block. Underscore words or phrases appearing in other blocks that aptly describe the employee.

APPRAISAL SUMMARY
and
PLAN FOR DEVELOPMEN‘I'*

 

In the light of the appraisal on the preceding pages. what are the individual's.. .STRONG MANAGEMENT CHARACTERISTICS?

 

 

 

AREAS REQUIRING IMPROVEMENT IN MANAGEMENT ABILITY?

 

 

'

Are there any limiting factors such as health. habits or character that would impede his results in carrying out greater responsibilities?..._..........lf "Yes.’I

explain:

 

 

TRAINING PLANS

To improve the individual in his present assignment or for advancement. what SPECIFIC training recommendations do you have?

 

 

 

 

 

 

DISCUSSION WITH THE INDIVIDUAL

What does he hope to achieve within the company?

 

 

 

What is he doing to improve himself both personally and in relation to his present position?

 

 

 

As a result of your discussion. list the immediate steps or plans you have agreed upon for the individual's improvement and development...................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appraisal discussed with
the individual by Position Date

"'All men resent being told they are doing a poor iob. but they welcome being told how to do better."

89

FIRST NATIONAL STORES

Store Employees Quarterly Rating

First National Stores has a very concise rating form
which is confined to one page, thereby keeping the rating
time to a minimum. Its important features are:

1. Total point score is determined. Yearly averages
for each individual trait and total quarterly scores are
figured.

2. Half of the employee traits are weighted 50 percent
heavier than the other half.

5. Section for comments provided after each trait and
at the bottom of the form.

4. Employees rated quarterly by their immediate super-
visor.

5. Previous ratings can be observed during each sub-
sequent rating, which may result in rater influence.

6. Fewer than average number of traits are used, and
without trait definitions, a rating manual would be requir-

ed.

9O
STORE EMPLOYEES QUARTERLY RATNG

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lea muse First We Social Security Nutter
Home address City State Phone No. Date or 5%
I
1 -
3
Former Employers Address Date Started Date Left Reason
Nah — Penile Single-Married-Widow-Divorccd
Sex Marital Status No. of Dependents
Es: Employed Avg. Wk. Hrs. Po-sifiITo Shore Address

 

 

 

 

 

 

RATINGS Yurly Yuty Coll-use
A . A
g: g 5 z I S S 4 'I l 3 S 4 VI.
massive 15 12 9 's
m 15 I? 9 6

 

Adaptability 151296

 

Dependability151296

 

Mermancelosot

 

Wlosss

 

Corleone-1086‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coopu'etionlosod

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Supervisor SUPerintefldent 5.7.52-5M Lee was

FIGURBL IV. FIRST NATIONAL STOI‘ES

91

GRAND UNION COMPANY

Personnel Progress Report

Grand Union has only recently begun to rate its store
employees. The significant aSpects of their rating plan are
as follows:

1. A total point score is computed, with individual
scores for each trait.

2. All traits weighted the same except "friendliness"
which has twice the weight of other traits.

3. Pertinent questions under each trait, concerning job
performance, help the rater determine the rating and provide
discussion material for the interview.

4. Each employee rated by his immediate supervisor,
usually every six months.

Because the Grand Union Company has expanded rapidly in
recent years, it has used a rating plan so that they might

promote as much as possible from within their own organization.

92

 

 

 

m II.’
“A” W"
m PROGRESS I”! TOTAL SCORE—.—
Ngmn Rating Date
How long with How long has he Rated
the Company? worked for you? By

 

EXPLANATION: In order that we may know the progress being made by an employee working under your direction. we ask
that you carefully and obiectively rate him on this form. Before rating a man on any trait. be sure to read carefully the de-
scriptive phrases appearing below the line indicating various degrees of the trait. Then check the box which. in your opinion.
fairly and accurately measures the individual's standing. and place the score in the "score" box.

Alter you have placed your check in the box. answer the questions regarding the trait. These questions should be
answered yes. no. not always. sometime. maybe. or with a question mark. Wherever possible. you should use a yes or no reply.
After completing the form. kindly place the total score in the right hand corner of this report.

