| Course | HRM-7610 Human Resource Management in the 21st Century Global Workplace |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 5 |
| Paper type | Module 5 written assignment: international performance management |
| Length | About 701 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Thomas Edison State University |
| Program | MBA in Human Resource Management |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HRM 7610 Module 5
Judging a Tokyo Manager From New Jersey: Redesigning International Performance Management
Student Name
MBA in Human Resource Management, Thomas Edison State University
HRM-7610: Human Resource Management in the 21st Century Global Workplace
Mentor Name
Month Day, Year
Judging a Tokyo Manager From New Jersey: Redesigning International Performance Management
Introduction
Lenape Surgical uses one performance appraisal form worldwide, completed by each subsidiary manager's supervisor at headquarters and based mainly on sales and profit against targets set at the start of the year. Last year the Tokyo subsidiary's sales fell 6 percent in yen terms after government cuts to hospital reimbursement reduced demand across the market, and its results converted into fewer dollars because the yen weakened. The general manager, a Japanese executive hired three years ago, was rated "below expectations." Within the subsidiary, his team considered it his best year: the company's market share rose and two large hospital contracts were won. He is now considering an offer from a competitor. This case shows the central problem of international performance management.
Why International Performance Is Hard to Judge
Dowling et al. (2013) identify variables that affect the performance of subsidiary managers and expatriates beyond individual effort: the compensation package, the task and its context, headquarters support, the host environment, and cultural adjustment. They also note that headquarters often relies on financial results that are distorted by exchange rates, local market conditions and transfer pricing, and that supervisors at a distance have little direct knowledge of what the manager actually did. In the Tokyo case, two of the main drivers of the result, reimbursement cuts and the exchange rate, were outside the manager's control. Black et al. (1991) showed that adjustment to an international role depends on the job, the organization and conditions outside work, all of which also shape the results a manager can deliver.
Who Should Appraise
A supervisor at headquarters sees the numbers but not the context; a local observer sees the context but may lack an overall view. Research on expatriate effectiveness supports using multiple sources. Shaffer et al. (2006) found that expatriate effectiveness has several dimensions, including adjustment, task performance and the decision to stay, and that individual differences affect each differently. A single rating of financial results captures only one dimension.
What to Measure
| Measure | Controllable by the manager? | Use in the redesigned system |
|---|---|---|
| Sales and profit in U.S. dollars | Partly; affected by currency | Report, but judge in local currency |
| Sales and profit in local currency against budget | Partly; affected by market | Adjust budget when the market changes sharply |
| Market share | Largely | Primary commercial measure |
| Key account wins and retention | Largely | Commercial measure |
| Team engagement and turnover | Largely | People measure |
| Compliance and quality | Largely | Threshold requirement |
| Development of a local successor | Largely | Leadership measure |
Redesigning the System
The redesigned system has four features. First, results are judged in local currency, with exchange rate effects reported separately. Second, targets are set jointly with the subsidiary manager and revised during the year if a major external change, such as a reimbursement cut, alters the market. Third, appraisal draws on multiple sources: the headquarters supervisor, the regional vice president who visits regularly, and structured input from the local leadership team. Fourth, the form combines commercial, people, compliance and leadership measures, weighted so that no single financial number dominates.
The system should also adapt to local practice where it matters. In Japan, open self-promotion in appraisal discussions may be uncomfortable for many managers, so the supervisor should collect evidence of achievements from multiple sources rather than relying on the manager's self-assessment. In Germany, the works council must be involved in introducing appraisal systems that affect employees, so the global design must allow for that process.
Applying the Redesign to Tokyo
Under the redesigned system, the Tokyo manager's year looks different. In local currency, sales fell 6 percent in a market that fell about 10 percent, so share rose; two major contracts were won; turnover in his team fell; and quality metrics were met. A fair rating would be "exceeds expectations" on controllable measures. Headquarters should revise his rating and explain the change, which may help retain a manager whose loss would be costly.
Conclusion
International performance management fails when distant supervisors judge results that local conditions and exchange rates distort. Measuring what managers control, adjusting targets for major external changes, using multiple sources and adapting the process to local norms would make Lenape's appraisals fairer and more useful.
References
Black, J. S., Mendenhall, M., & Oddou, G. (1991). Toward a comprehensive model of international adjustment: An integration of multiple theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 291-317. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1991.4278938
Dowling, P. J., Festing, M., & Engle, A. D. (2013). International human resource management (6th ed.). Cengage Learning EMEA.
