Performance Improvement

RESEARCH PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT SUBMITTED TO:

University name University venue

name

roll no. college name

G.G.S.I.P.U

Performance Improvement

Performance Improvement

Page 2

G.G.S.I.P.U

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.INTRODUCTION 2.

PAST SCENARIO

3.CURRENT SCENARIO 4.CRITICAL ANALYSIS 5.

ESSENTIALS REQUIRED

6.BIBLIOGRAPHY

Performance Improvement

Page 3

G.G.S.I.P.U

Introduction

Performance Improvement

Page 4

G.G.S.I.P.U Performance improvement

Performance Defined Performance is a measure of results achieved. Performance efficiency is the ratio between effort expended and results achieved. The difference between current performance and the theoretical performance limit is the performance improvement zone. Performance improvement It is the concept of measuring the output of a particular process or procedure, then modifying the process or procedure in order to increase the output, increase efficiency, or increase the effectiveness of the process or procedure. The concept of performance improvement can be applied to either individual performance or organizational performance. At the operational or individual employee level, Performance improvement usually involves processes such as statistical quality control.

Performance Improvement

Page 5

G.G.S.I.P.U At the organizational level, performance improvement usually involves softer forms of measurement such as customer satisfaction surveys which are used to obtain qualitative information about performance from the viewpoint of customers.Another way to think of performance improvement is to see it as improvement in four potential areas. First, is the resource INPUT requirements (e.g., reduced working capital, material, replacement/reorder time,and set-up requirements). Second, is the THROUGHPUT requirements, often viewed as process efficiency; this is measured in terms of time, waste, and resource utilization. Third, OUTPUT requirements, often viewed from a cost/price, quality, functionality perspective. Fourth, OUTCOME requirements, did it end up making a difference.

Levels Performance improvement can occur at different levels:

   

an individual performer(through performance appraisal) a team an organizational unit(through TQM) the organization itself(through BENCHMARKING)

Performance Improvement

Page 6

G.G.S.I.P.U Performance Appraisal Performance Appraisal, also known as employee appraisal, is a method by which the performance of an employee is evaluated (generally in terms of quality, quantity, cost and time). The roots of performance appraisal can be found in Frederick Winslow Taylor's time and motion study. Performance appraisal is a part of career development. Performance appraisals are a regular review of employee performance within organizations. Generally, the aims of a scheme are: •

Document criteria used to allocate organizational rewards.

•

Facilitate communication between employee and administrator.

•

Form a basis for personnel decisions: salary increases, promotions, disciplinary actions, etc.

•

Give feedback on performance to employees.

•

Identify employee training needs.

•

Provide the opportunity for organizational diagnosis and development.

•

Validate selection techniques and human resource policies to meet federal Equal Employment Opportunity requirements. A common approach to assessing performance is to use a numerical or scalar rating system whereby managers are asked to score an individual against a number of objectives/attributes. Employees are also allowed the opportunity to assess the person (manager) at the same time.

Total Quality Management (TQM) Total quality management is a management strategy aimed at embedding awareness of quality in all organizational processes. TQM has been widely used in manufacturing, education, government, and service industries, as well as NASA space and science programs. Total Quality provides an umbrella under which everyone in the organization can strive and create customer satisfaction at continually lower real costs.

Performance Improvement

Page 7

G.G.S.I.P.U Definition TQM is composed of three paradigms: Total: Involving the entire organization, supply chain, and/or product life cycle Quality: With its usual Definitions, with all its complexities (External Definition) Management: The system of managing with steps like Plan, Organize, Control, Lead, Staff, provisioning and suchlike[citation needed]. As defined by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO): "TQM is a management approach for an organization, centered on quality, based on the participation of all its members and aiming at long-term success through customer satisfaction, and benefits to all members of the organization and to society." One major aim is to reduce variation from every process so that greater consistency of effort is obtained. In Japan, TQM comprises four process steps, namely: Kaizen – Focuses on "Continuous Process Improvement", to make processes visible, repeatable and measurable. Atarimae Hinshitsu – The idea that "things will work as they are supposed to" (for example, a pen will write). Kansei – Examining the way the user applies the product leads to improvement in the product itself. Miryokuteki Hinshitsu – The idea that "things should have an aesthetic quality" (for example, a pen will write in a way that is pleasing to the writer). TQM requires that the company maintain this quality standard in all aspects of its business. This requires ensuring that things are done right the first time and that defects and waste are eliminated from operations.

