10 Steps to Re-Engineer Performance Management
•Descargar como PPTX, PDF•
0 recomendaciones•727 vistas
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
Más de Drake International
Más de Drake International (20)
10 Steps to Re-Engineer Performance Management
- 1. For audio, it is recommended you dial in A copy of the slides + recording will be available post webinar AUDIO: 1-877-668-4493 Access Code: 660 710 580 Event Password: 1234 WebEx Support: 1-866-863-3910 10 Ways to Re-Engineer Performance Management November 1, 2012 Presented by: Maysa Hawwash, National Manager – Talent Management Solutions
- 2. Agenda • Evolution of Performance Management • The Brutal Facts • The Case for Change • Taking the Steps • 10 Steps to Making it Work
- 3. Evolution of Performance Management 1960’s & 1970’s • ESR (Employee Service Record) • ACR (Annual Confidential Reviews) – 10 traits on a five or ten point scale – Job knowledge, sincerity, dynamism, punctuality, leadership, loyalty, etc. • Reports were never communicated to the employees 3
- 4. Evolution of Performance Management Early 1970’s • Content revealed to employees • Performance Appraisals introduced – Employee permitted to describe accomplishments Mid 1970’s • Some Development Components • Talent / Performance-based 4
- 5. Evolution of Performance Management Contemporary Performance Management • Performance and Development Reviews • Personal Development Plans • Learning and Development Activities • Coaching & Mentoring • Objectives and Performance Standards 5
- 6. Evolution of Performance Management Contemporary Performance Management • Competencies • Measurement • Reward and Compensation • Team Work • 360 Degree Feedback 6
- 7. The Brutal Facts • Stress for both managers and employees • Tight Deadlines • Employee contributions are not adequately recognized • Reviews are not focused 7
- 8. The Brutal Facts • Not aligned with Corporate Culture • Inflexible and not customizable • Past performance reviews are either irrelevant or overlooked 8
- 9. The Brutal Facts • Forms – complicated, with competency lists are too long/short • Turnover & low engagement continue to be serious issues • A wave of absenteeism or resignations follow the annual review cycle • Process fails to provide key insights or development opportunities 9
- 10. The Case for Change Got Money?? Now what?!?!? 10
- 11. The Case for Change • Autonomy: Employees want to be part of creating their own goals, work environment and working style • Contribution to an overall Organizational Strategy and Sense of purpose • Recognition • Mastery: The opportunity for growth and development • Leadership is key 11
- 12. The ROI Chain Increased Financial Performance and Shareholder value Higher Quality of Increased Products and Employee Services Engagement Increased Increased Innovation Customer Centricity 12
- 13. Taking the Steps • Starting from the top – Develop Key Performance Indicators – Develop a comprehensive communication plan 13
- 14. Taking the Steps • Develop an Infrastructure that fosters continuous feedback and collaboration – Translating KPIs – Develop goals that align to the organizational KPIs – Focus on culture and team work – Incorporate Corporate Social Responsibility and Employment value proposition 14
- 15. 10 Steps to Making it Work 1. Clearly define what business outcomes, behaviors and competencies you plan to measure 2. Involve employees in setting goals and objectives 3. Apply multi rater feedback when it makes sense. i.e 360 feedback 4. Collect important details about your workforce talent profiles 5. Avoid complex rating systems in the interest of transparency 15
- 16. 10 Steps to Making it Work 6. Recognition is key 7. Adopt more frequent dialogue (monthly mini-reviews as opposed to annual) 8. Ask employees what skills and competencies they want to develop 9. Ensure the system tracks accountability 10. Ensure the system provides analytics and key insights Bonus Step: Consider a Balanced Score Card 16
- 17. Drake Solutions f Drake P3 Personality Exit Interviews Assessments Outplacement Emotional Intelligence Assessments Leadership & Team Enterprise Surveys Development Performance Talent Management Management Process Systems – TMS/LMS Consulting Remuneration and HR Help Line Benefit reviews HR Audit 17
- 18. Questions Re-Engineer Q&A Performance with Maysa Hawwash, Manager, Management Talent Management Solutions 18
- 19. EXCLUSIVE OFFER – FREE TMS DEMO 19
- 20. Upcoming Webinar Register at http://drake- webinars.com November 15, 12pm EDT Occupational Health & Safety: Workplace Wellness 20
- 21. Thank You for Attending For Questions please contact Maysa Hawwash mhawwash@na.drakeintl.com 416-216-1067 21
Notas del editor
