Critiquing Performance Management
It has been proposed that the unitarist perspective ‘may represent one of the threats to performance management as it fails to recognize the plurality of interests that are so much a part of organizational reality’ organizational reality’ (Williams, 2002)
Line management has a major mediating influence on the implementation of HR practices (Den Hartog, 2004). Employee perceptions will be crucial. Consequently, if there is perceived inequality over pay it may be difficult to achieve the espoused benefits of performance management (Gospel and Pendleton, 2005). For example, if a practice is perceived as being manipulative it may have a negative impact. This can be witnessed through both overt and covert outcomes through decreased motivation which may result in worse performance and increased labour turnover (Dobbins, G., Cardy, R. and Platz-Vieno, 1990)
As stated by Fowler (1990), the starting point of a performance management system should be setting out the organization’s mission, aims and values. Following this, the organization’s objectives are identified, and these need to be intrinsically linked to, and support the firm’s mission. Fowler (1990) continued to state, these objectives should be cascaded down the organization with strong links to the objectives of the various managers and individual employees. The end result should be integrated objectives across all organizational levels and personnel.
(Den Hartog, 2004) have attempted to redress some criticisms of existing performance management models by setting out a conceptual model that gives greater prominence to the role of the line manager. Much research contends that for performance management to be effective and beneficial it needs to be owned and driven by line management (Torrington, D., Hall, L. and Taylor, S 2008).
Furthermore, organizational objectives can conflict with one another. Corporate governance needs to be taken into account as managers do not make decisions in a vacuum. For example, if the considerable emphasis is placed on shareholder value the management will need to consider the effect any decision they make will have on this (Gospel and Pendleton, 2005).
Likewise adopting a total quality management (TQM) system sets out to do things right the first time, whereas a learning organization orientation suggests that it is alright to make mistakes as long as one learns from them – two conflicting perspectives (Torrington, D., Hall, L. and Taylor, S 2008)
The
individual versus team dynamic represents another dilemma in performance
management, which to date has not received sufficient attention. (Torrington, D., Hall, L. and
Taylor, S 2008). For example, there is a danger that individual objectives
could be detrimental to the achievement of team-based objectives and vice versa
(Torrington, D., Hall, L. and
Taylor, S 2008).
Van Vijfeijken (2006) illustrate this potential conflict through an interesting example regarding management teams. An employee may have individual objectives about achieving their department’s objectives. Simultaneously they may be part of the firm’s management team which will have its own set of objectives. Conflict may arise, where for example, the management team have an objective of undertaking a major marketing campaign to increase the profile of a particular product or service. At the same time, the head of marketing has an objective of reducing costs in his/her department. Performance measurement is a further area of contention. For effective performance management clearly, the organization needs to know what performance it seeks (Torrington, 2008).
Furthermore,
it is commonly assumed that improved individual performance will lead to better
organizational performance. However, in reality, it is much more complex as improvements
at lower individual levels may be insufficient in improving organizational performance
(DeNisi, 2000). For example, improvements at an individual level may not result
in improved organizational performance if their objectives are not
intrinsically linked with team, departmental and organizational objectives (DeNisi,
2000).
performance management system is quite complex and the complexity clearly poses considerable challenges to organizations regarding the design and implementation of performance management systems (Fletcher, 2001). This complexity is likely to diminish anytime soon due to pressures for improved performance, technological advances, and cultural issues in implementing performance management across borders (Almond and Ferner, 2006).
References:
- Almond, P. and Ferner, A. 2006, American Multinationals in Europe: “Managing Employment Relations Across National Borders”, Oxford University Press
- Den Hartog, D. N., Boselie, P. and Paauwe, J. 2004, “Performance management”, a model and research agenda, Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53(4), p. 556–69
- DeNisi, A. S. 2000, “Performance appraisal and performance management” in K. J. Klein and S. Kozlowski (Eds), Multilevel Theory, Research and Methods in Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
- Dobbins, G. H., Cardy, R. L. and Platz-Vieno, S. J. 1990, A contingency approach to appraisal satisfaction: An initial investigation of the joint effects of organizational variables and appraisal characteristics, Journal of Management
- Fletcher, C. 2001, “Performance appraisal and management”, the developing research agenda, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74(4), p. 473–8
- Fowler, A. 1990, “Performance management” the MBO of the 90s, Personnel Management
- Gospel, H. and Pendelton, A. 2005, “Corporate Governance and Labour Management”, New York: Oxford University Press
- Torrington, D., Hall, L. and Taylor, S. 2008, Human Resource Management, 7th edition. Essex: Pearson Education Limite
- Van Vijfeijken, H., Kleingeld, A., van Tuijl, H. and Algera, J. 2006, Interdependence and fit in team performance management, Personnel Review
- Williams, R. S. 2002, “Managing Employee Performance”, Design and Implementation in Organizations. London: Thomson
Adding to the above content, according to Bouckaert & Halligan, (2008) Performance Management has to be located within a broad construction of organizational life, which recognizes that performance management cannot be considered in isolation in individual perspective as the outcome that the organization expects cannot be achieved overall.
ReplyDeleteHi Safiya, agree with your point. However, no one best, universally agreed performance management model exists and those being used tend to be quite basic in their orientation. Buchner (2007) suggests there has been a failure to utilize sufficient theory to support performance management. More specifically he argues that existent models fail to make explicit linkages between the various elements of the process. Similarly, Bevan and Thompson (1992) suggest a major issue is the lack of integration of activities and that some activities are utilized while others are not.
DeleteGreat post Derrick, in addition to the above, the role of a positive organizational culture which facilitates work-life balance can lead to positive effects on employee performance and a positive organizational culture which is family-friendly can have a positive effect on performance (Root and Wooten, 2008). According to Allen, Herst, Bruck and Sutton (2000) there is a link between increases in conflict and lower job satisfaction, organizational commitment and job performance, as well as increases in turnover intention and absenteeism.
ReplyDeleteHi Nishadi, well noted your content. There has also been the growth of more varied forms of feedback and broader measures of performance. A stronger emphasis on employee development is reflected in the extent to which appraisees have increased responsibility for steering performance appraisal and employers are also placing more emphasis on values, using performance appraisal to highlight the behaviours expected of staff (Armstrong and Baron 2005: 10). Alongside these developments, a more critical literature attributes the resurgent popularity of performance appraisal as part of the panoply of techniques used by employers to elicit commitment and at the same time to exercise detailed control over employee behaviour (Townley 1993; Newton and Findlay 1996).
DeleteAgree with your content. However, Stairs and Galpin (2010) claimed that high levels of engagement have been shown to relate to:
Delete● Lower absenteeism and higher employee retention
● Increased employee effort and productivity
● Improved quality and reduced error rates
● Increased sale
● Higher profitability, earnings per share and shareholder returns
● Enhanced customer satisfaction and loyalty
● Faster business growth
● Higher likelihood of business success.
According to Woods et al (2004), job satisfaction can be achieved when an employee becomes one with the organization, performs to the best of their ability and shows commitment; moreover, job satisfaction and performance are positively influenced by rewards. Kreitner et al (2002) identified various factors influencing job satisfaction, such as the need for management to create an environment that encourages employee involvement and manages stress in the workplace.
ReplyDeleteIt was suggested by Guest (2009) that engagement can be achieved through effective leadership of a strong, positive culture that ensures the enactment of organizational values; through strong management that supports employees’ work and well-being; through careful design of systems and jobs to enable employees to contribute through full use of their knowledge and skills; through effective employee voice; and through the provision of appropriate resources, tools and information to perform effectively.
Delete