MAKIRAOIWASMYAIDASOIICTIVELYASYOUCAN
I. m:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1D I4 I 2 0 SCORE
Wanda-fl. Menace-neon. Cooleed Occasionally Haegfly Seldomslniiu
my” Ineetettbetime Reserved ereetrtendly Untrlendtytype
Does he smile easily?__._...________Doos he have a friendly helpful attitude toward customers?....__._....__.._._.Does he
handle customers complaints in an understanding and courteous manner?_....-.-...._.--.......Does he make friends easily?

Does he work well with others in the store?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. Am
ID 7 4 I 0 SCORE
M “ w Welcomes sage-Ite- Aeceptable Net very ceeeeretlve Disloval
tee see-I verse: and cued-a Ne prebtem Sometimes aInIc-II Mose-H's
Is he pleasant and willing?_..._.__Does he work well with others?..._._._____._ls he open-minded regarding sug-
gestions and criticisms? Is he approachable and likable?___,_.......ls he a difficult individual with which to work?_-.
3. QUANTITY OF WORK:
l0 7 4 I 0 SCORE
haunt... be. Is- I. Ietow Heat 5. prodded
i7... is west “.3“ III. W w eats... WU,
Does this man do his share of work?...._............_...ls he lazy?mMust he be told what to do all the time?._...._...-.._

Does he stand around idle? Does he show initiative in keeping store clean?..._._
told?..__..___._.Does he work hard and consistently?..-........__...

Is he prompt to do as he is

 

 

 

4. QUALITY OF WORK:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ID 7 4 I 0 SCORE
“1 Above average fleets normal Frequent errors
III-leu— or"; quality Imam. u” ""“"' WastefeI—sllpshod
Does this man measure up to Grand Union high standards for quality of work?i______._..Does he handle customers
courleously and in a friendly manner?_..__....__...-Does he accept and respect Company policies? .._.....Is he conscious

 

-._..-.ls he accwate on detail work. such

of expenses?._______..Do you feel he is doing his work as well as he can?_._..
as credits. bookkeeping?--...._.. Must he be told repeatedly to do the same thing? ..... _.___.

 

 

FIGURE V. GRAIIED UNION COLIPMIY

93

RJOIKNOWLEDGE:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ID 7 4 l 0 SCORE
Her e-I-eI-II era-e wen lab-ea .- Has m Slaw In ass-rue. Hes net ere-ea
e: «no lee mad a! see sue-Ice.- assen- at essence hem
Is he satisfactorily assimilating the various details of the operation?_______Has he demonstrated that he can profit
from experienca?_.__..._..._.._Has he continued to acquire knowled9e7mHas he learned all he should have about the
business for the time he has been with us?.._....._....__.._Do you think he has made better than average progress in learning the
business?

I. PERSONALFITI'ESSFORTI'EJOB:

 

 

lo 1 e I o scone
lane-deflect Cealdedhatbe Whats She-Heat
enunc- wllwartaet Anne- evil-alien! ass-er

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As a result of your experience with this man. do you feel he belongs in our business?...._...._..._Do you think he likes
the business?....___...__._Does he ever give the impression he is "above" the iob?.....__..._._....ls he interested in display and
merchandising?_.._..____....._ls he capable of setting up displays well? Would you consider him a good
merchant?

 

7. PERSONALAPPEARAIICE:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ID 7 4 I 0 SCORE
m m m... Oaaerallyedld' ,MIII I
Does he shove daily?.__.__..___._Hair well groomed? Hands and nails clean? Shoes

 

 

clean?___.__General clean cut appearance?________..._Does he observe the rules of personal hygiene?..._............_..._..
Does he wear clothes practical and suitable for the work being performed7WRegardless of the type clothes worn.
are they neat and clean?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S. JUDGMBITs
I0 7 S I 0 SCORE
win" nee-em Aer-WI- WW Deasnat
may... Usaew ardaarydncasniaacas aadarratic “tram

 

 

Does he think well and logically?...__...._..._..Do you believe his iudgment would be dependable under stress?.._...-......_-
Does he tend to iump to conclusions? ___...Does he express opinions freely without much evidence?__......._..__......ls he
really a thorough thinker?

