Appraising and Rewarding Performance of Manulife China Bank Life Assurance Corporation free essay sample

It is one of the oldest insurance firms in the country. The firm received its license to operate in Manila in 1907, twenty years after the company was first established in Toronto, Canada in 1887 by Sir John A. Macdonald, who at the same time was Prime Minister of Canada. Manulife Philippines was the first foreign company to list in the Philippine Stock Exchange, and is among the top five life insurance companies in our country today. The firm’s dedication to client service enabled it to grow and increase financial strength. In 2007, the Philippine Insurance Commission (IC) and the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (Central Bank) approved the operation of a bank assurance joint venture company, Manulife China Bank Life Assurance Corporation (MCB Life). MCB Life is a strategic bank assurance alliance of China Banking Corporation (China Bank), the Philippines’ first privately owned commercial bank, and The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company (Manulife), a wholly owned subsidiary of Canadian-based Manulife Financial Corporation. We will write a custom essay sample on Appraising and Rewarding Performance of Manulife China Bank Life Assurance Corporation or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page B. Company Mission and Vision of Manulife China Bank Life Assurance Corporation In Asia, Manulifes goal for each market is to develop a company that will best meet the needs of customers, achieve employee satisfaction, and provide leadership in the life insurance industry. Manulife works hard to build companies that cultivate wealth creation, wealth protection, and an improved quality of life for local customers. Manulifes corporate vision is to be the most professional life insurance company in the world: providing the very best financial protection and wealth management services tailored to customers in every market where the company does business. MCB Life’s mission is committed to develop long term relationships with families and businesses which make us the company of choice in providing economic security through a broad range of financial services, customized and delivered by competent and ethical professionals. C. Company Profile and Background of Sun Life Financial Sun Life Financial is an international leader in protection and wealth management with key operations in Canada, US, UK, Hong Kong, Japan, Indonesia, India, China, Bermuda, and the Philippines. Sun Life of Canada (Philippines) pioneered life insurance in the Philippines in 1895. Today, Sun Life of Canada (Philippines), Inc. , is one of the largest and most trusted insurers in the country with almost a half a million policies in force and is boosted by the strength and stability of Sun Life Financial shares in the Philippine Stock Exchange. Sun Life Asset Management Company, Inc. SLAMCI) is the fund manager and principal distributor of the biggest family of mutual funds in the Philippines, the Sun Life Prosperity Funds. It also boasts of being the first in its field to put in place the accounting system needed to adequately comply with the standards set by the International Accounting Standards (IAS). Serving as the company’s wealth management arm, SLAMCI benefits from the expertise of its mother company’s close association with MFS Investment Management (the inventor of mutual funds in the US). Sun Life Financial Plans, Inc. SLFPI) is the second wholly-owned subsidiary of SLOCPI and the sole distributor of its pension and education plans. SLFPI holds the distinction of being the fastest growing pre-need company in the country today. For 113 years now, SLF-Philippines continues to be a proud and trusted partner of the Filipino in his journey to financial freedom. D. Company Mission and Vision of Sun Life Financial Sun Life Financial’s vision is To be the preeminent provider of financial security to individuals over their lifetime. With regards to this mission of the company, Sun Life Financial aims to provide financial freedom for Filipinos. E. Objectives of Study The objective of this study is to present the methods of rewarding and appraising performance of our two chosen companies, particularly in the insurance industry. For this research, we chose to do a study on Manulife Philippines, more specifically Manulife China Bank Life Assurance Corporation (MCB Life); and also Sun Life Financial. This paper aims to present the different rewards given to employees and performance appraisals done to evaluate their employees’ performance, while comparing both companies. In order to obtain a clearer picture on how employees are being appraised and rewarded in two companies in the same industry, a comparison between Manulife Philippines and Sun Life Financial should be done. F. Statement of Problem The researchers would conduct a study on the rewarding and appraising of performance of insurance companies, and what the companies want to achieve. The researchers would like to find out how the companies reward their employers in this industry, and the process of performance appraisal; and the effects of these human resource activities in the daily operation of the companies. G. Basic Assumptions The basic assumptions with regards to the insurance industry are that there are agents who sell insurance packages, and managers who oversee their work. All the employees in the insurance industry are motivated to work harder, since the more insurance sold means the higher commission they receive. As agents sell insurance, managers motivate and supervise agents, and ensure that performance is met through the reaching and, if ever, exceeding of quotas. H. Significance of the Study The significance of the study is to provide insight on how the Human Resource (HR) department of each company manages and oversees the proper giving of rewards and