Benchmarking It is a process used in management and particularly strategic management, in which organizations evaluate various aspects of their processes in relation to best practice, usually within their own sector. This then allows organizations to develop plans on how to adopt such best practice, usually with the aim of increasing some aspect of performance. Benchmarking may be a one-off event, but is often treated as a continuous process in which organizations continually seek to challenge their practices. Performance Improvement

Page 8

G.G.S.I.P.U PROCESS The process for Performance Improvement is: Design- to develop a plan that is thought to improve a process Measure-to collect information (data) that will allow us to compare what we used to do with what we believe to be an improvement. Assess- we review the data to determine whether the change we have made is only a change, or an actual improvement. Improve-based on our assessment of the data, we continue on the cycle with making changes again which we think will get us further improvements.

Performance Improvement

Page 9

G.G.S.I.P.U

PAST SCENARIO

Performance Improvement

Page 10

G.G.S.I.P.U The past decade saw a plethora decade where managers were urged to promote teamwork through reward systems and new organization forms, to pay for performance, to train managers and staff in “total quality” principles, to deploy cross-functional teams, to reengineer core business processes, to return to value-based management fundamentals, to adopt the Baldridge criteria, to foster and reward continuous improvement, to implement “balanced scorecards,” to derive and use customer-driven performance measures, to benchmark these measures, and to employ all these strategies while downsizing, outsourcing, simplifying, and producing just-in-time results. No manager could afford to employ all these programs. Some management improvement protocols that extolled simplification, streamlining, clarity, and accountability became obese, rigid, and even Bureaucratic, violating their own precepts. The streamlining agenda needed a dose of its own medicine. Conscientious managers had little objective information to enable them to choose from an array of rapidly promulgated ideas. “New” management ideas were backed by little verifiable data demonstrating their efficacy. Many ideas were superbly presented not only in print but also by consultants who polished and added pricey legitimacy. Most new methods were promoted without attacking other strategies, but with a dogmatism that implied the superiority of new theories over their antecedents and competing models. Anecdotal evidence was used to extol new methods of organizing, managing, and rewarding people, buoyed by rising optimism about the productivity and competitiveness of American industries. However, the thoughtful manager could find little evidence about the relative effectiveness of various improvement programs, to enable an informed decision about where best to invest limited time. Which tools would most efficiently and assuredly lead to improved management effectiveness and enterprise performance? In fact, many of the improvement programs that surfaced (or re-surfaced) during the past decade were unvalidated models. They may sound sensible and appear to yield worthwhile benefits. But empirical evidence -- in terms of systematic, verifiable cause and effect -rarely links management behaviorsbelieved to be Beffective with desired work group performance patterns(such as teamwork and collaboration), or with measured organizational performance. Shortcomings of Management Behavioral Models Many management behavioral models are inadequate in other ways, besides lacking an empirical basis. Some models prove too complicated to assimilate and put into practice, such as conditional or situational models that expect a manager to adopt different supervisory behaviors based on different attributes of the group being supervised or the task at hand. Experienced managers know that they will be perceived as more credible and trusted if subordinates do Performance Improvement

Page 11

G.G.S.I.P.U not experience variances in management style from task to task, group to group, or individual to individual. Some management models are descriptive and analytic, rather than normative, providing little guidance on how to put them into practice. And the models that are normative often do not define behaviors that can be broadly understood and applied -- at all levels by different people. Some management models are great leader-centric, basing “theory” on a heroic, charismatic, larger-than-life interpretation of what made popular political or business leaders effective. Although these accounts are fascinating, they entail several problems: First, it is not clear to most managers how to apply a leadership model of heroic proportions to everyday problems in their immediate organizations. This challenge can be disillusioning and frustrating because many of the “great leader theories” center more around traits than behaviors. Managers intent on improving their leadership skills cannot do anything about changing personality or physical traits. Useful models must be built on understandable, changeable behaviors. Finally, many models are incomplete because they do not encompass work group dynamics influenced by management behavior. Some of these models survey employees about whether management behaviors are perceived favorably or experienced as effective, but they do not measure whether desired work group patterns (teamwork, collaboration, information-sharing) actually improve based on such behaviors. Whether or not “management styles” are perceived favorably by those supervised is interesting, but not nearly as useful as measured correlations between normative management behaviors and work group effectiveness.

