Performance management
Order Instructions:
Dear Admin,
Note:To prepare for this essay please read the required articles that is attached then answer the following questions:
1)Evaluate the findings of the authors in regards to changes in the design, implementation, and effectiveness of performance management systems since earlier studies were conducted.
2)Analyse the claims of the authors in relation to the level of satisfaction, the training of users, and the involvement of employees with performance management systems.
3)Support your argument with evidence from the study and other real examples where possible.
Also,
1) The answer must raise appropriate critical questions.
2) Do include all your references, as per the Harvard Referencing System,
3)Please don’t use Wikipedia web site.
4) I need examples from peer reviewed articles or researches.
5) Turnitin.com copy percentage must be 10% or less.
Note:To prepare for this essay please read the required articles that is attached
Appreciate each single moment you spend in writing my paper
Best regards
SAMPLE ANSWER
Introduction
Performance management serves the purpose of decision making while developing the skills of employees. Developing and managing human capital involves making decisions on pay increases, transfers, promotions and retirements (Pulakos 2004). The appraisal information gathered is applied as a guide to employee training, experience evaluation and other mentoring and development activities (Hillgren & Cheatham 2000).
The role of performance management can only be felt if the attitudes, skills and commitment levels of those people responsible for its implementation are wholly on the exercise while owning the appraisers together with the appraises (Lawler 1994). The effectiveness of the whole program can be eroded by perceived unfairness in the exercise hence procedural fairness and distributive justice must seem to prevail at all time during the entire implementation process. The critics of the PM system are convinced that the PM system only satisfies short-term performance while jeopardizing the long-term organization plans by building fear among the staff while encouraging unhealthy competition and rivalry among the employees (Deming, 1982). Managers are mostly frustrated by the performance management standards as they attempt to address its challenges and expectations (Lawler 1994).
According to Rheem (1996) companies that utilize the PM effectively perform better financially than those that have not implemented the PM system in their HRM structures.
The role of performance management has changed greatly since its inception. Its prim role of performance measurement of setting performance objectives seem to have been surpassed by other pressing management issues like determination of staff training and development needs which according Nankervis & Compton (2006) rank on top of the HRM list with a rating of 89.2% while appraisal of past performance, alignment of objectives and development of competencies are also on top of the list ranking closely at 88.9%, 75.5% and 56.6% respectively. At the bottom of the list are setting of performance objectives, retainment of caliber staff and change of organization culture and which were ranked as 2.4%, 27.55 and 28% respectively. The major traditional functions of the Human Resource Management (HRM) and Performance Management (PM) of dismissal, discipline, the retention of the high caliber staff and organizational change are no longer the prime responsibilities of the departments.
However, performance management (64%) is still favored as a management tool compared with other hybrid systems (21%) such as trait-based appraisal systems or the management by objectives (MbO) systems (7%). About 65% of the respondent confirmed consistent use of the PM system while almost 75% of all the PM have been largely developed by the HRM specialists while only a paltry 12% are reported to be imposed by respective head offices.
According to Nankervis & Compton (2006) the trend towards modern, customized and sophisticated performance system that are effectively designed to align the goals of the organization and individuals including company objectives. However the satisfaction of performance management by HR Professionals has declined compared to the earlier studies that were carried out 1990. The ratings dropped and registered a range of 84% to 20% as highly effective while 49% registered as effective. The best systems of performance management are enshrined in ideal principles of organizational strategic alignment and individual employee goals whose outcomes are transparency, equity, consistency, friendliness in view of clear links of salary review and human capital development.
Strategic management elements have also been introduced on the PM systems to make more effective and powerful. The introduction of the Balanced Scorecard brought in fresh impetus to the system that was slowly becoming ineffective. By assessing the company’s values and mission, the targets and objectives of the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) can be carefully articulated to reflect the needs of the company. However, only 25.5% of the total respondent who took part in the survey had implemented the BSC in there PM system. According to those respondents who have implemented the BSC system, 95% of them are satisfied with the performance of their PM systems as the systems are now consistent and focused towards the attainment of the organizations goal (Nankervis & Compton, 2006).
- Ineffective and less attractive systems reflect none of the qualities above and which suffer from inadequate communication systems, lack proper feedbacks or any technical training.
Nankervis & Compton (2006) states that “…satisfaction levels with present systems have deteriorated since the earlier studies, the training of system users has declined, and the involvement of employees in the review of their own and their team’s performance is not yet well implemented. The dissatisfying factors remain those of all previous studies, and indicate the guiding principles that HRM professionals should use in order to further develop their performance management systems – alignment, integration, commitment, collaboration, feedback, outcomes, and user-friendliness” (pg. 100).
The success of the Performance management system or its failure is greatly hinged on the attitudes and skills of the implementing officers together with the perception of the employees. Any form of bias or unfairness being perceived or otherwise, can ruin the whole purpose and objective of the performance management system. The level of commitment and decisiveness of the implementing officers in the HRM department is of utmost importance if the system is to succeed (Hedge and Teachout 2000). Recognition and other forms of rewards that accrue to best performing staff must be clearly outlined and the procedures effectively communicated to all the employees (Wilson 2001).
Nankervis & Compton (2006) concludes that “…section reports only the qualitative responses of the sampled HRM professionals of the perceived effectiveness of their present performance management systems. The study did not include quantitative measures. Although the majority of respondents (69%) report general satisfaction with their present performance management systems, ranging from 49 per cent ‘effective’ to almost 20 per cent which are ‘more than effective’(16%) or ‘highly effective’ (4%), more than 30 per cent are less than satisfied…” (Pg. 93)
The level of satisfaction for the PM is far above average and its effectiveness and application is what really matters.
To conclude, the performance management system has gradually changed from its previous roles of setting performance objectives to development and training of employees. Its success depends entirely on the attitudes of the implementers and the perception that the employees will have when implemented (Nankervis & Compton, 2006).The introduction of the Balance Scorecard into the system has added a new positive strategy in the management and implementation of the performance management. Its application is still limited but it has registered great success in all areas that it has been implemented. The performance of the PM system is effective if it’s implemented positively and fairly across the whole spectrum without any bias. The most effective systems of performance management should be protected under the ideal principles of organizational strategic alignment and individual employee goals whose outcomes are transparency, equity, consistency, friendliness in view of clear links of salary review and human capital development. These traits can only be recognized if the attitudes and behaviors of employees are positive and the system is free from any form of bias.
References
Hillgren, J.S., & Cheatham, D.W., 2000, Understanding Performance Measures: An Approach to Linking Rewards to Achievements of Organization Objectives, Scottsdale, AZ: Worldatwork.
Hedge, J., M. Teachout, 2000, Exploring the concept of acceptability as a criterion for evaluating performance, Group and Organization Management 25(1): 22–44.
Lawler, E., 1994, Performance management: The next generation. Compensation and Benefits Review 26(3): 16–20.
Nankervis, A.R. & Compton, R. L., 2006, Performance Management: Theory in Practice? Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, vol. 44 (1)
Schuler, R.S., 1992, Strategic Human Resource Management: Linking People with the Needs of the Business, Organizational Dynamics, 22, 19 – 32.
Pulakos, E.D., 2004, Performance Management: A Roadmap for Developing Implementing and Evaluating Performance Management Systems, SHRM Foundation. Retrieved May 30 2015 from https://www.pdri.com/images/uploads/Performance_Management.pdf
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
