Wednesday, December 26, 2012

Performance Management-what is it and why do we engage in it?


Why engage in PM? 
v  Improve job matching- employees are given tasks and jobs that are based on their skills and abilities. Evaluating workers gives them a sense of what they can do and how well they can do it.

v  Communication of organisation values and objectives- gives guidance to employees on how to satisfy the desires of the organisation by showing employees what is valued and incidental. It can also be a powerful means of communicating organisation culture and norms of behaviour with regard to outcome and process.  
 
v  Provides feedback/indication of areas for self-improvement- identify key areas for further development 
 
v  Training and career development- PM acts as a guide  
 
v  Pay and promotion for performance- any organisation that allocates pay based on performance must measure who has succeeded. Performance evaluation provides necessary measures.  
 
v  Information for hiring strategies, especially validation of entry requirements- decisions on whom to hire? 
 
v  Validation of other HR practices- permits organisations to validate the efficacy of many HR practices. E.g. are we reaping benefits from company or external training programs?  
 
v  Retentions and reductions on work force- e.g. if there are mandatory probation periods and occasional decisions about reductions in force, for which performance evaluation data are important inputs.  
 
v  Legal defence- hiring, promotion and discharge decisions can be challenged in court. An org needs a well-documented paper trail of performance appraisals that will pass scrutiny as being valid/ non-discriminatory.  
 
v  Effects on those doing the evaluating- the extent that managers can influence the performance of their subordinates, reminds managers about what their priorities should be in hiring, developing , managing and rewarding subordinates. PM forces organisations to give candid feedbacks to their employees.  

Key characteristics of different performance evaluation systems 
-WHO/WHAT is evaluated? Evaluate the team/the work group or the division? 
-WHO performs the evaluation? Supervisor? Peers, subordinates, in part, customers? 
-Time frame- short to long? What is the time frame in which data will be collected before evaluations made? Twice a year?  Once?  
-Objective/formulaic versus subjective/impressionistic evaluation : measuring hard results such as revenue generated per month or more subjective means like the superiors thoughts/ evaluations  
-Relative versus absolute performance e.g. sales volume, units produced per week, etc. or is it on a relative basis compared to others in the organisation which possess similar capability levels? 
-Forced distribution versus unspecified percentages 
-Multi-source verses single source evaluation 
-Multi-criterion versus single summary statistic is data gathered from a single source or multiple sources and combined into a single rating statistic of overall performance? 
-fine versus coarse performance distinctions 

What Performance Appraisal instrument can we use?
  •       BARS
  •       BOS
  •       Trait Based Scales
  •       360 degree feedback 
In sum/Conclusion points

-Performance evaluation serves many diverse and sometimes competing functions in organisations.  
-Recall the key dimensions to consider in the design of a performance evaluation system. 
-Recall that performance evaluation systems affect and should be evaluated from the perspective of at least four different constituents- those evaluated, those doing the evaluation, management in general and outside constituents such as government and unions.  

NOTE- from the point of view of those being evaluated, PROCEDURAL JUSTICE is important
 

-finding an ideal
 performance evaluation system is impossible but Greenberg's five factor analysis provides useful insights on what to look for in a performance evaluation system. In particular the form and content of P.E systems should reinforce both organisation. strategy and culture. 

-in trying to strike a balance among the various functions,
 dimensions and constituencies involved in performance appraisals, firms have found a variety of tactics to be useful : 

1. Comparative performance evaluation which enables the evaluator to control for  the effects of unmeasured, environmental influences on performance 

2.using course summary measures, blurring distinctions in the middle of the distribution and only rewarding/ punishing the extremes.  

3. Marshalling a diversity of inputs in the evaluation process- e.g. systems that rely on evaluation committees or 360 degree feedback  

- When designing the system need to ask - what is the main goal? Am I aiming to produce a formal assessment e.g. pay for promotion decisions or to provide feedback that will aid an employee’s development? Is performance evaluation even necessary –especially at the level of the individual employee.  



No comments:

Post a Comment