Performance 2

Performance planning and review

Performance appraisal problems  Disliked by managers and employees  People can’t see relevance  Emphasis on what went wrong  Emphasis on past performance  Meeting system’s requirements can become most important aim  System tries to do too much

Performance appraisal conflicts

Source: Adapted from Porter, Lawler and Hackman (1975).

Performance planning and review  More than name change  Part of performance management cycle – thus links made clear  Name change emphasises two aspects  Focus on future  Focus on performance – other needs met in other ways

Role in performance management

What do we assess?  Performance standards  define acceptable level of performance  quantitative or qualitative

 Performance objectives  usually set future goals or targets  quantitative or qualitative

 Performance indicators  evidence needed to prove that planned effort has achieved desired result

What do we assess?        

Standards, objectives Activities, behaviours, outcomes Bottom line results Team performance Benchmark comparisons External standards Competencies Personality measures

Setting effective goals  Specific  Measurable  Agreed  Realistic  Time-framed

Making reviews effective  Part of process of performance improvement  Distinguish reviews of performance, potential and remuneration  Concentrate on performance not personality  Encourage participation  Keep review in hands of management  Insist on benefits from review process

Performance review methods  Comparison methods  Standards-based reviews  Results-based reviews  Competency-based assessments

Standards-based reviews  Does employee have a particular characteristic - Yes or No?  To what extent does employee have a particular characteristic?  Methods  Rating scales  BARS  BOS

Results-based reviews  Management By Objectives  clarifies job requirements  mutual expectations of managers and employees  agree on specific work objectives (performance planning)  usually incorporate some aspects of rating scales or BARS/BOS approaches

Competency assessments  Assess ability of employee to behave as desired or specified  Confusion caused by many definitions of competency concept  Question whether competency assessments are performance reviews

Other review methods  Critical incidents  Essays and narratives  Checklists  Self-appraisals  Peer reviews  Upwards reviews  Client reviews  Assessment centres

360-degree feedback  Feedback rather than appraisal  Focus is development rather than performance  Multiple raters or reviewers  Subjects usually in management ot team leader roles  Structured and anonymous data collection

Feedback methods compared

Performance review problems  Lack of management commitment  Lack of training  No follow up or feedback  Takes too much time  ‘My job can’t be measured’  Personality more than performance  Priorities change, goals out of date  Goals are imposed

Errors in assessment  Halo effect  Central tendency  Harshness / Leniency  Similarity / Dissimilarity  Contrast  First impressions / Recency  Bias, prejudice  Logical error  Insufficient information

Maier’s interview approaches  Tell and sell  Tell and listen  Problem solving

Effective feedback  Specific rather than general  Descriptive rather than evaluative  Focus on behaviour that can be changed  Concerned with ‘what’ of behaviour, not ‘why’  Receiver can check if it is valid  Timely and relevant