 

9. POSSISIUTY FOR FUTURE GROWTH:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ID 7 4 l 0 SCORE
w a... I“... Ho «note. he a. no
will WWW.“ above average“ APraepactm confidence“ m...“ '.'
Does he appear to be ambitious to get ahead?____._.._.._______ls he a good leader?__.__...__._.._ls he imaginative7...
Does he accept responsibility?._......_._.__........_..Should he be promoted?__._.___.__lf so. to what position?

If not ready for promotion. state in General Remarks Section the reasons why not. In your estimation. how long
will it be before he will be ready for promotion?

Remarks:

 

 

Signature of person rated

94

HENKE AND PILLOT, INCORPORATED

Factual Appraisal Report

This chain has a very comprehensive rating form, in which
the first page is reviewed with the employee and signed by him.
The second page is then filled out by the store manager and
sent to the personnel department. Its important features
are:

1. Two traits, numbers 10 and 11, provide for the rat-
ing of supervisory employees, thereby giving the form more
flexibility.

2. A total score is computed, with a possible grade of
90 for the clerks and 110 for the department managers. This
score is computed at the office and is not revealed to the
employee during the interview.

5. Each trait and its subdivisions are thoroughly de-
fined on the rating form to ensure uniform interpretation
by the raters.

4. Second page provides adequate Space for additional
rater comments and plans for future action.

5. Ratings made by the store manager every six months.

95

L ode 029101 FACTUAL APPRAISAL. REPORT

HENKE IND PILLOT. INC.

 

Linnaeus-(N Name Salary 1

[Store No. Date of Last Increase

 

 

Job TIIle [Sc—a.

, i____ 1

Code Amount Last Inc rease

 

 

 

THE FOLLOWING GENERAL DEFINI‘I‘DNS APPLY TO EACH FAC'IOR RATED BELOW:
(Thu Is the basic standard for ram any factor below)

UNSATISFAC‘I‘ORY: The employee's performance wIth respect to a
IacIor Is deIIcIenI enoqh to justify release from present lob unless
Improvement In made.

FAIR: The employee's performance wIth respect toafactor Is below

0000: The employee's performance with respect to a factor meets
the job requirements as the job In defined at the time of rating.

VERY GOOD: The employee's performance with respect to a factor
In beyond the ordinary requlrements for good performance for the

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the requirements for the job and must Improve to be sattsfactory. lob.

RATE 0N FACTORS BELOW UNSATISFACTORY FAIR GOOD VERY GOOD

LQUAN‘I'ITY OF WORK: Output Inadequate to OIRpIn below job re- Outpm ssxlsfles job OIdpsI asceads satis-

A. Volume of work regularly pro- retain In job withoia qulrements. requlremcnts. factory job require-
duced. Improvement. mans.
B. Speed and consistency of output.
C. Sales (Personal)
p, I.-- , __ a , __- .

2. QUALITY OF WORK: Extent to Quality too poor to - Work below standard Work satisfies Quality huh. work very
which work produced meets reIaIrI In job wIthoIs quallty requirements. quality requlrements. well done.

Quality requirements of accuracy, Improvement. C) |j E] D
thoroughness. and effectiveness.

3. DEPENDABILITY: Extent to chh Too Issrellable to re- Not fully dependable. Can be rellad on to Enceea mmal lob ra-
employee can be counted on to Info In job withom fulfill lob hmands. qulramaua.
carry om Instructions. report on Improvement. [3 D C]
tIme. stay on the )0b, and fulfill
responsibilities.

4. JOB ATTITUDE: Amount of In- Attltude too poor to Attitude needs Im- Favorable or nc- ngh degree of amhusI—
teress and enthusiasm shown In retafn In job wtthod povemem so be nc- capable mutuda. ss- ud Ines-am.
work. Improvement. D capable. [:1 D

p a.