- … Performance management is probably the process that we have most overcomplicated in HR, and all with good intentions,” Companies that successfully create performance management systems can use them to solve business problems, This means getting rid of check-the-box models that burden managers with long lists of competencies in favor of one-on-one meetings between managers and employees to set challenging yet achievable goals. Today’s agenda will cover: 1 How the process of performance management evolved2. The Brutal facts that some managers and HR professionals try to ignore3. Why it’s important to change4. Taking the steps 5. and then making it all work
- were maintained for controlling the behaviors of the employees and these reports provided substantial information on the performance of the employees. Any negative comment or a remark in the ESR or ACR used to adversely affect the prospects of career growth of an employee. The assessments were usually done for ten traits on a five or a ten point rating scale basis. These traits were job knowledge, sincerity, dynamism, punctuality, leadership, loyalty, etc. The remarks of these reports were never communicated to the employees and strict confidentiality was maintained in the entire process. The employees used to remain in absolute darkness due to the absence of a transparent mechanism of feedback and communication. This system had suffered from many drawbacks.2. hatever adverse remarks were incorporated in the performance reports were communicated to the employees so that they could take corrective actions for overcoming such deficiencies. In this process of appraising the performance, the reviewing officer used to enjoy a discretionary power of overruling the ratings given by the reporting officer. The employees usually used to get a formal written communication on their identified areas of improvements if the rating for any specific trait used to be below 33%.this phase the term ACR was replaced by performance appraisal. One of the key changes that were introduced in this stage was that the employees were permitted to describe their accomplishments in the confidential performance reports. The employees were allowed to describe their accomplishments in the self appraisal forms in the end of a year. Besides inclusion of the traits in the rating scale, several new components were considered by many organizations which could measure the productivity and performance of an employee in quantifiable terms such as targets achieved, etc. Certain organizations also introduced a new section on training needs in the appraisal form. However, the confidentiality element was still being maintained and the entire process continued to be control oriented instead of being development oriented.he appraisal process was more development driven, target based (performance based), participative and open instead of being treated as a confidential process. The system focused on performance planning, review and development of an employee by following a methodical approach. In the entire process, the appraisee (employee) and the reporting officer mutually decided upon the key result areas in the beginning of a year and reviewed it after every six months. In the review period various issues such as factors affecting the performance, training needs of an employee, newer targets and also the ratings were discussed with the appraisee in a collaborative environment.This phase was a welcoming change in the area of performance management and many organizations introduced a new HR department for taking care of the developmental issues of the organization.Strategic:
- were maintained for controlling the behaviors of the employees and these reports provided substantial information on the performance of the employees. Any negative comment or a remark in the ESR or ACR used to adversely affect the prospects of career growth of an employee. The assessments were usually done for ten traits on a five or a ten point rating scale basis. These traits were job knowledge, sincerity, dynamism, punctuality, leadership, loyalty, etc. The remarks of these reports were never communicated to the employees and strict confidentiality was maintained in the entire process. The employees used to remain in absolute darkness due to the absence of a transparent mechanism of feedback and communication. This system had suffered from many drawbacks.2. hatever adverse remarks were incorporated in the performance reports were communicated to the employees so that they could take corrective actions for overcoming such deficiencies. In this process of appraising the performance, the reviewing officer used to enjoy a discretionary power of overruling the ratings given by the reporting officer. The employees usually used to get a formal written communication on their identified areas of improvements if the rating for any specific trait used to be below 33%.this phase the term ACR was replaced by performance appraisal. One of the key changes that were introduced in this stage was that the employees were permitted to describe their accomplishments in the confidential performance reports. The employees were allowed to describe their accomplishments in the self appraisal forms in the end of a year. Besides inclusion of the traits in the rating