executing performance appraisals on their employees. The study will give companies an idea on what performance appraisal and rewarding system they should implement in order for them to effectively motivate their employees, particularly those in the insurance industry. I. Scope and Limitations The scope of this study is on the HR practices in rewarding and gathering performance appraisals on two insurance companies’ employees, namely MCB Life Assurance Corp. nd Sun Life Financial, both of which are located in the Philippines. Since the study is limited to only two insurance companies, namely MCB Life and Sun Life Financial, the researchers could not generalize the results of our information to the entire insurance industry. There are many other insurance companies that can be used as object of study that would provid e us with different results with regards to rewards and performance appraisals. The second limitation of this study is that the two companies are located in the local setting. Although these companies originated internationally, some of their policies with regards to rewarding employees and performance appraisals may slightly differ from their international counterparts. Also, the study involves only the participation of the HR managers of the respective companies. The performance appraisal and rewarding systems of the companies’ were obtained solely from the HR managers. To limit the study, the researchers focused only in interviewing the HR managers. CHAPTER II: Review of Related Literature A study was conducted in manufacturing firms. The results revealed that the impact of the systematically administered pay varied depending on the type of organization involved. The systematic administration of pay-for-performance reward system can increase employee performance in manufacturing firms than in service organizations. In addition, since there is an assumption that employee performance is positively affected by pay, pay for performance or incentive pay is considered as an effective way to increase the incentive effects of money because it relates pay directly to results of the performance (Luthans, 2002). Financial incentives are more effective when they are link to good performance. The link between pay to performance generally motivates people to work harder. The link is seen as a reinforcer or motivator. The approach recommended to organizations is to consider or include specific performance criteria to employee pay and directly link it to value enhancing business results. The system at Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (MetLife) is used as an example for variable pay. The performance of employees and managers at the company is measured by comparing each employee to others who are on the same level. Performance is measured on a 1-to-5 scale basis. The company calculates the results and categories of each employee as top, middle, or bottom. Employees on the top category receive about 65 percent more in bonuses than those in the middle category. Employees at the bottom category might not receive any bonus (DuBrin, 2005). Regular performance appraisals can provide a basis for employee motivation only if handled well. But often performance appraisals become uncomfortable rituals for employees and managers. Performance appraisals can be considered effective when expectations and objectives are clarified to the employees for the benefit of both supervisors and workers. Meanwhile, good manager-employee relationships could be ruined once performance appraisal is poorly prepared or improperly conducted (Tim Peterson, 2000). The organizational culture requires the evaluation of its employees’ performance on an individual basis. Focusing only on the individual’s performance and not considering the limiting conditions that restrict one’s performance will defeat the purpose of the performance appraisal conducted in organizations. The best way to evaluate or appraise performance is through the use of objectives, standards, or targets. The targets should be set for each employee. Open communication between employees and their immediate supervisor should be present to be able to remove possible barriers that will occur in attaining the desired results. It should be set individually to fully capture one’s abilities and level of development (Bacal, 1999). Most organizations believe that the way to improve organizational performance is to get every employee do a better quality job. The improved individual performance will accumulate and generate its way to the profit and loss statement. Performance management is an individual-based process that usually takes place between an employee and his direct supervisor. The manager or supervisor would set expectations, observe behaviors, determine performance, coach and provide feedback to the employees. This is conducted in a performance review. This process is being widened to include a 360-degree review that gets additional inputs from other employees, generally guided by the direct manager. An analysis was done on the financial performance of 437 companies. In almost all the cases, companies with performance management programs have higher profits, better cash flows, stronger stock market performance, and a greater stock value. Productivity is also better. It can be concluded that if people or employees are treated as valued assets to be developed, it will be beneficial for the company (McAdams, 1996). A guideline for effective rewarding and recognition has been provided. First, the reward should match the person; the person should find the reward satisfying. One way to know what the person likes is to ask him what he value the most. Second is to match the reward to the achievement. A person who did a project should be rewarded in a more substantial way than a person who only did you a favor. Third, the reward should be timely and specific. To have more effect or motivation to repeat