HR Assignment#8
ACCOUNTING123
NOTE: Read this article to understand the topic and do not answer the discussion questions. !
FIRE ME WHY DON’T YOU? ! Objectives ! Learn that providing feedback to employees on a consistent basis is critical and necessary for performance improvement. ! Understand that even in a culture of coaching, some employees tend to blame others for poor performance. ! Learn that the best defense against having to dismiss an employee is hiring the right employee in the first place. Describe the process of a productive performance evaluation meeting. ! Identify the various signs to an unmotivated employee. ! Understand that constant documentation of employee performance and behavior is critical for decision making. !!! INTRODUCTORY NOTES !
Firing an employee is incredibly difficult, however, there are times when it has to be
done; and, as a manger, you may be the one chosen to do so (King, 2008). What is even more
difficult to digest as a manager is when an employee asks “you” to “fire them” especially since
they feel that no matter what they do it will not be good enough. On the one hand, some
companies feel that the employee should assume full responsibility for his or her own career, for
keeping their qualifications up to date, for moving to the next position level and most daunting of
all for achieving job satisfaction (Patch, Rice & Dreilinger, 1992). Other organizations, however,
create a climate and culture of coaching whereby they are interested in improving the ability of
their managers so they can improve their performance and prepare them for future roles
(Lindbom, 2007). This culture is one which a regular review of performance and just-in-time
feedback benefits everyone involved.
Feedback on performance is a necessary evil, giving it as a manager, and receiving it
from others (Craig, 2008). If done properly it can assist an organization with motivation and
morale and increased performance. If done poorly, it can cause long-term performance and
behavioral problems. Employees are satisfied and benefit mostly from performance appraisal
systems when supervisors are supportive and there is trust between the individuals involved in
the process (Whiting, Kline & Sulsky, 2008). The performance appraisal and providing
knowledge of results is often considered one of the most important human resource practices
(Boswell & Boudreau, 2002) and has increasingly become part of a strategic approach to
integrating Human Resource activities and business policies while assessing and developing
employees and distributing rewards (Kuvaas, 2007).
There are three opportunities according to McKay (2008) when as managers and leaders
we can do something about our employee’s performance: at the time of hiring (hire correctly in
the first place); through training and coaching; show poor performers the door. If a manager feels
they have hired an individual who does not have the right personality, mental ability and attitude
to do the job, no amount of training or coaching will matter.
A good leader must be able to both deliver rewards for good performance and
punishments for poor performance along with being able to rally the staff in an effort to achieve
an organization’s goals and objectives (transactional leadership and transformational leadership)
(Vigota-Gadot, 2007). Balancing a relationship with fairness and equity for employees is a key
element of success and motivation. If management finds itself in a position where there is a good
chance that dismissing someone is inevitable, make certain everything was done in an effort to
have supported the employee’s potential success: training, coaching, sharing of specific results,
communication and a series of performance appraisals listing actions needed for improvement
(Creveling, 2008).
At times, however, no matter what management or Human Resources does, some
employees are just not a match for the organization and they do not “own up to their deficiencies
or lack of performance.” Rare as it is, some employees also have their own agendas and may
want an organization to “fire them.” No matter what the cause, even with “at-will employees,” if
a manager finds him/herself in the untenable task of having to let someone go, do so with respect
and in a manner that keeps the employee’s dignity intact (Koeppel, 2007).
! PROFILES ! Paul Apel is the Second Shift Supervisor at Generations. He has been at the company for four years now and was promoted from the rank and file after two years. Paul has minimal experience as a supervisor and thus was afforded the opportunity to attend numerous training and development programs. Paul’s mom, Grace Cotter also works at Generations. ! Grace Cotter, Paul’s Mom has been with Generations for 25 years. She is a Union Shop Steward. Grace has always been a very dedicated employee and is competent in all of the various operations that go into the production of the clothing lines Generations is famous for. ! Jim Bausch, the Production Manager of Generations, was formerly an Industrial Engineer before he was promoted. Jim believes in mentoring and developing his employees and is supportive of the many educational programs available for those who want to move ahead in the company. Jim has a high level of trust in his supervisory staff. ! Judy Donato is the Human Resource Manager of Generations. Judy began her career at the company as an administrative assistant for Dennis Howell. As the company grew, however, there became a need for a Human Resource department. The respect that the employees have for Judy was proof enough she was the best candidate for the position.