5. ADAPTABILI‘I’Y: Extent to chh Range of duties per- Performs somewhat Performs full rsue C- perform all :1 the
employee Is able to perform va- formed too Ilnuted IIInIted range of re- of ordInary job re- raqnfred ad many of
rIety of assignments wIthIn scope to totals In job wIIh- qulred Mes. qulrements. the nasal tats wffhln
of job duties. on Improvement. C] scope of job. [3

I“

6. JOB KNOWLEDGE: Extent of job Enowlefie Inadequate Lacks requfred [nowlate sstfsfles Very well Informed on
Information and MEMII‘ to retaln In job wIIh- knowlecke. ordinary lob requlra- all fitness of work.
possessed by employee In hand- on Improvement. E] C] moms. E]
III; merchandlse. eqqumasR and
paperwork.

7. INITIATIVE: Extent to whlch em- Lacks sufficient In— Lacks InltIsIIve to Exes-class snow! of ‘ Essrclses Inttfmfve he-
ployee performs job wIthom walt- Itlaslve to retaln In nttaln requlrad jot. Initiative raqulrad ymd Job rsflrm
In to be told or shown what to do. lob wtfhod lmprwe- objectlve. by the job.

I. COURTESY a chERAmN: Relaun- be Insf- Does not always Inlmalns effective Ability m b sor-
Eatent to which employee ethbIts fectlve to resale In set ales; well wlfh worm; relations msl job reqnfremsds.
courtesy and cooperation with lots wlthod lme- others; Irrltaflu. wIth others. Fully Goes 0d of way to on-
customers. eo-worners and others. most. not cooperative. E] cooperative. operate. C]

O. PERwflAL APPEARANCE: Inadequate so retsln Does not fully meet Good appsnruce. W

In preaem job. requiremems In m fulfill-lam
[resent job. [3 D of lab rag-Iran‘s. [3
Please Note: Only Department Manager. aore Manager. Buyers. and aupervfsors wIlI be rated on plus 10 and II.
to. OPERATIKE EFFICIENCY or Inndsqmte to ressln Does not fully meet Good perms-ea of limerlor fnlflllmd
UNIT: to present lob. requlremems In III. of Job reanrenseds.
A. Gross Proflt Performance resell Job.
8. Supply Expense Control
C. Herchandlse Follow-W
D. Unlt Housekeemq
I. Salary Control
If. LEADERSHIP: AbIIIty to lead Inadequate to retaln Does not fully meet ”lattes lob raqnlre- hpsrtor to normal job
and traln subordlnates. In present lob. D requIrements In E] ments. D reqntrensems. U
posed lob.

 

Note: FILL WT BACK OF FORM. WTAN‘I'II

FIGURE VI .

HbNKn AND PILLOT,

“ems
31v

- o:<.‘ .O“ ‘r‘.
VIPs/Malian,

.1.‘

 

1. Has employee shown any outstanding accomplishments or abilities in performing his
work? What are they?

2. Whatis employee doing atpresent toimprove himself, suchas attending school, studying
at home, etc. ?

3.Whatis employee doing at present as an active participant and' contributor tocommutity
activities such as civic and charitable organisations? (Applies to store managers and
group managers only.)

4. General Comments.

AC TION

C] Leave on present job
(Recommend action for improvement such as Training, Charge of attitude, Change in
pay, Encouragement, etc. )

 

[3 Put on probation: Until what date?

 

[:1 Replace: E] Promote to ___
E] Transfer to job of same classification
[:1 Terminate
When should recommended action be taken? __ _

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Check the current D Immedime Promotable DQuestionable Because New
status of this D Promotable Elvnsatisfactory
Individual: D Satisfactory on present job
APPRAISAL MADE BY: . REVIEWED BY:
Store Manager _ __ Group Manager ___
or
Group Ilsnager Division Manager._-.
or
Division Manager Personnel Director

 

The Factual, Operating andMerchandising Performance sections of this report have been
discussed with the employee by

 

Name Title
(Salary changes are not to be discussed with employee until approved.)

