| Course | HLTH 4373 Human Resources for Healthcare Administrators |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 3 |
| Paper type | Performance management design |
| Length | 1,310 words, about 5 pages plus title and reference pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | American College of Education |
| Program | B.S. in Healthcare Administration |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for HLTH 4373 Module 3
Retiring the Annual Checkbox Form: A Performance Management Design for Rehabilitation Technicians at an Inpatient Rehabilitation Hospital
Student Name
American College of Education
HLTH4373: Human Resources for Healthcare Administrators
Module 3 Assignment
Instructor Name
October 19, 2026
The Current System
The 22 rehabilitation technicians at our composite 60-bed inpatient rehabilitation hospital assist therapists and nurses with patient transfers, mobility, exercise sessions, setting up equipment and helping patients practice daily living skills. Their performance matters for safety, since transfers and gait training carry a risk of falls, and for the therapy program, since technicians extend what therapists can deliver. Yet their performance is managed through a single annual appraisal: a two-page form with twelve generic items, such as dependability and teamwork, rated on a five-point scale by a supervisor who may have observed the technician only a few times.
Last year's ratings illustrate the problem. Nineteen of 22 technicians were rated four or five on every item, even though the therapy director had raised concerns about unsafe transfer technique with at least four of them during the year. The ratings drive a small merit increase and nothing else. Technicians describe the process as a formality, and supervisors describe it as paperwork. Human resources was asked to design a better approach.
What the Research Suggests
DeNisi and Murphy (2017), looking back over 100 years of appraisal and performance management studies published in the Journal of Applied Psychology, describe how decades of work concentrated on rating scale formats, rater training and the accuracy of ratings, and they argue that future research should focus more on performance management, meaning the broader set of activities organizations use to improve performance rather than only to measure it. For a hospital, the lesson is that a better form will not by itself produce better performance.
Pulakos et al. (2015) go further. They argue that performance management fails when it is built around formal annual processes and that it can be fixed by concentrating on everyday behaviors: setting clear expectations, giving informal feedback in real time and developing people through their work, with the formal system simplified to support those behaviors rather than replace them. Their approach fits a clinical setting well, since the moments that matter, a transfer done safely or unsafely, happen on the unit and are best addressed there. A rating in December about a transfer in April teaches nothing; a word from the therapist at the bedside teaches something that day.
Clear Expectations
The redesign starts with expectations that describe the job as it is done. With the therapy director and two senior technicians, human resources replaced the twelve generic items with six competency areas specific to the role: safe patient handling and transfers, including correct use of gait belts and lift equipment; infection prevention and equipment cleaning; accurate observation and reporting of changes in a patient's condition; support of therapy sessions as directed by the treating therapist; communication with patients and families; and teamwork with therapists and nursing. Each area has behavioral descriptions of what meeting and exceeding expectations look like, such as checking the therapy plan for weight-bearing restrictions before every transfer.
New technicians will review these expectations with their supervisor during the first week, and each technician will receive a one-page card summarizing them. Expectations that no one has explained cannot fairly be used to judge anyone.
Feedback in Real Time
The heart of the new approach is frequent, specific feedback. Therapists already work alongside technicians every day, so they will be trained and expected to give brief feedback on the unit: what went well, what to change and why, focused on behavior rather than personality. Each technician's supervisor will observe at least one patient transfer and one therapy session a month using a short checklist drawn from the competency areas, and will discuss it with the technician the same day. Unsafe practice, such as a transfer without checking restrictions, will be addressed immediately, documented and followed by a supervised repeat.
Supervisors will also hold a fifteen-minute check-in with each technician every quarter, reviewing the observations, discussing any concerns raised by therapists or nurses, and agreeing on one development goal. These check-ins replace the idea that performance is discussed once a year and make the annual review a summary of conversations that have already happened. More feedback is not automatically better, however. Kluger and DeNisi (1996), pooling hundreds of feedback intervention effects, found that feedback raised performance on average but lowered it in more than a third of cases, most often when the message pulled the receiver's focus off the work itself and onto their own self-image. That result shapes the therapist training: comments address the transfer, the gait belt or the handoff, never the technician's character, and each one ends with what to do on the next patient.
Development and the Annual Summary
Development is part of the design, not an afterthought. Technicians who meet expectations in all six areas for a year will be offered training in advanced skills, such as assisting with functional electrical stimulation or supporting aquatic therapy, and a small pay step for each skill validated. Two technicians a year will be sponsored for physical therapist assistant or occupational therapy assistant education, a direct link to the hospital's workforce plan.
The annual summary will remain, since the hospital needs a documented basis for pay decisions and a record of performance. It will be shortened to the six competency areas, each rated as not yet meeting, meeting or exceeding expectations, with the monthly observation checklists and quarterly check-in notes attached as evidence. A three-level scale was chosen deliberately: finer scales invite inflation without adding information, and the evidence behind each rating matters more than the number.
Fairness, Training and Documentation
A system that relies on many observers must be fair. Supervisors and therapists will receive a two-hour training session on giving behavioral feedback, avoiding common biases such as rating on a single recent event, and documenting observations consistently. Technicians will be able to add written comments to any observation and to request a second observer if they believe an observation was unfair. Human resources will review the distribution of annual ratings by supervisor each year to identify any supervisor who rates much more harshly or leniently than others. Documentation of unsafe practice will follow the hospital's progressive discipline policy, which protects both patients and the employee's right to know what is expected and to have a chance to improve.