scale, several new components were considered by many organizations which could measure the productivity and performance of an employee in quantifiable terms such as targets achieved, etc. Certain organizations also introduced a new section on training needs in the appraisal form. However, the confidentiality element was still being maintained and the entire process continued to be control oriented instead of being development oriented.he appraisal process was more development driven, target based (performance based), participative and open instead of being treated as a confidential process. The system focused on performance planning, review and development of an employee by following a methodical approach. In the entire process, the appraisee (employee) and the reporting officer mutually decided upon the key result areas in the beginning of a year and reviewed it after every six months. In the review period various issues such as factors affecting the performance, training needs of an employee, newer targets and also the ratings were discussed with the appraisee in a collaborative environment.This phase was a welcoming change in the area of performance management and many organizations introduced a new HR department for taking care of the developmental issues of the organization.Strategic:
- were maintained for controlling the behaviors of the employees and these reports provided substantial information on the performance of the employees. Any negative comment or a remark in the ESR or ACR used to adversely affect the prospects of career growth of an employee. The assessments were usually done for ten traits on a five or a ten point rating scale basis. These traits were job knowledge, sincerity, dynamism, punctuality, leadership, loyalty, etc. The remarks of these reports were never communicated to the employees and strict confidentiality was maintained in the entire process. The employees used to remain in absolute darkness due to the absence of a transparent mechanism of feedback and communication. This system had suffered from many drawbacks.2. hatever adverse remarks were incorporated in the performance reports were communicated to the employees so that they could take corrective actions for overcoming such deficiencies. In this process of appraising the performance, the reviewing officer used to enjoy a discretionary power of overruling the ratings given by the reporting officer. The employees usually used to get a formal written communication on their identified areas of improvements if the rating for any specific trait used to be below 33%.this phase the term ACR was replaced by performance appraisal. One of the key changes that were introduced in this stage was that the employees were permitted to describe their accomplishments in the confidential performance reports. The employees were allowed to describe their accomplishments in the self appraisal forms in the end of a year. Besides inclusion of the traits in the rating scale, several new components were considered by many organizations which could measure the productivity and performance of an employee in quantifiable terms such as targets achieved, etc. Certain organizations also introduced a new section on training needs in the appraisal form. However, the confidentiality element was still being maintained and the entire process continued to be control oriented instead of being development oriented.he appraisal process was more development driven, target based (performance based), participative and open instead of being treated as a confidential process. The system focused on performance planning, review and development of an employee by following a methodical approach. In the entire process, the appraisee (employee) and the reporting officer mutually decided upon the key result areas in the beginning of a year and reviewed it after every six months. In the review period various issues such as factors affecting the performance, training needs of an employee, newer targets and also the ratings were discussed with the appraisee in a collaborative environment.This phase was a welcoming change in the area of performance management and many organizations introduced a new HR department for taking care of the developmental issues of the organization.Strategic:
