本案例研究中具体采用的绩效管理技术类型是基于李克特工具的问卷调查，采用的是一种稍微修改过的客观管理方法。通常的方法管理是经理们聚在一起，根据他们希望公司整体表现的方式，为公司的短期和长期目标制定计划。一旦这个基于关键目标、使命和愿景陈述的计划完成，那么就会制定一个关于组织员工如何帮助实现这些目标的标准化规模。年末，该量表将用于计算员工的熟练程度。这就是彼得·德鲁克最初提出的“目标管理”。不灵活、静态的目标通常是为员工提出的。现在在案例研究中，可以说这种不灵活的静态结构是用来给员工打分的。例如，一个人一天所做的工作量是有等级的。然而，工作质量并没有被评估(Mitra & Shaw, 2011)。对于更现实的工作表现，几乎没有灵活性。第二，业绩考核表没有明确说明进行考核的财政年度组织的目标和目标。这就好像员工只是根据他们与MC的日常活动来进行评分，并没有将他们与MC联系起来的长期目标。
The specific types of performance management technique present in this case study are the Likert tool based questionnaire, which follows a slightly modified management by objective approach. The normal management by approach method is one where managers would come together to plan for short term and long term goals for the company based on how they want company’s performance to be in a holistic way. Once this planning based on key objectives, mission and vision statement is complete, a standardized scale as to how employees of organizations help in meeting these goals is then developed . End of the year, this scale would be used to calculate the proficiency of employee. This was the original ‘management by objective’ which was coined by peter Drucker. Inflexible, static goals are usually suggested for the employees. Now in the case study, it could be said that such an inflexible static structure is used to rate employees. For instance, the amount of work that the individual does in a day is rated. However, the quality of work is not being rated (Mitra & Shaw, 2011). There is little or no flexibility to accommodate for more realistic workplace performances. Secondly, the performance assessment form does not clearly state the objectives and goals of organization for the financial year that the assessment is carried out. It is as if the employees are being rated merely on their day to day activities with MC with no long term purpose connecting them to MC.
There are much more developed set of instruments such as Balanced Score card, KPI systems and more that could have been used as an instrument in performance management assessment (Liccione, 2014). The instrument used is questionnaire method where the performance assessor -the manager is allowed to choose a standard set of choices to assess employee. The instruments’ main strength is its simplicity, but its weakness is that it is not comprehensive. Some features of the instrument could in fact compromise the validity, reliability and felt fairness. Validity of the instrument ensures that the research is conducted in a form of scientific fairness with due diligence shown in the Likert scale checks made. The person who makes these checks is human and hence the instrumental design is prone to human errors. Secondly, there are issues of internal validity. This is because the Likert scale based system has not been structured properly with pre-defined goals and objectives. Reliability of the instrument and design of performance assessment lies in how the assessment could be easily replicated by anybody wanting to carry out a similar assessment. Reliability exists here.