1. Answer:
In my opinion, this evaluation has several major proposes according to the various idea of Max, Jim and Lynne. Fine-tuning has been used as a tool to evaluate the score of workers. The main point of this case is discussing about ‘evaluating form’. According to this case, there are two main ideas of the evaluation.
Firstly, Tom Hamilton, the first year manager, is an accurate evaluation called Give them the facts. Accuracy is top priority in this performance appraisal. He said “One key to motivate people is providing true feedback”. If you give them the truth, it would be easier to talk to them about how to improve their performance.
Secondly, Max Steadman, Jim Coburn, and Lynne Sims, is a fine-tuning evaluation. As stated in their opinion, just only one score can make the workers mad or happy. Flexibility is the first priority depended on the situation of each worker. For example, Lynne gave a good rating score to worker who have personal problem in order to support, speed up her recovery, and make sure that she would not lose her job. Jim gave a good score to mediocre worker who have performed very well in last two or three months improving and motivating him. On the other hand, they would rated the low score to the worker whose performance was not good, in order to shape up and jolt this one to perform better. Besides, they would gave low rating to workers who act like rebel to remind them who the boss.
However, as a tool to judge the employee, I strongly not believe that the evaluation form is appropriate. Because of fine-tuning evaluation, the score of evaluate can change by manager depend on their personal felling with workers. That would make unfairness in evaluation process when compare score of new worker with older worker.

2. Answer:
“Fine-tuning” evaluations that become unacceptable distortion in my opinion is ‘manager is Treating workers with different standard’
Unfair to helping someone in team would cause the worker a bad behavior. The worker would not know what their problem is because the managers always give them a good score without considering their mistakes. Thus, the workers could not improve their performance because they do not notice their mistake.

3. Answer:
I would enhance the quality of the evaluation by using feedback model. Firstly, give feedback frequently more than once a year at a performance evaluation session. Secondly, encourage the evaluated person to participate in the feedback sessions. This serves as a two-way exchange, problem-solving is look effective than an evaluator telling method. When employees participate in feedback communication they would more satisfied. Thirdly, in providing feedback process, please do not focus only ineffective or problem. But you need to praise, recognition, and encouragement in form of positive reinforcement. Fourthly, focus on performance and goals, not personal characteristics. Lastly using ‘Multisource Feedback: A 360-Degree Approach’ to improve result for more fairness, clarity, and credibility in performance improvement program.