! Joe Frazier is the other second Shift Supervisor at Generations. Joe keeps to himself and rarely collaborates with Paul on any production or quality matters. Joe’s performance is excellent and customers rarely have any complaints about product that comes from his departments. ! Dennis Howell is the Chief Operating Officer of Generations. Having come from the garment district in New York, Dennis is more than technically competent to do the job necessary for the customer Dennis rarely holds departmental meetings and usually lets Jim handle the “people” end of the business. ! Chang and Rosalina are employees on the Second Shift. They are very verbal in letting management know that something is wrong with the manner Paul treats their co-workers. ! Cindy Lampson is the attorney who Paul has hired to represent him. !!
GENERATION’S NEWEST SUPERVISOR
Paul Apel, a Supervisor at Generations, has been with the organization for approximately
four years. He was promoted from the rank and file after his second year with the company.
Generations is a clothing factory with one location in the Northeastern portion of the United
States. Being newly promoted, Paul was afforded a significant amount of training, development
and mentoring. The Human Resource department created with Paul and his manager, James
Bausch (Jim), a developmental plan. The plan outlined the competencies needed to be successful
on the job and the focus of training and education in order to achieve mastery in these necessary
skills and abilities. Paul was one of two supervisors on the recently enhanced second shift. Due
to an average 15% growth in business in the past three years, management decided to increase
the size of the workforce. Adding a larger second shift made sense since machinery and
equipment were readily available. Generations has a first shift also but it was at maximum
capacity. Manpower could not be added.
Paul held past positions of responsibility elsewhere as a prison and security guard. His
mom, Grace Cotter, has been with Generations for twenty-five years. During the last ten years,
Grace has been a union steward. Grace is a very dedicated, focused employee. She thought about
retiring a few times so she could spend her days with her grandchild, Paul’s son, but she decided
at 60 years old she’d rather keep active and work. Besides, Grace was a valued employee and
Generations appreciated this by rewarding Grace with out-of-contract bonuses and some extra
time off when needed. Recently, Grace underwent hip surgery. Generations accommodated her
due to the follow-up physical therapy which took place during work hours. Her physician told
her there would always be some residual pain but Grace forgets this while at work. Her pleasant
demeanor and knowledge of the product line is one of the many reasons why so many employees
of Generations want to work with and respect Grace. The admiration management has for Grace
surely played a part in the decision to promote Paul over other qualified non-Generations
candidates.
After two years as a supervisor of the 2nd shift, rumors about Paul began to make their
way to Jim. One such story noted that Paul is rarely seen, if at all, during the second shift. He
opens the shift up, sets up the various departments under his supervision, makes certain the work
is distributed appropriately according to the production schedule, and then either disappears into
his office or leaves the building. If an employee asks him a question, he either ignores the
employee or tells him/her to “do it the way they think they should do it.” There was additional
hearsay that Paul had a temper. He would yell at his employees for no apparent reason. Most of
the 2nd shift was Asian and Mexican.
During his first six months as a supervisor, Paul’s overall performance was rated as being
Outstanding. This is the highest rating an employee can attain. Following the next six months his
performance appraisal rating had dropped to a C+ (Competent Plus), which translates to
functioning above average. During his second year, however, Paul’s execution and the
productivity of his department during the 2nd shift began to deteriorate. Quality slipped and more
often than not when the first shift arrived the morning after, they needed to clean up and also re-
do some of the production orders because of errors made in sewing, cutting, and final pressing.
This caused a backlog in shipping to world-wide designers, distributors, and major department
stores that were waiting for the new seasonal clothing lines. Top Management trusted Middle
Management and the Supervisors. This trust resulted in an unwritten “hands-off” position toward
the second shift. “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” was the mantra of Jim and his first shift team.
Unfortunately, recent events had begun to show that things were not as rosy as once thought.
Several key areas were in need of immediate focus for Paul; external customer attention, change
mastery, leadership, work ethics, integrity, communication, internal customer focus, and
development of self and others. Human Resources consistently works with Paul on updating his
developmental plan. The recommendation was to provide another formal evaluation in three
then six months later to be certain improvement was noted in these critical competencies. Paul
expressed his dissatisfaction with this outcome but accepted the assessment none-the-less.