Name __mo_._ ,_._ _-..-. __s-fi_ _. . , , Title H-

 

97

THE KROGER COMPANY

Improvement Guide for Store Employees

The Kroger Company has been one of the most ardent sup-
porters of merit rating at all levels of personnel. The
rating of store employees has been in effect for a number
of years, and although its use is Optional for each of its
branches, it has received good acceptance.

An important point to note in the Kroger rating form is
the presentation of employee traits. There are three general
traits listed with six to nine associated traits under each
of the three general headings. These traits are presented in
short phrases which effectively projects the intended meaning,
thereby eliminating the need of trait definitions. These
traits give a very sharp and accurate description of job per-
formance so as to pinpoint observation.

Other important features of the Kroger form are:

1. Only three trait subdivisions; however, adequate
Space for any qualifying remarks is provided.

2. Special section for the rating of department heads
with objective Operating data concerning percent of sales and
gross profit.

5. No final rating is given to employee; instead they
are ranked in order from "best" to "poorest" by each store
manager. Employee sees rating form but not ranking sheet.

4. Entire page provides space for comments and future
plans.

5. Employees are rated yearly by the store manager.

98

noon
mom 61113 FOR STORI muss

NAME AG. 8!! sum
JOB CIASSIFICATION DIST. mu
JOB ASSIGWI‘ HOW L016 HAVE you surnames) THIS mom?

 

 

HOV To USE CREEK LIST: To review Job performance, place an "I" in the left hand col-
umn opposite those points on which improvement is needed. "I” strong points in the

right hand column. Check other points in the middle column. In the "Rourke" section
cement on his strong points and those on which improvement is needed. Use dates, em

plesI figuresletc. to illustrate your Eintx Check only points which apply to his Job.

30-!
fig:
0
0 E
>Ilev-I
sea
9.
EH
HO

PERSONALITY

Getting along with customers REMARKS:
Friendliness

Cheerfulness and optimism in outlook
. Neatness and cleanliness in
persoml appearance

Getting along with fellow workers
Effectiveness as a team member
Winning cooperation from others
Taking the lead with others

Getting slow with his supervisors

' Seeking and accepting responsibility
Accepting new ideas

Interest in selling m;
Being punctual and on the Job

at all times

Displaying pep and energy

Displaying enthusiasm for his work

Interest in a career with Kroger

Interest in self-development

Hakim constructive suggestions

Willingness to learn

Following through on training

   
 
   

 

 

 

Mg
Handling work with limited supervisioq REMARKS:
Participating in sales promotions
Accuracy of work and am to mils
Elimimting waste

Eliminating safety hazards
Maintaining quality and freshness of
product

Keeping his work area clean and neat
Making things convenient for Mrs.Smith
Being helpful to Mrs. Smith

 

 

 

\.

FIG"RE VII. THE KROGER CCLLEANY

II. MPOIIBOIEIBPABAPPLYNALLIEPARMMHEAIB. CECEAILPOINBHEICHAPPIZ:

 

M

DEPARTMENT HEAD
RESPONSIBIUTIES

Using sales plans to best sdvantagc__ _

Fleming and following through on
in-store prasotions

Gui-tins proven-13
Pricing nsrehandise correctly _w_ M_

IMPROVE
our son now
| CCNPLIMENT

 

 

“‘.‘—- - "»_.._.-—. — — _

hintaininggoodsellingunits _____
fitting the axis- fra the clerks
under his supervision
hintaining good relations with
qloyees
“staining enthusiasm among
qloyees 1
Developing personnel"

 

 

COOperating with other
nts -_.
hintaining clean and inviting
depart-ant __ ,__.
Control of gross prof1t__-.,__.fi_,_u_

 

Control of all enemas in his
depart-em
hintaining adequate records
and reports
Care and nintensnos of tools
an! equipscnt ._ __
Following Branch and Cmpany
policies __ --. _ _ __

 

 

 

 

slum momma mm 512 mum mww:
Percent of. sales to total sales
—_—Rsnk in district: Upper 1/3 Middle 1/3 Lower 1/3

Pement of _ gross
"" ' " Rank in district: Upper 1/3 Middle 1/3 Imu- 1/3

 

Cunt on any special conditions affecting his perfomnce:

100

PLAN FOR IMPROVEMENT: (Agree on one or two points on which special effort will be made.
Under each point list definite steps which will be taken to accomplish improvement.)

