My friend was called by a very big multinational German firm to train their executives and managers in a new PAS ( Performance management system) system. The firm had designed a PAS system with the help of a consulting firm. They installed PAS in SAP. They designed a good training program of a day to train their large work force in the new PAS system. More than 20 odd trainers were brought in to train the workforce all over India. More than few millions were spent on the entire exercise. Do you think that the company achieved its objective of changing their performance system?
The success of a performance appraisal system (PAS) does not depend on the 'brilliance' of the form designed, KRA's designed, goals set or the quality of training. It depends on the 'spirit' in which the performance appraisal is conducted. If the 'spirit' is right, everything works right in a performance appraisal system. Even if the design of performance system is wrong, the people involved in PAS discover problems 'incrementally' and, slowly but surely, reach the final destination. However, if the spirit is not put in place, then no amount of design can correct the flaws.
As a HR professional, your job is to 'ensure' that the right spirit is brought in the performance appraisal (preventive care) and 'sustained' throughout the years (corrective care). Both preventive and corrective strategies have to be designed appropriately to ensure that the right spirit is in place.
For instance, in installing a PAS one needs to take care of how goals are set in an organisation. One of the companies, i knew of, had set the goals based on last year with a 40% increase. With nothing to support such high goals, the goals cannot be met in the first place itself. How can employees achieve such 'ambitious' but unsupported goals? HR executives have to intervene and ensure that the PAS system is objective and not biased towards 'organisational bosses'. If they fail to intervene, either because HR is not taken seriously in an organisation or because HR executives does not have a conviction to stand up to, the PAS system is bound to fail because of this 'weak link'.
Other such 'weak links' in a PAS are inappropriate contextualisation of the KRA's, 'mismatch' of resources provided visavis the KRA's, lack of requisite skills of reviewing the performance of a junior, linkage of PAS with annual increments and so on.
If PAS is linked with annual increments ( as is being done by many companies), the system becomes 'over laden' with emotions due to the dynamics involved. If PAS is linked with annual increments, and because bosses have to choose whom and what to offer, they make these 'choices' first due to the high 'variety' involved. Employees loose faith in PAS because they perceive it as a means to justify lower ‘increments’. Relevance of PAS system has to be ‘reconfigured’.
Skills of managing the performance evaluation review are not innate. Without these skills, bosses find it difficult to 'assert' without pointing 'fingers'. They find it difficult to handle the outburst of emotions that are inherent in such a review. Bosses, unable to manage this high emotional interaction, are often known to avoid such interactions. This can put the entire PAS system at risk.
Corrective strategies to ensure that PAS is working as per the intended design are equally important. For instance, HR executives have to assume that 'junior' is more handicapped than the 'boss' and therefore has to be supported with something 'extra' to negotiate the handicap. Corrective strategies are monitoring strategies. For instance, HR executives may have to install a system of feedback so that every junior's feedback is received and responded.
A PAS system can become a useless 'ritual' or can become a highly active system to spot and nurture performers. Be it PAS or any other HR system, HR executives need to first diagnose the weak link in the system. Without diagnosing the weak link, PAS system can fail to make any impact.
The success of a performance appraisal system (PAS) does not depend on the 'brilliance' of the form designed, KRA's designed, goals set or the quality of training. It depends on the 'spirit' in which the performance appraisal is conducted. If the 'spirit' is right, everything works right in a performance appraisal system. Even if the design of performance system is wrong, the people involved in PAS discover problems 'incrementally' and, slowly but surely, reach the final destination. However, if the spirit is not put in place, then no amount of design can correct the flaws.
As a HR professional, your job is to 'ensure' that the right spirit is brought in the performance appraisal (preventive care) and 'sustained' throughout the years (corrective care). Both preventive and corrective strategies have to be designed appropriately to ensure that the right spirit is in place.
For instance, in installing a PAS one needs to take care of how goals are set in an organisation. One of the companies, i knew of, had set the goals based on last year with a 40% increase. With nothing to support such high goals, the goals cannot be met in the first place itself. How can employees achieve such 'ambitious' but unsupported goals? HR executives have to intervene and ensure that the PAS system is objective and not biased towards 'organisational bosses'. If they fail to intervene, either because HR is not taken seriously in an organisation or because HR executives does not have a conviction to stand up to, the PAS system is bound to fail because of this 'weak link'.
Other such 'weak links' in a PAS are inappropriate contextualisation of the KRA's, 'mismatch' of resources provided visavis the KRA's, lack of requisite skills of reviewing the performance of a junior, linkage of PAS with annual increments and so on.
If PAS is linked with annual increments ( as is being done by many companies), the system becomes 'over laden' with emotions due to the dynamics involved. If PAS is linked with annual increments, and because bosses have to choose whom and what to offer, they make these 'choices' first due to the high 'variety' involved. Employees loose faith in PAS because they perceive it as a means to justify lower ‘increments’. Relevance of PAS system has to be ‘reconfigured’.
Skills of managing the performance evaluation review are not innate. Without these skills, bosses find it difficult to 'assert' without pointing 'fingers'. They find it difficult to handle the outburst of emotions that are inherent in such a review. Bosses, unable to manage this high emotional interaction, are often known to avoid such interactions. This can put the entire PAS system at risk.
Corrective strategies to ensure that PAS is working as per the intended design are equally important. For instance, HR executives have to assume that 'junior' is more handicapped than the 'boss' and therefore has to be supported with something 'extra' to negotiate the handicap. Corrective strategies are monitoring strategies. For instance, HR executives may have to install a system of feedback so that every junior's feedback is received and responded.
A PAS system can become a useless 'ritual' or can become a highly active system to spot and nurture performers. Be it PAS or any other HR system, HR executives need to first diagnose the weak link in the system. Without diagnosing the weak link, PAS system can fail to make any impact.
Only after one diagnoses the weak link in one's PAS system, can one devise appropriate preventive and corrective strategies to ensure that the PAS system is self-sustainable and can achieve its desired objective.
2 comments:
We have installed a PAS system which is linked with increments. Spotting good performers is not difficult.
But, as you mentioned, we face considerable difficulty in spotting average performers who can be converted into 'good' performers. Infact, either those performers leave or remain in the organisation with considerable 'frustration'.
What does this mean? Should we drop the linkage of PAS to annual increment? But that is like dropping the baby with bathwater?
Ramesh.S
I agree with Ramesh. In our company, which is one of the big companies, our PMS system has become a system for giving increments and promotions.
Although this was not the original intention of PMS, this is what it has become.Due to the perception of juniors, the PMS system is only used by good performers.
We can hardly use it for detecting better performers. Infact we can use it to detect people who are likely to exit. But that does not mean anything is done to prevent it.
Jeevan
Post a Comment