Performance Improvement

Page 12

G.G.S.I.P.U

PRESENT SCENARIO

Performance Improvement

Page 13

G.G.S.I.P.U Performance IMPROVEMENT: Current Trends Recent research reveals that the majority of organizations are utilizing performance management systems / performance management software and many are in the process of revamping their first generation systems. According to Development Dimensions International (DDI), performance management systems are active in 91% of 3,600+ organizations studied. This article will review the current trends in performance management, and how companies worldwide are making changes. Performance Management - A Definition According to SHRM (Society for Human Resource Management), "performance management is the organized method of monitoring results of work activities, collecting and evaluating performance to determine achievement of goals, and using performance information to make decisions, allocate resources and communicate whether objectives are met." It is likely the majority of employees equate "performance management" to their performance appraisal form and yearly discussion with their manager about "how they are doing in their job." But things are changing in this area of HR. Online performance management systems 59% of HR executives identify improvement of HCM (Human Capital Management) technology as a key response to their business challenges. Main areas of focus: hiring management solutions pre-employment assessment employee self-service performance management However, with all this focus on online systems, More than half (52%) of companies surveyed in 2005, are stuck in paper-based performance evaluation systems with annual reviews. As companies transition to online performance management systems, some key ingredients are: Scalability - able to deploy on large scale with solid security Performance Improvement

Page 14

G.G.S.I.P.U Employee self-service - managers and employees able to access systems anytime, any place, on-demand Integration - ability to connect with other HR systems Increased Communication Regarding Employee Performance With increasing use of performance management technology, managers and employees more easily communicate regarding performance issues. Annual performance reviews are being replaced with more frequent schedules (quarterly, monthly, etc.). In addition, performance management technology enables organizations to include feedback from a variety of audiences. Such 360-degree feedback is internal (supervisors, peers, subordinates) and external (customers, vendors, etc.). A new Research report is a little more favorable, however still shows room for improvement. Below are some highlights from their research database of approximately 1.2 million employees in over 400 organizations worldwide: Less than 50% of employees believe their organizations adequately address poor performance. Clearly it is a challenge for most companies large or small to manage the performance of their employees . . . especially in the eyes of those employees. However, those organizations making the connection between employee performance and organizational performance are taking steps to integrate once disparate hr functions with online systems that offer long term ROI towards organizational and individual employee success

Process The Process of appraising an Individual is:

Determines individual goals and objectives

The departmental Manager would determine the specific goals and objectives for a person performing a specific job. The requirements of the job would drive the individual performance targets.

Performance Improvement

Page 15

G.G.S.I.P.U

Advise employees goals objectives

of and

The Manager would communicate expectations to employees prior to the new appraisal period commencing, including how their performance was to be measured and what were the specific outputs.

Receive performance expectations

The employee would receive the information regarding performance expectations from their supervisor or manager, most likely during a formal session.

Performs work

The employee would then perform work with the knowledge of what were the expected outputs and behaviors.

Appraises work against objectives

The departmental Manager would appraise an employee’s performance based on observed behavior, measurable outputs or deliverables, perhaps employees peers and subordinates (360 degree), or other agreed criteria.

Make assessment

an

Advise employee and HR of results

The Manager would make a specific assessment against each measurable item and probably an overall assessment against company program guidelines: For example, rating of 1 to 5, where 1 is excellent and 5 is unsatisfactory.

The Manger would probably advise HR of the result, especially if there were bonus payments attached to the result or if there was an unsatisfactory result where a person was to be managed out of the company. The manager would require HR guidance on how that process was to proceed and what warning systems needed to be in place. The Manager would advise the employee of the assessment, probably in a formal feedback session.