COMMENTS BY EMPLOYEE: This guide has been fully discussed with me by N ~
. I would like to add the following comments:

 

 

 

Employee Date

commrrs BY STORE MANAGER: (To be completed after the performance review)

M and I have reviewed his performance on the Job and we have
fully discussed the above notes for development. I would like to add the following
comments and recommendations: (Be specific.)

 

Store Manager Date

COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF DISTRICT MANAGER:

I have reviewed this improvement
guide and would like to add the following comments:

 

District Manager Date

101

KROGER Page of

 

INVENTORY GP STORE PERSONNEL
STORE RATIRG SUMMARY SHEET

 

BRANCH - arm HAIL
RATEPs:

 

 

 

 

Store Manager District Manager

 

INSTRUCTIONS To THE RKTEBS: 0n the basis of all the facts known, enter the name of
each store employee opposite the description which best shows the ratere' Judgment of
his performance. While employees of several different Job levels may be listed on

this sheet, rate each employee with regard to the standards for his own Job level.
Use as many sheets as needed.

- 1L acrxou mamas

5 Present T . Change as hen?-
Description L_ Name I Job [A e thgggj 199¥§§?9%l§“b°“0';)
j- i
i
l

 

 

~— ~___._-—‘

Above average:
performance.§
Much strongeré
than most. :

I

u
.
I

 

Good, solid
performance. \
Able to do
the Job sat- l ‘
isfactorily.
Getting along
all right. 5

 

 

 

__-._...._ ._ _-__-_ _-

 

 

-t-mmv- ('1'; H' : 1?-“ ”‘94 " ‘ “Hi 'mA '&.'.'.""I' “wk: '

Needs improveL
ment. RCQuires
extra super- E I
vision.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

102
COMPANY X
Qualifications Inventory
NonrAdministrative Employee
This company is one of the large food chains in the
country. Up until the present time, its rating program for
store employees has been on an Optional basis, to be used
at the discretion of its various Operating Division.Managers.
In the near future, a rating program for store employees
will be established and it will be mandatory to rate all
employees once each year. This chain is preparing a rating
manual and planning to provide educational material to each
of its Divisions.
The important features of the form are:
1. Very concise, limited to one page.
2. Employee traits listed as descriptive phrases--
no definitions. 1/
3. More than average number of traits are used.
4. Final over-all rating presented in "adjective"

form, with previous report available at time of rating.

 

105

ouauncanons mvsmosv
NON-ADMINISTRATIVE EMPLOYEE

 

 

 

 

 

 

anus nut!" JOI TI n: nus as "(sent Jos 0"! U “u U-S- 5°C. “C- "0- 0"
(I'LOYEO causes us. us. so.
D luau
bowsloa was on canon" 0:31.. nun oa sauce RETAIL LOC. on out. DATE THIS '0-
cowuno

 

 

 

 

 

 

This For. Is To Be Used As An Aid In Evaluating The Present Performance Of All Full-Tins, Non-Abbistrative Employees.
Give Its Prep-stirs: As Ihich Cue ad Attention As You Would Like From This Employee If He Vere Rating You.

Consider Each Trait Sepatuely and Independently. Rate This Employee 0n Each Trait In Relnial To The Requ'rc-ents Of His
job and Ihat You Espect Of An Employee On His job — Not In Relation To The Performance Of Other E-ployees 01 His job.

The Care and Accuxy I'ith 'hich You Complete This Fora: I’ill Demine Its Value To You. To The Bufloye'e, and To The
Cos-pay. Rene-ter The Accuacy OI Your Ratings Reflects The Quality Of Your Judgment.