THE REPORTS CONTINUE
Jim and the Human Resource Manager of Generations, Judy Donato, continued to hear
the reports from employees that Paul was not a pleasant person to work with. One tale said that
Paul would not let employees go on their break unless they asked permission of him directly. Jim
also noticed the error rate was significantly higher than previous on the 2nd shift. A plan to visit
the 2nd shift unannounced was discussed between Jim and Judy. Each one did just this within the
next week. Jim and Judy noticed the same thing. Paul, when visited unannounced, was either in
his office reading the newspaper, on the telephone, or talking to the female coach of one of the
physically challenged employees. Generations had an agreement with the local Association of
Disabled Citizens (ADC). Generations hired individuals who were somewhat physically
challenged into jobs that were not too demanding. Accommodations were always made. This was
a part of their community relations goals and objectives. ADC provided assistance in the form of
a coach to help the employee(s) and also the company.
The visits did not appear to cause any concern for Paul. He always explained who he was
talking with and also why he might have been on the phone. The coach would immediately
leave Paul’s office when Jim or Judy arrived. Paul then would make his way into the plant and
spend time on the floor with his employees as if to ignore the visitors.
Several days passed and there was little positive change in the reports from other
employees. The scrap rate, productivity, and the quality coming from the 2nd shift were
unchanged. Additional information surfaced that reported Paul would now leave the building for
long periods of time with the ADC coach or another non-employee female who visited him. He
waited until he certain Jim or Judy were not showing up and then he would change his
personality, start his tyrants and leave. Nothing of this, however, was mentioned from the other
2nd shift supervisor, Joe Frazier. Joe’s employee’s never complained and their production results
were well on target if not exceeding standards. Jim and Judy chose not to discuss any of this with
Joe at this moment.
Judy and Jim began to investigate further what the grapevine was saying. Aside from
increasing the amount of times they visited or stayed long past the primary shift, they would ask
employees as they walked through the aisles during their visits, “How’s it going?” Usually they
got nothing but silence especially when Paul was walking around. There were at least six
occasions, during different times of the shift, within a three week period when they had arrived
and Paul was nowhere to be found. They waited for about an hour each time. Upon Paul’s return
he’d usually have a pizza box or a sandwich with him. His explanation was he went to get dinner
and there was a crowd which caused the delay. Paul would always walk in with the coach from
ADC.
! THE VISITS WITH THE TEAMS
Judy decided one evening to join one of the team meetings from the shift. These took
place on a bi-weekly basis. The teams would discuss projects, workloads, resources, processes,
etc. During the course of one of these meetings, Judy decided to ask bluntly how they felt they
were being treated by management. At first there was a deafening silence. Judy waited and asked
again if management was pleasant and helping them get their work done.
“Quite frankly,” Judy noted, “the quality and productivity of your team on the second
shift is not up to standards. Our customers are getting concerned about late shipments and shabby
workmanship. Some of them are considering leaving us and going elsewhere for their clothing.
That means layoffs if they do.” Soon the silence was broken and Chang, an expert seamstress,
interjected.
Chang: “He, Mr. Paul, yell at us. He no respect us, he tell us to take a hike when we ask
him for help. Mr. Paul say go back to work and do what you are hired to do and stop
complaining. Then he closes his door with that woman inside his office. We no see him
for long time. Every night this happens.”
Rosalina, another senior seamstress also broke into the conversation:
“All I know is Mr. Paul sometimes leaves his office, walks out the building with the
coach lady, and doesn’t come back for about two hours or more. It’s not our fault we are
not doing good. He never helps us. Our needles are dull, our machines need adjustments
and cleaning, and the cutting machine is not as sharp as it should be so our seams are off
the line.”
Judy: “Why didn’t anyone ever say anything before today?”
Chang: “We afraid of Mr. Paul. He yell at us and tell us to find another job if we no like
it here. Mr. Paul tells us there other people who he can get to do our jobs.”
Judy took notes as more information came from the team for the next 30 minutes or so all
with the same theme: Paul may not have been living up to the expectations set forth during the
performance evaluation. Judy decided that it was time to work with Jim on yet another plan to
get to the bottom of the second shift challenges. Customers were not happy, employees were
fearful, and with the increase of potential business coming to the company through some
excellent new designs, marketing, sales, and styles, Generations needed to put its house in order.
Judy and Jim put together what they hoped would be one last plan to get this part of the
shift back on track. The first action they took was to talk with Joe the other Supervisor. Joe
stated he was unaware of any of the problems employees claimed. Joe never heard any yelling or
threatening coming from Paul. He also never saw Paul leave the building except to smoke
periodically during employee’s break time or their lunch. Joe did admit Paul’s door was often
closed but he figured he was working on production related issues. Joe’s area of the factory was
located quite a distance from Paul’s section of the plant. The machines did make quite a bit of
noise also. A huge wall divided them and there were separate entrances that employees could use
if they so chose. Joe’s section and teams were extremely busy and he did admit he has had little
to no contact with Paul for months except to say hello in the beginning of the shift and at
debriefing meetings with Jim.
