Effectively Managing Performance: Not Optional
Employees or other parties that do work for an organization need to perform well for the organization to perform well. The most common reasons why performance management is so ineffective in most organizations is that its criticality is not recognized and/or there is insufficient investment in developing an optimal process. Survey data suggests many managers and employees control their enthusiasm for performance management, but this is often due to it being done badly and to a failure to recognize its criticality.
The requests for consulting assistance I have received over the last several decades demonstrate a common failure to value performance management. Some of the most common pleas:
Can you recommend an “off the shelf” system that is not expensive?
Please recommend a form we can use that will not consume a lot of time
Is there an article that can convince managers to do this better?
My response to all three is “no” if the objective is success. Much like any other facet of workforce management what will work is what will fit the context within which the strategy will be used. The answer to each question therefore depends on the suitability of the organization’s culture and the commitment of management to expend the necessary effort.?
Is it the method or the process that determines success?
Both must be sound. There are fundamental principles that must be honored when developing a performance management system. Before a specific method (e.g., the form used, or performance criteria selected) can work effectively there must be a sound process in place to facilitate successful execution.?
The model below outlines the components of a process that is based on the fundamental requirements for success. The required elements of this model that are most often not met are:
All parties continuously know what is expected (performance standards and goals)
All parties continuously know how well results meet expectations
All parties agree on what must be done going forward
A continuous record (CPR) is kept of events and feedback results in agreement
Results must be attributed to their causes – and all parties must agree on them
Consequences of performance are known by all parties and viewed as appropriate
领英推荐
Expectations for the next performance period are established
Developmental plans are created to maximize each parties’ future performance
Once the process is developed and all parties are trained to perform their respective roles effective appraisal of performance is possible, increasing the motivation to extend the right effort and behavior. However, there are requirements that must be met for the system to be effective:
Performance appraisals must be based on contributions, not personal characteristics
Performance standards and goals must be attainable
Administrative consequences must be appropriate
Recent debates in the literature have questioned whether periodic measurement and feedback (sometimes called “check ins”) or year-end appraisals are critical. This “either – or” question is framed wrongly, since the correct answer is “both – and.” Neither will succeed without the other.?
There are also claims that removing appraisal ratings improves the process. However, recent research has shown that when ratings are stopped performance generally declines. This is not surprising, since if it is not important enough to measure how can the employee think the organization places a high value on it.?
There are numerous computerized systems being made available that claim to simplify the performance management process and lessen the time managers need to spend on it. Technology can assist with keeping continuous performance records and can enable interaction asynchronously and at a distance. That can be of great value, especially when work is being done remotely. But measuring the desirability of a system based on how little effort is required is wrong-headed. Recently I tested an automated system and was repulsed by the robotic commentary that was triggered by checking a box. If a manager cannot take the time to provide descritpions of job-related behaviors and results that prompted the ratings how can an employee believe that the process is intended to contribute to the effectiveness of everyone?
The Bottom Line?
Effectively defining, measuring and rewarding performance will facilitate workforce effectiveness. Poor strategies or poor execution can undermine the performance of the organization significantly. Having all the financial, operational and customer capital required can set the stage for success, yet it the required intellectual capital is lacking it will undermine performance. The right workforce is a pre-requisite for maximizing the effectiveness of that intellectual capital. Once the right workforce is in place effective performance management strategy and execution will focus that workforce on what is required and motivate people to extend their best efforts.
About the Author:?Robert Greene, PhD, is CEO at Reward $ystems, Inc., a Consulting Principal at Pontifex and a faculty member for DePaul University in their MSHR and MBA programs. Greene?speaks and teaches globally?on human resource management. His consulting practice is focused on helping organizations succeed through people. Greene has written 4 books and hundreds of articles about human resource management throughout his career.