desired actions, the reward should be given as soon as possible. The employee must also know the reason why he is being rewarded. The pattern of recognition must be irregular, so as to have an effective way in sustaining performance in the end. The reward and recognition must reflect the company’s values and business strategy. Employees must also participate and contribute in their development and execution. It also advised not to use â€Å"jelly bean† motivation by giving all employees the same reward regardless of their performance. Managers must know how to justify the performance and reward the employees accordingly (Nelson, 2005). CHAPTER III: Methods and Sources of Data The means of gathering data for our study was through two formal interviews. The respondents interviewed were the Human Resource (HR) Managers of both firms; Ms. Joy Escobido for MCB Life, and Philip Tiu for Sun Life Financial. Each of the two Human Resource Managers for the respective companies provided us with a brief background of the company, and oriented us with the operations of the firm with regards to their department. The researchers used interview as their primary tool on gathering pertinent information about the insurance companies’ performance appraisal and rewarding systems. Most of the companies’ information was obtained from the interview and the companies’ websites. Books about organizational behavior, human resource management, performance appraisals, and rewarding were used to give the researchers adequate information about the topic. The theoretical foundation was mainly obtained from the books. Journals that were retrieved from De La Salle University’s electronic database provided the researchers updated and reliable information about the topic. The study is solely a descriptive type of research paper. Only the Human Resource managers of the respective companies were interviewed to understand the companies’ performance appraisal and rewarding systems. Presentation, Analysis, and Interpretation of Data The employees of Sun Life Financial and Manulife China Bank Life Assurance Corp. MCB Life) companies are called differently. Employees in MCB Life are considered as the company’s associates and not as agents. According to the company, this is done to show the equality within the workplace. Although in reality, the associates are considered as rank-in-file workers; what MCB Life wants to embed in them is that they are all very important in the life cycle of the company. Without them, the company will not generate sales at all. MCB Life believes that the word â€Å"agent† has a negative connotation of having a lower position in the company. This is why the company decided on the term â€Å"associates†, which at the same time increased the self-respect of the employees. On the other hand, Sun Life Financial considers their employees as agents of the company. The performance appraisal and rewarding systems of Sun Life Financial and MCB Life both differ in many ways. Sun Life Financial appraises the performance of its agents based on the quota quarterly. The branch manager or the immediate supervisor of the associate is the one who conducts the quarterly performance appraisal. The immediate supervisor evaluates the agent based on the amount of his generated sales. If the agent reaches the quota of PHP 125,000 per quarter, then he gets to remain in the company. All of the employees, whether old or newly hired, have the same quota for their yearly sales. However, if for two consecutive quarters, the quota for the sale is not met, the agent is removed from the company. This is something that the company practices to push their employees to reach their target quotas and motive them to work harder. Thus, it is important for an agent to generate more sales because it is the sole basis of their performance appraisal. It may seem that the HR department is directly not connected with the termination of the company’s employees, but in reality, they are the ones who are responsible in the handling the performance appraisals (given to them by the immediate supervisors of the employees). It is the responsibility of their immediate supervisors to evaluate the accomplishment of each of his employees, and present their evaluation to the HR department or further decisions regarding the sanctions, termination, and rewards due to the employees. MCB Life provides their associates with both a base pay and a commission, while the agents of Sun Life Financial’s salary are solely based in commission – no sales, no salary. Unfortunately, our interviewee was not comfortable with disclosing such information regarding MCB Life’s base pay and commission rates, although the associate’s commission ranges from 25%, which is the minimum commission rate, to 50% maximum commission rate. The commission that each of the associate receives depends on the insurance plan they sell to their clients. Aside from the commission rate that these associates receive, incentive pay is also given to those associates who exceeded above the quota of sales required from them. Persistency, refers to collection of payment, incentive pay is give to the associate whose clients were able to pay for two years insurance plan. Bonus pay is given to the associate who has achieved the quota and a persistency rate of 85% and above. Health card are also given to employees in case of health or medical emergencies. The employer shoulders PHP 400 for the associate’s health card every month. An associate, who happens to have a disease, will receive a medical insurance of up to PHP 200,000. The net selling commission (NSC) of Sun Life’s agents is computed based on their settled Life Insurance and/or Pre-need applications (see Figure 1, Appendices). Based on Figure 1, in the year 2001, 5 settled applications are equivalent to PHP 100,000 net selling commission, while 15 applications are equivalent to PHP 125,000 net selling commission.