- were maintained for controlling the behaviors of the employees and these reports provided substantial information on the performance of the employees. Any negative comment or a remark in the ESR or ACR used to adversely affect the prospects of career growth of an employee. The assessments were usually done for ten traits on a five or a ten point rating scale basis. These traits were job knowledge, sincerity, dynamism, punctuality, leadership, loyalty, etc. The remarks of these reports were never communicated to the employees and strict confidentiality was maintained in the entire process. The employees used to remain in absolute darkness due to the absence of a transparent mechanism of feedback and communication. This system had suffered from many drawbacks.2. hatever adverse remarks were incorporated in the performance reports were communicated to the employees so that they could take corrective actions for overcoming such deficiencies. In this process of appraising the performance, the reviewing officer used to enjoy a discretionary power of overruling the ratings given by the reporting officer. The employees usually used to get a formal written communication on their identified areas of improvements if the rating for any specific trait used to be below 33%.this phase the term ACR was replaced by performance appraisal. One of the key changes that were introduced in this stage was that the employees were permitted to describe their accomplishments in the confidential performance reports. The employees were allowed to describe their accomplishments in the self appraisal forms in the end of a year. Besides inclusion of the traits in the rating scale, several new components were considered by many organizations which could measure the productivity and performance of an employee in quantifiable terms such as targets achieved, etc. Certain organizations also introduced a new section on training needs in the appraisal form. However, the confidentiality element was still being maintained and the entire process continued to be control oriented instead of being development oriented.he appraisal process was more development driven, target based (performance based), participative and open instead of being treated as a confidential process. The system focused on performance planning, review and development of an employee by following a methodical approach. In the entire process, the appraisee (employee) and the reporting officer mutually decided upon the key result areas in the beginning of a year and reviewed it after every six months. In the review period various issues such as factors affecting the performance, training needs of an employee, newer targets and also the ratings were discussed with the appraisee in a collaborative environment.This phase was a welcoming change in the area of performance management and many organizations introduced a new HR department for taking care of the developmental issues of the organization.Strategic:
- comapanies have tried to sidestep the elephant in the room by over engineering the process and thereby losing sight of what employers are trying to achieve: which is to drive higher performance from employees and reward desirable behaviors.Managers are Asked to deliver performance evaluations for large teams within very tight deadlines3. Reviews tend to place more importance on completing the performance review and less on having a meaningful conversation, and on recognizing employee contributions to the Organizations Strategy4. The focus is on the form and not the process and the dialogue, same language used for all employees5. Places employees into a curve Even more unfortunate, though, is the infrequency of appraisals. With only 35% of organizations using a semi-annual appraisal – and only 9% using a quarterly appraisal – it is no wonder that so many employees and managers think the annual performance appraisal doesn’t reflect employees’ performance. There is simply too long between the performance and the assessment. Can you imagine a judge giving an Olympics gymnastics score in July 2013? Of course not – it is silly. But that is exactly what we’re asking our managers to do today.So what is the solution? One option is the use of a lightweight quarterly appraisal process. Typically these appraisals have no detailed forms, no extensive calibration sessions. Instead, they are simply conversations between managers and employees about how the employee is performing and what should be done differently in the future. The conversations are often documented with an email that includes bullet points about the discussion. These conversations can also take place at the same time as quarterly goal discussions, a practice that our research shows correlates with better business performance. Another approach could be a focus on improving the coaching skills of employees. In our performance management research, we found that the greatest barrier to performance management is that managers lack the skills to coach their employees. Giving all employees the confidence, skills and knowledge to coach each other can improve the level of feedback throughout the organization. This helps improve both the number of sources from which employees receive feedback and the frequency with which they get it. (Bersin members can access our research on employee coachinghere.)Reducing bias is just as important in the workplace as it is in the Olympics. Some of the first few steps to doing this is increasing the number of raters and enhancing the frequency of appraisal. These activities can begin to put your organization on a path to more feedback and coaching – ultimately helping your employees perform at their best – just like the Olympians we get to watch on TV.
