(Solution) CIPD 5C002 (AC2.1) With reference to a people practice issue, interpret analytical data using appropriate analysis tools and methods

New User Gifts

First Order Deal get Ksh 200 Off.

KaribuCustomer

Payment Methods:

Description

Solution

(AC2.1) With reference to a people practice issue, interpret analytical data using appropriate analysis tools and methods. There is NO requirement for references in this task.

Word count: Approximately 450 words

Departments Outstanding Meets KPIs Not Quite there yet Underperforming
Administration First Quarter 2/11*100= 18.18% 2/11*100= 18.18% 3/11*100= 27.27% 3/11*100= 27.27%
Second Quarter 1/11*100= 9.09% 3/11*100= 27.27%

3/11*100= 27.27%

4/11*100= 36.36% 1/11*100= 9.09%
Sales First Quarter 0/13*100= 0% 13/13*100= 100% 0/13*100=0% 0/13*100= 0%
Second Quarter 0/13*100= 0% 13/13*100= 100% 0/13*100=0% 0/13*100= 0%
Logistics First Quarter 4/20*100=20% 8/20*100=40% 6/20*100=30% 2/20*100=10%
Second Quarter 5/20*100=25% 9/20*100=45% 4/20*100=20% 0/20*100=0%
Research & Development First Quarter 3/10*100=30% 3/10*100=30% 1/10*100=10% 3/10*100=30%
Second Quarter 5/10*100=50% 3/10*100=30% 1/10*100=10% 0/10*100=0%

Interpretation of Findings

In administration department, for Quarter 1, 5 in 100 employees had met their target with partly 36.36% meeting it in second quarter. For underperforming category, the number has increased from 3 to 4 and hence relevant noting that performance management reduction. This evidence failure for strategies in place for enhancing performance.

For sales, in first and second quarter, a target has been met at 100%. This is with both quarters demonstrating constant performance hence its success.

The logistics department in quarter 1 at 60% had the employees working to achieve their target with quarter 2 having 70% of set target. Underperforming similarly had an increase from 1 to zero staff. This is an evidence of performance management effectiveness with employees appreciating approaches invested.

In the research and development department, performance has improved from 30% in the first quarter to 60% in the second one. This is while underperforming including 0 staff offering department a positive node on increased performance management. Consistency of the data is evident with logistics quarter 2 outstanding performance evident.

4% Bonus for the outstanding review

The total costs of the bonus in the organisation are equal to total buses for the 1st quarter added to the entire bonus obtained in second quarter;

Hence the total is; £9170+ 11,600= £20770

These findings evidence the R&D department evidencing an improved performance in between both the quarters. This is primarily informed by double bonus payments being issued in Quarter 2 owing to exemplary performance. Specifically, it is clear that Harrisson Briggs was issued with £32,500. The increased bonuses are evidence of their increased performance in overall.

Considering the bonus payments, higher payments were evident in Quarter 2 with R&D staff getting double bonus pay increasing the overall bonus cost. The standard bonus pay in first quarter was significantly less since they had been offered to the departments hence lower bonus pay.

Table 2 Data

Feedback for Line Managers

Question asked Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree
I’m given time to prepare to for employee appraisals 3/50*100=6.0% 29/50*100=58.0% 11/50*100=22.0% 7/50*100=14.0%
I feel confident in carrying out a performance appraisal 4/50*100=8.0% 22/50*100=44.0% 23/50*100=46.0% 1/50*100=2.0%
I have no concerns when applying ratings when conducting appraisals 7/50*100=14.0% 34/50*100=68.0% 9/50*100=18.0% 0/50*100=0.0%
I’m confident that I’m able to assess employee’s performance fairly 3/50*100=6.0% 26/50*100=52.0% 11/50*100=22.0% 10/50*100=2.0%
I have had training to enable me to undertake appraisals 0/50*100=0.0% 0/50*100=0.0% 44/50*100=88.0% 6/50*100=12.0%
I have no issue in challenging underperforming employees 0/50*100=0.0% 9/50*100=18.0% 37/50*100=74.0% 4/50*100=8.0%
I’m good at providing feedback and agree set performance targets 12/50*100=24.0% 4/50*100=8.0% 15/50*100=30.0% 19/50*100=38.0%

Feedback for Employees

Question asked Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree
My line manager provides clear and direct guidance  2/235*100=0.85% 111/235*100=47.23% 121/235*100=51.49% 1/235*100=0.43%
During my reviews my line manager listens to the ideas I put forward  5/235*100=2.13% 39/235*100=16.60% 187/235*100=79.57% 4/235*100=1.70%
My line manager provides positive feedback  6/235*100=2.55% 141/235*100=60.00% 82/235*100=34.89% 6/235*100=2.55%
My line manager possesses good people management skills 15/235*100=6.38% 99/235*100=42.13% 89/235*100=37.87% 32/235*100=13.62%
My line manager has time to listen to me  84/235*100=35.74% 79/235*100=33.62% 15/235*100=6.38% 57/235*100=24.26%
My line manager provides a balanced response when conducting my reviews  0% 143/235*100=60.85% 92/235*100=39.15% 0%
My line manager provides me with constructive feedback  69/235*100=29.36% 65/235*100=27.66% 56/235*100=23.83% 45/235*100=19.15%
My line manager provides me with learning and development opportunities so I can do my job better 54/235*100=22.97% 101/235*100=42.98% 70/235*100=29.78% 10/235*100=4.23%

For the trends in table 2 data, it is evident that 88% of the line managers evidence that they lack sufficient training for their appraisal which is a significant issue. Also, only 58% are confident of ratings of employee performance. This is with 32% of line managers agreeing they are in a position of successfully offering feedback and setting achievable target. This is while 82% struggling in challenging the underperforming staff. Conversely, the employees feedback evidence lack satisfaction with 80% of them in disagreement that their line managers give a listening ear to their ideas in review process. Also, positive feedback is lacking where 48% of them note line managers offer constructive input. Finally, approximately 57% note possession of enough L&D opportunities with 45% strongly disagreeing on gaining meaningful feedback offered by line managers.

Please contact us to access this assessment in full