Another week had passed since the team meeting and more data came in from
Operation’s Information System. It all pointed toward additional errors, shabby quality
inspections, late shipments, elevated machine breakdowns, and increased customer returns.
Productivity dropped to less than 84% based upon standard. Overall it did not look good. Judy
and Jim agreed to meet with Paul formally and lay the facts out on the table in the form of
another formal performance review with yet one last follow-up plan to improve.
THE FINAL PLAN TO GET BACK ON TARGET
Two days after they received the operations data, Judy and Jim asked Paul if he would
join them as soon as he got his shift up and running. A little hesitant, Paul agreed. The three of
them met in the conference room on the production floor so they would be able to monitor the
factory just in case someone needed them. Jim began:
Jim: “Paul, we need to look at some of the recent numbers. They are not good and quite
frankly I am worried. We are all worried. Well-Mart, one of our largest customers is about
ready to pull the plug on our spring fashion line because of quality issues and late
shipments. Paul, help me understand what’s going on? During your last performance
review we put together a plan and you agreed to make some serious improvements. From
what these numbers say we seem to be going in the wrong direction.”
Paul: “Oh not this again, Come on people, you’re just picking on me again and honestly
I’m getting tired of this. In fact, to be honest with you, I think you’re harassing me. It’s
not my fault you gave me a bunch of incompetents out there. These people can’t sew for
nothing. Judy, where did you get them from? No matter what I do it’s not good enough
anyway. My best is just not good enough for this place. It’s the same thing over and over
again.”
Judy: “Paul, listen. I sat in on one of your team meetings from your shift last week. Your
employees told me about you yelling at them constantly, threatening to fire them, and
replacing them. Then they said you leave the building for long periods of time with the
coach from ADC, or you close your door with the coach from ADC and are nowhere to
be seen for the better part of the shift. We’re not sure what’s going on here Paul but as
Jim said the numbers are not good and if what the employees are saying about your
behavior, it may be inappropriate while here at work.”
Paul: “Oh yea you’re going to believe them over me now. Just like you both. I told my
mother to get out of here a long time ago. You don’t appreciate anything I do. And my
personal life is my personal life. If I want to go to lunch with a woman, that’s none of
your business.”
Jim: You’re right to a point Paul. We’re not making this personal. What you do on your
time is your business. What you do on company time and property is all of our business.
It appears you are taking a lot of company time to work or talk with this lady. We heard
that from more than just a few employees. She is supposed to be here to help coach her
employee. Let’s get back to these numbers Paul. What’s your take on why they are still
decreasing?”
Paul: “Hey Jim, no matter what I say it doesn’t matter. You’ve already made your mind
up. Give me the review will you? No better yet, why don’t you just fire me. That’s what
you want to do anyway. Fire me why don’t you?”
Jim: Looking very shocked at what he just heard. “Paul we have no intention of letting
you go at this moment. We want to talk with you about your performance as we have
been doing for months now. We want to share with you again some areas that need
improvement. You need to take some ownership of the problem. We want you to focus on
this and not blame everyone else. Judy’s staff will work with you on hopefully a last
development plan so you get back on track. I want to put someone on the shift with you
to lend a hand so he can help with the areas customers are concerned about.”
Paul: Becoming angrier, “I don’t need anyone to help me. Hey, this is ridiculous. You’re
just out to get me no matter what I do or say. Fire me why don’t you? I’m tired of this
already. I’ll just collect unemployment until I find another job. I can’t seem to please you
guys anyway. It’s my entire fault, right?”
With that Paul rose from his seat, went to the door, opened it, and left. As Jim and Judy
watched in utter amazement Paul walked out the exit door, got into his automobile and drove off
the premises.
Judy and Jim sat speechless. They had not expected this sort of reaction. They looked at
each other. Judy looking at Jim said, “Okay now what? One might consider this job
abandonment.”
DISMISS PAUL OR NOT?
Jim: “Well, if he wants us to fire him why not. Let’s do it.”
Judy: “What! We do that and we’ll end up with a lawsuit on our hands. This was a
performance review meeting and not a very good one at that. We did not come here to
dismiss Paul. Since when does an employee ask to be fired? Something’s up with this
guy and I don’t like it. ”
Jim: “I know Judy but I thought we can just let anyone go with or without cause. Didn’t
you say once we were an employer at will?”
