Section 1, Topic 1, Activity 1.1d:
Thinking about your own organisation (and others in which you’ve worked), what do you see as being key components (or stages) in the performance management process:
From my current company, the performance management process is defined as ’the dialogue’, used mainly to discuss objectives and behavioural competencies. The aim is to agree, between the line manager and employee, on a performance plan, targets and measured regarding development.
Currently, I feel that the key components to the dialogue are:
Tasks & Objectives – Normally 3 to 4 objectives with an individual weighting, normally developed in line with the managers individual ...view middle of the document...
Feedback & Actions For The Manager – This is currently regarded as not important, as not many employees are prepared to suggest ways the manager can improve. Although, I do feel that if there were ever any serious issues, this would be utilised, and also always provides the employee with a formal route to air their views, if necessary.
Section 1, Topic 1, Activity 1.4a:
Read pages 39 to 47 in Armstrong’s Performance Management.
Identify which three or four of the key issues and implications suggested may need further attention as a priority to enhance the operation of PMS in your organisation.
1. Line managers do not have the skills required.
* Formal training for line managers and/or staff
* Coaching skills
Currently, in my organisation, line managers receive no training on how to conduct a performance review. Although almost 50% of the ‘dialogue’ process is completed by the employee prior to the ‘meeting’ they too receive no formal training, not only for them to understand how to complete the documentation effectively, but to also provide them with an overall understanding of the company’s performance management system and processes. Within the organisation, there is an performance improvement program (PIP), which, although these has been relayed to management, the rest of the staff have not even been exposed to this process; I do not know of its existence, let alone the requirement and reasons for its implementation.
Along with the basic formal training requirements above; within the organisation there is no direction to promote or even discuss coaching skills.
2. Clarity in purpose and process and simplicity in operation.
* How it works?
* How it effects them?
* How will the outcomes be used?
* Keep it simple!
Closely linked to point 1 above, I know without doubt that employees are not aware of the outcomes of the ‘dialogue’. Questions such as “Does this affect my pay review or not?” are all too common, usually asked on a yearly basis. Employees are not aware fully of how it all fits together i.e. dialogue process, pay review process, performance improvement program and processes etc.
What are the objectives of the company’s performance management system? This is the link to pint 1 above, as training (either formal or informal) should, but unfortunately currently does not, provide the answer to the question.
The current ‘dialogue’ process could be greatly simplified also, the current template looks as though it is covering all relevant aspects, however this is done without an overall view to what the process is trying to achieve, and why.
3. Cultural Fit.
* The way it “does the business”
* “Lifted from the shelf”
Unfortunately, the current ‘dialogue’ is “lifted from the shelf” twice a year; in April to sum up the previous year, and set new goals/targets for the coming year, and then around December as a 6-month review, which is nothing more than a quick...