1
ALMOST sous uses!
NEVER nuts ”w‘LL' news

0

 

PRESENTS NEAT APPEARANCE
REPORTS TO WRK OI TI‘
COMPLIES “TN oouuuv POLIOES
EXNIII TS LOTS OF DRIVE

ROMS 'ELL “TH OTHERS
SHO'S FRIENDLY MANNER

 

 

 

 

 

CATCNES DI WIGLY
MAINTAINS WTIISTIC ATTITUDE

 

 

DOES ACCURATE ”RR
DEMQISTRATES SELF WIDENCE
FOLLO'S INSTRUCTIGIS

 

 

 

TRIES TO IMPROVE SELF ................_-
GETS THINGS 004E (I! TIME
MKS PAST
REMAINS CALM WDER PRESSURE

 

 

 

 

”RES IN ORDERLY “NNER
RESPECTS OTHERS‘ VIE'POINTS ........

 

 

WRKS STEADILY
USES NOD JUDGMENT
ACCEPTS consuucnve CRITICISM

 

 

 

00000000000000000000
00000000000000000000
00000000000000000000
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

OVER-ALL RATING RATER'S COMMENTS (Include corrective unanswes to he token by this employee):

 

LAST REPORT THIS REPORT
(Date ___.._)

|—__l oursrmomc Cl
{:1 coco [:1
I: FAIR [:I
D POOR C] Eater's signatur- Job Tm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REVIERER'S COMMENTS:

 

 

 

 

Reviewers Signatwe Job Title 032.

 

 

For. No. II" .22 Printed in U.S.A.

FIGURE VIII. COLLPAN‘I X

 

CHAPTER VI
CONCLUSION

On the surface, a merit rating plan for store employees
would seem like an insignificant thing to the food chains.

To some, it is a device or technique that can be utilized or
left alone with no appreciable effect on Operations. The
really important aSpects of the food business, such as new
stores, merchandising techniques, Operational improvements,
employee relations, et cetera, seem to dwarf the value of a
merit rating plan. Also, the food chains are made up of
thousands of individuals who do not understand the value

of a rating plan and to this date show little evidence of
their willingness to accept such a plan in the near future.
To them, a rating plan for store employees is a nebulous in-
strument which registers intangible results that cannot jus-
tify the time and money involved.

Behind this wall Of Opposition, an important segment of
food chain management has begun to form. Personnel directors
in conjunction with progressive elements of tOp management
have realized the potential value that a rating plan can Of-
fer. As a result of this, many of the leading food chains in
the country have adOpted a rating plan for their store employees
within the past few years. With at least some of the initial

Opposition cleared away, it seems that merit rating for store

105

employees is destined for wider use in the food chains, regard-
less Of the existing Opposition.

As pointed out in this thesis, it is not an easy job to
establish an effective rating plan in a food chain Operation,
for there is no royal road to a simplified program. There are
many pitfalls involved in a rating plan and the number that have
failed or been left to die is mute evidence Of this fact. A
rating plan requires a lot of hard work from all concerned, if
the desired results are to be attained. Some companies do not
care to eXpend the necessary energy that is required and soon
find that the plan will not run at "half throttle", only to
stall and die. Once the benefitscfifsuch a plan are realized
and some of its value experienced, the whole program assumes
more meaning and the work involved is more readily contributed.

For a chain to have a successful rating plan it must have
five important things:

1. Soundly constructed rating form;

2. Plan must be sold to all levels of Operation;

5. Systematic check to iron out initial Operating

difficulties;

4. Effective use of results--employee interview,

aid to personnel decisions, etc.;

5. Close follow-up, to insure that the rating plan does

not lose its original drive.

If these five rules are followed, a company can reap all

the accompanying benefits Of a rating system.