When Performance Does Not Improve
Most technicians will respond to clear expectations and steady feedback, but the design must also say what happens when one does not. If two consecutive monthly observations show the same gap in one competency area, the supervisor and technician will write a 60-day improvement plan that names the behavior, the support offered, such as a refresher session with the hospital's safe patient handling coach, and the date of the next observation. The technician keeps working with patients during the plan unless the gap involves a transfer that put a patient at risk, in which case the technician works only under direct therapist supervision until a repeat check is passed. If safe practice is still not reached at 60 days, the case moves into progressive discipline. Keeping coaching and discipline as separate steps lets most conversations stay developmental while still protecting patients.
Evaluating the Redesign
The new system will be judged after one year by five measures: the share of monthly observations completed, with a target of 90%; the number of patient falls during transfers or therapy sessions involving technicians, compared with the prior year; the distribution of annual ratings, expecting fewer automatic top ratings; technician turnover; and technicians' views, collected in a short anonymous survey asking whether they know what is expected, receive useful feedback and see a path to develop. If observations are not being done, the design has failed in practice regardless of its merits, and the hospital will look at supervisor workload before adding more requirements.
References
DeNisi, A. S., & Murphy, K. R. (2017). Performance appraisal and performance management: 100 years of progress? Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 421-433. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000085
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254-284. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254
Pulakos, E. D., Mueller Hanson, R., Arad, S., & Moye, N. (2015). Performance management can be fixed: An on-the-job experiential learning approach for complex behavior change. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8(1), 51-76. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2014.2
Reading the HLTH 4373 Module 3 instructions
HLTH 4373 Module 3 usually asks you to design or improve how an organization manages the performance of one group of employees. Prompts commonly ask you to define performance expectations, choose how performance will be observed and measured, plan feedback and coaching, connect performance to development and rewards, and address fairness and documentation. Some versions ask you to critique an existing appraisal form first; others ask for a policy or a sample form. Support the design with human resources research rather than only a textbook definition, and use the language of the job group you choose. Check Canvas for whether a sample appraisal tool must be attached as an appendix.
Inside the HLTH 4373 Module 3 example
The example begins with evidence that the current system is failing: inflated ratings that contradict what therapists observed. It then uses two research articles to argue that the fix lies in everyday performance management, not a better form. Expectations are rewritten as six job-specific competencies developed with technicians. Feedback is built into daily work through therapists and monthly structured observations, with immediate handling of unsafe practice and quarterly check-ins. Development is tied to performance and to the hospital's workforce needs. The annual summary is kept but shortened, with evidence attached. Fairness safeguards and an evaluation plan close the paper, including a warning about the most likely failure point.
HLTH 4373 Module 3 rubric: what full marks look like
Performance management rubrics typically reward job-specific standards, a credible feedback process, links to development and rewards, and attention to fairness. The standards criterion wants behavioral, observable expectations rather than generic traits. The process criterion looks at how often and by whom performance is observed and discussed, and graders reward designs that fit how work actually happens. Research support earns points, especially when it shapes the design rather than decorating it. A fairness and legal criterion often covers rater training, employee input and documentation. Evaluation measures and clear writing in APA 7 account for the rest of the grade in most sections. A short appendix holding the observation checklist can also help, since it shows the grader the design is usable on a busy unit.
HLTH 4373 Module 3 help from the desk
Designs lose points when they swap one generic form for another with new wording but the same once-a-year process. Another common problem is ignoring who can actually observe the work; supervisors who rarely see the job cannot rate it well. Students sometimes add so many requirements that the design would collapse under supervisor workload, which graders notice. Keep the rating scale simple and require evidence. Address fairness explicitly, including how employees can respond. Connect performance to something that matters to employees, such as development or pay. If your design is meant for nurses, coders or another group, send the job group and your rubric, and a Module 3 draft will be built around that group's daily work.
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 American College of Education 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 HLTH 4373 and B.S. in Healthcare Administration sample papers
- HLTH 4373 Module 1: Workforce Planning Analysis
- HLTH 4373 Module 2: Recruitment and Selection Plan
- HLTH 4373 Module 4: Employee Relations Analysis
- HLTH 4373 Module 5: Retention Strategy and Measures
- HLTH 4303 Module 1: HIPAA Privacy Incident Analysis
- RES 4353 Module 5: Plain-Language Evidence Brief
- HLTH 4203 Module 2: Policy Impact Analysis
- HLTH 4403 Module 2: Patient Portal Evaluation
HLTH 4373 Module 3 questions, answered
What does HLTH4373 Module 3 usually ask for?
HLTH4373's third module usually asks for a performance management design for a job group: clear expectations, a way to observe and give feedback, development and a fair, documented review. Your classroom's instructions decide the job group.
What is the difference between performance appraisal and performance management?
Appraisal is the periodic rating of performance; performance management is the broader set of activities, expectations, feedback, coaching and development, used to improve performance throughout the year.
Why are annual performance ratings often inflated?
Raters may have observed little, want to avoid conflict or see ratings tied only to small pay decisions. Frequent observation and behavioral anchors help reduce inflation.
Where can I find a free HLTH 4373 Module 3 sample paper?
It is on this page, complete and free to read: the Module 3 performance management redesign for rehabilitation technicians, covering expectations, monthly observations, quarterly check-ins, development and the evaluation plan.
How can performance management be made fair?
Train observers, use behavioral descriptions, let employees respond to observations, review rating patterns across supervisors and follow a consistent discipline policy.