NATIONAL COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ARTS

MBA PROGRAM

AQUINO, KRISTEL-ANNE M. March 2, 2018

Human Resource Management Dr. Daquigan

A Relative Case on Appraisal

 POINT OF VIEW

Ms. Madel Canicula

HR - Manager

 TIME CONTEXT

2018

 SHORT HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

GMEDI began in 1987 as a construction company working on sub-contracts from larger and
older companies in the industry. It quickly gained a reputation for solid and dependable
performance and, in time, achieved Triple A status as a full-fledged Contractor.
In 2003, GMEDI ventured into real estate and housing development. It started with pocket-sized
developments consisting of a dozen to 30 houses in each project, mostly within the cities of
Pasay, Quezon, Pasig and nearby towns and cities of Rizal Province.
Since then, GMEDI has grown into a multi-million company that has produced and sold more
than a thousand houses in the upper low-cost and middle income Categories.
GMEDI is now among the fastest-growing and highly respected housing and real estate
development companies in the country. It is an active member of some of the largest and best-
known associations of professionals and business corporations in the Philippines today.

 COMPANY PROFILE

GMEDI VISION:
GMEDI aspires to be a leading developer of quality real estate properties at par with global
standards that provide better and more affordable homes and structures in well-planned
communities for our modern client families.
GMEDI MISSION:
GMEDI is committed to the pursuit of excellence in our business of designing and building better
and more affordable homes and communities, through dependable, honest, and competent
service to our clients, through our professional workforce who value continuous education and
training and through the practice of corporate social responsibility towards the State, our
industry, and our people.
 AREAS OF CONSIDERATION – SWOT ANALYSIS

o STRENGHTS:
 GMEDI has its stability, quality products and service strength
 In partnership with one of the well known Gen. Contractor in the Philippines.
 Faster construction of houses due to partnership.
 Projects nearby Metro Manila
 Accessible to main road
o WEAKNESS:
 Inaccurate evaluation for employee performance.
 Sensibility to media.
 Lack of unified internal marketing unit

o OPPORTUNITIES:
 More employees with higher educational attainment.
 New administrations investment priority.
 Population growth.
 High OFW remittance.

o THREATS:
 Increase of turnover rate of employees.
 Strong competition with big real estate companies
 Uncertain political landscape.

 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

How can GMEDI effectively assess each employee’s performance?

 ALTERNATIVE COURSES OF ACTIONS

1. Implementation of Key Performance Indicator and Key Results Area.

Advantage:
 Alignment Toward Common Goals
 Focus on Quantifiable Result.
 Incentives for Personal Performance
 Identify the overall performance of an employee and department.

Disadvantage:
 Additional cost.
 Time consuming.
 2. Administer Management by Objectives

Advantage:
 Focus on setting and controlling goals.
 It highlights the area in which the employees need further training, leading to career
development.
 It improves communication between management and subordinates.

Disadvantage:
 MBO can only succeed if it has the complete support of the top management.
 The emphasis is more on short-term goals
 Time consuming.

3. Application of Forced Ranking

Advantage:
 The forced distribution is a simple and consistent methodology.
 It leads to increased productivity and identify key players and encourages competition.
 The managers are required to act on low performers.

Disadvantage:
 The teamwork can be negatively impacted by the forces ranking
 It encourages unhealthy competition
 The calibration does not depend on results achieved

 CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS:

o I highly recommend ACA No. 1 and 2 because it both promote focusing on common goal
and have a fair evaluation among every employees. It also helps for the growth and
development of every employee.
o While the ACA no. 3 encourages unhealthy competition between employees and it can
limit creativity, risk taking and it can weaken ethics and negatively impact the corporate
culture.