Judy: “Sure try it some time. He used the big “H” word on us Jim. He’s looking for
something. I would not fire him, not just yet. I’d get him back in here and finish the
evaluation first then we can decide what to do.”
Jim: “Doubt that will ever happen. He left the building Judy remember? He abandoned
his job. You tell me we can’t let him go for that? Now who am I going to get to cover the
shift?”
Some more discussion took place. Judy and Jim waited a bit hoping Paul would return. Instead,
after about 30 minutes, the phone rang. It was Dennis Howell, the Chief Operating Officer.
Dennis: “Jim, it’s Dennis. I just spoke with Paul. He called me from his car. He said you
and Judy were pushing him around and harassing him about 30 minutes ago, telling him
he’s no good, that he curses at employees at night and said he is running around with
some lady from the ADC? What’s going on? We got a lot of product to get out of here.
Can I see you? Paul says he wants to meet with me and Judy also. I also got a call from
Grace, Paul’s mom. She’s also on her way up to my office. She says her son also called
her a few moments ago also and was really upset about the way he was being treated.
Grace said that she doesn’t know the whole story but has heard some rumors that the 2nd
shift doesn’t like Paul and wants a new supervisor because he’s too tough. I think we
better talk before we have a real problem on our hands.”
Jim, Judy and Dennis met. Jim explained what happened at the recent meeting they had
with Paul. He told Dennis they were just following the performance appraisal recommendations
they wrote a few months ago. Dennis was aware of the production numbers, the quality
decrement, and shipments being delayed from Paul’s teams. Dennis had been working with Jim
on this for quite some time. When Dennis heard that Paul wanted to be fired he was also quite
surprised. He agreed with Judy that something must be wrong. He planned to meet with Grace in
a few moments and had to get back to Paul about the meeting he asked for. Jim and Judy left
Dennis’s office.
AN ALTERNATIVE FOR PAUL
Paul did not show up for work the next two days although he had made a call and left a
message that he would be out ill. He also followed up with a phone call during the day to meet
with Dennis. Judy decided after the two days of call outs from Paul, to meet with General
Counsel and asked that a release agreement be drawn up providing Paul with a severance
package of four weeks pay if he signs and releases the company from any action. General
Counsel had no idea why Generations should do this. If the Supervisor was ineffective and if he
has not shown up for work the past few days then why not just let him go? Unless we have some
doubts that the stories are true from the employees? After a two hour meeting, Counsel decided
to agree. An agreement was created. Paul was contacted by Judy who left a message to meet
with Jim and her the following day. They wanted to discuss his request.
Paul showed up Wednesday. This time, however, he went directly to Dennis and wanted
to talk only with him and Judy. Dennis let Paul speak his mind and vent. He did not call Jim
immediately. Judy joined them and was surprised Jim was not present. When Judy raised the
concern about not having Jim in the meeting, Dennis ignored it and continued to ask Paul
questions. Paul reported to them both that he feels there is no hope and no future for him at
Generations, and that Jim is setting him up to fail. He again asked to be dismissed after a 30
minute discussion. When it appeared as if there was little hope to convince Paul to remain and
finish working through the performance evaluation, Judy shared with Paul the Release
Agreement. She asked if he would consider something like that. Paul asked to see it first. Paul
read it, signed it, and was handed a check for four week’s severance. A copy of the agreement
was given to Paul. He left the building.
Judy informed Jim later about the meeting and its result. He was not pleased that Dennis
held the meeting without him. He told Judy that undermines his authority and all the work he has
done with Paul. None-the-less Jim had no choice but to accept what happened and now needed to
make arrangements for a new Supervisor on the 2nd shift. Judy and Jim spoke to the teams on the
shift to inform them that Paul would no longer be coming to work and they would soon have a
new leader. For the time being though Jim would stay on the shift for a few hours and then Joe
would take over from the other end of the plant. Everything would work out just fine so have
patience. Jim gave some of the senior employees a bit more responsibility in the transition and
told them their compensation would be adjusted accordingly.
PAUL’S ATTORNEY
Two days following that meeting, Human Resources was contacted by an attorney, Cindy
Lampson, who reported she was representing Paul. This made little sense to Judy but she took
the call regardless. Since Jim happened to be with her she placed the telephone on conference so
he could listen and comment if need be. The conversation was a cordial one. Notes were
exchanged verbally. Paul’s attorney, Cindy Lampson, noted that Generations had no grounds to
dismiss Paul and they must reinstate him with full back pay. Paul was planning to pursue a
lawsuit for unlawful discharge and harassment against Generations. To say the least Jim and Judy
were again confused. Judy pointed out to Cindy that they were in possession of a release of all
claims that Paul signed in acceptance of four weeks of severance pay.
