Employee 's Individual Behavior And Performance Appraisal Meetings Between Keller And Petrou
Emotions, attitudes and stress ran high throughout the case. As discovered in performance appraisal meetings between Keller and Petrou, Petrou always felt that Keller got involved where he shouldn’t. This upset Petrou, causing higher emotions and stress.
Getting back to the MARS model, we analyze the four factors that attribute to an employee’s individual behavior and performance: motivation, ability, role perceptions, and situational factors.
Motivation: It was made very clear in the beginning of the case that Keller was unhappy with Petrou’s performance. In fact, in Keller’s view, Petrou wasn’t motivated to do his job (or at least the way Keller thought was the right way). Keller would claim that Petrou’s ‘intensity’ – the amount allocated toward a goal in relation to movitation – is severely lacking.
Ability: Petrou’s ability to perform and complete key tasks is a overwhelming theme of this case. From the get-go, Keller is displeased with Petrou’s ability to perform his role and manage his team – and nonetheless, complete projects. However, Petrou argues the opposite. He states that his ability to perform and manage is just fine, and that it is Keller’s ability as a leader that is hindering his success by his ‘interferance with his operations.’ As made clear throughout the case…