Performance Improvement

Page 16

G.G.S.I.P.U

Records performance results

The HR Clerk would record performance results in HRIS, including assessment, date of next review.

The HR Clerk would record any future dated activity and any performance improvement warnings issued. Record future dated activity

Receives feedback makes comments

and

Monitors performance and follow up action

The employee would receive feedback from the Manager and agree where performance was deficient, additional training required, and career path preferences.

The departmental Manager would monitor progress and any follow up action required.

Deletes old The HR Clerk or HR System Administrator would arrange to delete old performance performance records when the agreed date has been reached. records

Produces Reports

The HR Clerk would produce and distribute performance related reports

Performance Improvement

Page 17

G.G.S.I.P.U

CRITICAL ANALYSIS

Performance Improvement

Page 18

G.G.S.I.P.U This paper will try to give further insights on the prospects of Performance Improvement. Increased Integration of HR Functions Research shows there is a clear need to integrate the traditional HR functions into a more holistic, strategic approach to human capital management. Some integration opportunities include: Aligning employee goals with corporate goals Linking reward and recognition programs to performance Targeting learning and development toward performance gaps Identifying skills and competencies of top performers for retention and succession planning Integrating traditional HR functions, will give rise to an increased need to automate them. Connecting the functions at their integration points into clean, close-looped systems eliminating duplication of data and streamlining reporting processes is the charge for many organizations. Strategic HR - The Link Between Employee Performance Management and Organizational Performance Increasingly companies are focusing on "strategic HR," aligning human resources initiatives with the overall goals of the organization to improve business success. Aligning Employee Performance Management (EPM) with Corporate Performance Management (CPM) has the following effects: 90% of companies surveyed, perceive improved management of their workforce as key to gaining competitive advantage. Organizations are aligning their employee performance goals with corporate performance goals through technology solutions. Employees Perceptions A recent survey of indian organizations and 3,000 employees revealed the following of their employees: Only 29% feel their companies do a good job of identifying and rewarding top performers Only 27% feel there is a clear link between performance and pay Only 24% feel their companies manage poor performers so their work improves. Performance Improvement

Page 19

G.G.S.I.P.U ESSENTIALS REQUIRED FOR PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT What essential features would be evident in a complete, useful model? First, it would be simple in ways that lend broad structure and clarity to the complex relationships among managers, employees individually and in groups, and the overall work product of these relationships. Effective management models contain both analytic and synthetic features. Analytic elements dissect a problem and provide a descriptive framework, while synthetic elements reformulate in a normative way that aims for improvement. Managers may not comprehend how to improve behaviors by reading a purely analytic or descriptive analysis, even of the highest caliber. Therefore, useful management models need to contain synthetic as well as analytic components. Second, good management models come to grips with values that motivate behavior. Improvement is about changing behaviors (of managers, employees, work groups), which are rooted in the belief systems that characterize the “informal organization.” Therefore, in order to influence how people in a workplace lead, follow, communicate, and solve problems, an improvement model must engage the dynamic interplay of values,expectations, disincentives, symbols, motivations, and beliefs that affects individual and team behaviors. Third,the value of a behavioral model depends on whether it can be validated empirically. Changing management practices and work group patterns requires an investment of time and resources, and a validated model provides assurance that the organization is not rewarding the wrong behaviors, incentivizing the wrong values, sending mixed messages about expectations, or pursuing a trend that will soon fall out of favor if it does not produce quick results. Finally, a performance improvement model needs to be capable of changing behavior through measurement, feedback, and learning.

Performance Improvement

Page 20

G.G.S.I.P.U Bibliography

•

http://books.google.co.in/books?hl=en&id=xSeb535yrQwC&dq=performance+improve ment&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=NsibeW8bw3&sig=axN92i8oyidQ5mHVb rm-tiE_NqA

•

www.organizedchange.com/balancedscorecard.htm

•

www.ispi.org/publications/pij.htm

•

www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/112729556/home

•

www.ispi.org/publications/pij.htm

•

www.ama-assn.org/a

Performance Improvement

Page 21