Shaffer, M. A., Harrison, D. A., Gregersen, H., Black, J. S., & Ferzandi, L. A. (2006). You can take it with you: Individual differences and expatriate effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), 109-125. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.1.109
HRM 7610 Module 5 instructions, in plain terms
The second HRM-7610 written assignment covers international performance management. Expect questions on how multinationals appraise subsidiary managers and expatriates, which factors outside the individual affect international performance, who should appraise and what should be measured, and how performance systems should be adapted to local culture and law. Many versions include a scenario or case. Apply the text's model and research on expatriate effectiveness, and recommend a design with specific measures. Use APA style and show how your recommendations would change an actual appraisal. If the question gives a scenario, identify which parts of the result the person could control before you judge their performance. Bring in the firm's own appraisal form or measures if you can describe them.
How the HRM 7610 Module 5 example is put together
The paper opens with a case in which a global form misjudged a subsidiary manager. A section applies the text's variables affecting international performance, identifying which drivers were outside the manager's control. A section on who should appraise uses research on the dimensions of expatriate effectiveness. A table sorts measures by controllability and assigns each a use. A redesign section sets out four features and two local adaptations. The final section reapplies the new system to the case, showing the difference it makes. The table sorting measures by controllability is the core of the redesign and could be reused for any subsidiary.
Reading the HRM 7610 Module 5 grading rubric
Marks go to correct use of international appraisal concepts, analysis that separates context from contribution, a redesigned system that would work and research behind it. Answers that separate controllable performance from context, such as exchange rates and market changes, show a clear understanding of the module's central problem. Recommending multiple appraisal sources and adapting the process to local norms and law demonstrates applied knowledge. Showing how the redesign changes an outcome makes the argument concrete. Mentors also value attention to retention, since unfair appraisals can drive away valuable local managers, and to the legal processes that govern appraisal in some countries. Showing the redesigned outcome for the case makes the recommendation persuasive.
HRM 7610 Module 5 help from the desk
Students lose points by recommending a single global form without adaptation, by ignoring exchange rates and local market conditions or by discussing expatriates only when the question covers subsidiary managers too. Others describe problems without a redesigned system. Separate what the manager controls from what they do not. Recommend multiple sources. Specify measures and weights. Note where local law or culture changes the process. A free first sample using your own HRM-7610 Module 5 case is available on request. Recommend how often targets can be revised and who approves the change, so flexibility does not become a way to avoid accountability. Explain how local input will be gathered fairly. Keep the redesign simple enough to run every year.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Thomas Edison State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More HRM 7610 and MBA in Human Resource Management sample papers
- HRM 7610 Module 1: Discussion: Culture and the Limits of a Global HR Policy
- HRM 7610 Module 2: Written Assignment: Structuring HR for a Growing Multinational
- HRM 7610 Module 3: Discussion: The People Side of a Cross-Border Acquisition
- HRM 7610 Module 4: Midterm Project: Staffing, Recruitment and Selection in Four Countries
- HRM 7610 Module 6: Discussion: Bringing Expatriates Home Without Losing Them
- HRM 7610 Module 7: Written Assignment: Paying an Expatriate and a Local Team Fairly
- HRM 7610 Module 8: Final Project: Entering Mexico, Macroeconomics, HR Practice and Risk
- HRM 7620 Module 5: Discussion: The Talent Infrastructure Behind Inclusion
- HRM 7640 Module 3: Written Assignment: A Logistic Model of Ninety-Day Turnover
- HRM 7630 Module 1: Case Study: HR, Counsel and a Harassment Investigation
HRM 7610 Module 5 questions, answered
Where can I find a free HRM 7610 Module 5 sample paper?
The complete Module 5 paper on redesigning international performance management at Lenape Surgical is above, with a measures table and a revised rating.
Why is international performance management difficult?
Results are affected by exchange rates, local markets and distance, and supervisors at headquarters may not see the manager's actual work.
Who should appraise a subsidiary manager?
Ideally several sources, such as a headquarters supervisor, a regional leader who visits and structured input from the local team.
Should subsidiary results be judged in local currency?
Usually yes, with exchange rate effects reported separately, so managers are judged on what they can influence.
How should appraisal adapt to local culture?
By adjusting methods, such as relying less on self-promotion where it is uncomfortable, and following local rules such as works council involvement.