Judy: “Paul chose to resign. We accepted his resignation. The company was very
generous and provided him with a release and four week’s severance pay. I’m really not
sure why Paul is saying we dismissed him. The letter we have on file from Paul states, “I
am resigning my position as Supervisor of the 2nd shift of Generations effective
immediately.”
At that point, Cindy excused herself. She told Jim and Judy she needed a bit of time to
discuss this action of which she was unaware with Paul. She asked Judy to kindly fax a copy of
the release and Paul’s signed letter. Judy obliged. Cindy was never heard from again.
Later that same day Generations received a “Notice of Hearing” from the State Department of
Unemployment to be held on the behalf of Paul Apel. Apparently Paul had also filed for
unemployment benefits. Jim asked Judy “how can he collect if he chose to resign from his
position?” Judy was just as perplexed.
Because of their schedules, neither Jim nor Judy could appear in person. They made a
phone call and sent a follow-up letter stating their position with back up documentation. The
Unemployment Office phoned regardless on the date listed originally in their first
correspondence. As Jim and Judy were walking out the door to go to an off-site meeting the
receptionist stopped them. She told them there was an unemployment investigator waiting on the
phone to talk with them both.
The investigator would not take no for an answer, nor was she going to re-schedule the
hearing. She forcefully asked Judy for an explanation of the events that led up to the dismissal of
Paul. Judy continued to note that Paul was given numerous performance evaluations, had a
number of developmental plans and finally had voluntarily resigned. The company was in
possession of a signature on a resignation letter to that effect. The investigator noted she was also
in possession of the document. She then “demanded” that Judy fax over or deliver in person
immediately all appraisals and notes in Paul’s personnel file. Judy asked for identification and
informed the investigator of this inconvenience. If they wanted the file they could send along a
courier with a subpoena. Following 30 minutes of working up the chain of command, Judy
finally gave up and faxed 39 pages of information detailing Paul’s work history including
performance appraisals, warnings, development plans etc. they were all received by the local
Office of Unemployment.
Three work days later Generations received notice Paul was being awarded full
unemployment benefits with no penalty. The investigator noted in her report that Generations
forced Paul to resign against his will. It was not contestable.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
1. Would you have let him go as he is requested?
2. Would you have continued with the performance appraisal?
3. If you were the Chief Operating Officer and/or Judy, would you meet with him? If so, with or without Jim? Explain why? !
4. How might this situation have been avoided in the first place?
5. What are some of the areas of the performance appraisal process that might have broken down? !
6. If you were to meet with Paul that last time prior to signing the agreement of release of all claims, what might you have said and done? !
7. Why do you think Judy was reluctant to let Paul go as he so requested?
8. Was the four week’s severance package a good idea?
9. Do you agree with Office of Unemployment’s decision? Why or why not?
! !
Additional Resources
Craig, T. (2008, April). How to give feedback. Personnel Today, 31, ! Creveling, J.P. (2008). When it becomes necessary to fire an employee. Chemical Engineering, 115(2), 51-54. ! King, R. (2009). Firing employees is sometimes necessary. Snips, 78(1), 83 ! Koeppel, D. (2007, July 5). One key to a problem-free firing is dignity. New York Times (Late edition East Coast), p. C.5. Retrieved April 18, 2009 from Banking Information Source database. (Document ID: 1299540811). ! Kuvaas, B. (2007). Different relationships between perceptions of developmental performance appraisal and work performance. Personnel Review, 36(3), 378-397 ! Lindbom, D. (2007). A Culture of coaching: The challenge of managing performance for long- term results. Organizational Development Journal, 25(2), 101-106 . ! McKay, R. (2008). Zero tolerance for poor performance. NZ Business, 22(3), 22-23. ! Patch, F., Rice, D., & Dreilinger, C. (1992). A contract for commitment. Training & Development, 46(11), 47-51. ! Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2007). Leadership style, organizational politics, and employees’ performance: An empirical examination of two competing models. Personnel Review, 36(5), 661-683. ! Whiting, H.J., Kline, T.J.B., & Sulsky, L.M. (2008). The performance appraisal congruency scale: An assessment of person-environment fit. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 57(3), 223-236.