106

As previously stated, it is the writer's Opinion that the
employee interview that follows the rating can be the most im-
portant advantage of a rating plan. The interview sets condi-
tions right for the employee and the store manager to discuss
ways Of improving employee performance for the ultimate benefit
of both. NO other personnel technique makes such an ideal situ-
ation possible, with a tool such as the rating form to serve as
a guide for the discussion. Employees long to know "how they
stand" in their jobs. They want to be treated fairly, with no
favoritism involved. They want someone to acknowledge the
superior skill and effort that they employ in their daily
tasks. It would be unwise to assume that these employee de-
sires would automatically be fulfilled without furnishing the'
store manager some tool or reminder to act as a guide. A rat-
ing plan with a subsequent employee interview fulfills these
needs perfectly. Certainly, no stone can be left unturned
which will help bring chain management and its store employees
closer together to aid in a better understanding of the human
relations problem. What better means could management supply
for a solution to this problem, than a rating plan?

Finally, it could be said that a food chain is practical—
ly obliged to have a rating plan. Store employees will be
rated and judged by their store managers and supervisors,
whether a formal rating plan exists or not. It is only human
to compare the merits of one individual against those Of an-

other. A rating plan gives organization and guidance to this

107

existing tendency and leads the way to improved employee re-

lations and increased Operating efficiency.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS

Armstrong, T. 0. "Talking Your Ratings", Rating Employee
and Supervisorygerformance. New York: Emerican.Manage—
ment Association, 1952. p. 152.

 

 

Bellows, Roger M. Psychology of Personnel in Business and
Industry. New York: Prentice-HaII] Incorporated, 1949.
99 PP-

 

Bittner, Reign. "DeveIOping an Employee Merit Rating
Procedure," Rating Emplgyee and Supervisory Performance.
New York: American.hanagement Association, 1950.
pp. 20-55.

 

Halsey, George D. Making and Using Industrial Service
Rating . New York: Harper and Brothers,’1944. C149 pp.

 

Mes, John F. Personnel Handbook. New York: The Ronald
Press Company, 1951. 1167 pp.

 

National Industrial Conference Board, Incorporated.
"Employee Rating," Studies in Personnel Policy, NO. 59.
New York: 1942. 119 pp.

 

Moore, B. V. and G. W. Hartman. Readings in Industrial
sychology. New York: D. Appleton-Century Company, 1951.
60 pp.

Probst, John B. Measuring and Rating Employee Value.
New York: The Ronald Press Company, 1947. 166 pp.

 

Probst, John B. §ervice Ratings. Baltimore: The Lord
Baltimore Press Company, 1931. 560 pp.

Scott, Clothier, Mathewson, and Spriegel. Personnel Man-
agement. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company,51941.
254 pp.

 

Smyth, Richard C. and M. J. Murphy. Job Evaluation and
Employee Rating. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company,
incorporated, 1946. pp. 167—237.

 

 

Tiffin, Joseph. Industrial Psycholo . New York: Prentice-
Hall, Incorporated, 1944. pp. 231— 1.

 

- Yoder, Dale. Personnel Management and Industrial Relations.
New York: Prentice-Hall, Incorporated§fil942. p. 354.

PERIODICALS

Driver. Randolph s. "The Validity and Reliability of Ratings,"
ggrsonnel. 17 (March, 1941), pp. 185~l90.

BULLETINS

Wortham, Mary. "Rating Of Supervisors," Bulletin 11.
Industrial relations Section, California Institute Of
Technology, 1944. p. 22.

COMPANY LITERATURE

"The Employee Service Review Plan," Manual of Instructions.
National Tea Company, Chicago, Illinois. 1952.

"How to Use the Improvement Guide to Conduct a Performance
Review Interview," The Kroger Company, Cincinnati, Ohio.
1955.

"Merit Rating and Employee Appraisal Manual." Colonial
Stores, Incorporated, Atlanta, Georgia. 1953.

ROOM USE ONLY.

 

 

 

A ’93:": .
II I I .‘ \ I. v
\n v a ‘I f v v

it‘s
J ’.‘ p
W3“ 6

 

 

 

 

M'TIT/llflflufijfllnfilfllflfuj/Zflflliflflyflflfillfi'E’