- comapanies have tried to sidestep the elephant in the room by over engineering the process and thereby losing sight of what employers are trying to achieve: which is to drive higher performance from employees and reward desirable behaviors.Managers are Asked to deliver performance evaluations for large teams within very tight deadlines3. Reviews tend to place more importance on completing the performance review and less on having a meaningful conversation, and on recognizing employee contributions to the Organizations Strategy4. The focus is on the form and not the process and the dialogue, same language used for all employees5. Places employees into a curve Even more unfortunate, though, is the infrequency of appraisals. With only 35% of organizations using a semi-annual appraisal – and only 9% using a quarterly appraisal – it is no wonder that so many employees and managers think the annual performance appraisal doesn’t reflect employees’ performance. There is simply too long between the performance and the assessment. Can you imagine a judge giving an Olympics gymnastics score in July 2013? Of course not – it is silly. But that is exactly what we’re asking our managers to do today.So what is the solution? One option is the use of a lightweight quarterly appraisal process. Typically these appraisals have no detailed forms, no extensive calibration sessions. Instead, they are simply conversations between managers and employees about how the employee is performing and what should be done differently in the future. The conversations are often documented with an email that includes bullet points about the discussion. These conversations can also take place at the same time as quarterly goal discussions, a practice that our research shows correlates with better business performance. Another approach could be a focus on improving the coaching skills of employees. In our performance management research, we found that the greatest barrier to performance management is that managers lack the skills to coach their employees. Giving all employees the confidence, skills and knowledge to coach each other can improve the level of feedback throughout the organization. This helps improve both the number of sources from which employees receive feedback and the frequency with which they get it. (Bersin members can access our research on employee coachinghere.)Reducing bias is just as important in the workplace as it is in the Olympics. Some of the first few steps to doing this is increasing the number of raters and enhancing the frequency of appraisal. These activities can begin to put your organization on a path to more feedback and coaching – ultimately helping your employees perform at their best – just like the Olympians we get to watch on TV.
- Managers struggle when trying to explain the logic behind the content or the process, the forms are not intuitive and don’t come with an easy button
- Research has shown that employees are no longer motivated to work for financial reasons only…Control of their work inspires motivation: including such components as the ability to impact decisions; setting clear and measurable goals; clear responsibility for a complete, or at least defined, task; job enrichment; tasks performed in the work itself; and recognition for achievement.To belong to the in-crowd creates motivation: including items such as receiving timely information and communication; understanding management's formulas for decision making; team and meeting participation opportunities; and visual documentation and posting of work progress and accomplishments.Today’s employees want to belong to organizations that has a well articulated social reasonability plan, customer centric culture and an environment where they feel they can contribute to something bigger than just their job..Employees want to be recognized for their contributions, more important than the financial rewards is the ability to recognize the good performance.The opportunity for growth and development: includes education and training; career paths; team participation; succession planning; cross-training; and field trips to successful workplaces. People want clear expectations that provide a picture of the outcomes desired with goal setting and feedback and an appropriate structure or framework.
- Research has shown that employees are no longer motivated to work for financial reasons only…Control of their work inspires motivation: including such components as the ability to impact decisions; setting clear and measurable goals; clear responsibility for a complete, or at least defined, task; job enrichment; tasks performed in the work itself; and recognition for achievement.To belong to the in-crowd creates motivation: including items such as receiving timely information and communication; understanding management's formulas for decision making; team and meeting participation opportunities; and visual documentation and posting of work progress and accomplishments.Today’s employees want to belong to organizations that has a well articulated social reasonability plan, customer centric culture and an environment where they feel they can contribute to something bigger than just their job..Employees want to be recognized for their contributions, more important than the financial rewards is the ability to recognize the good performance.The opportunity for growth and development: includes education and training; career paths; team participation; succession planning; cross-training; and field trips to successful workplaces. People want clear expectations that provide a picture of the outcomes desired with goal setting and feedback and an appropriate structure or framework.
- First, every company needs to have a true north — and that needs to come from the leadership team. Executives need to clearly communicate organizational objectives to management. Managers need to reinforce these expectations with employees. HR needs to guide and drive sustainable standards across the company.Second, “sheep-dipping” managers once or twice a year won’t cut it in today’s highly competitive environment. The term refers to a process whereby sheep are dipped once a year or seasonally to prevent diseases, which lies in contrast to the premise that performance management ought to be a daily, year-round initiative. In addition to strategic training initiatives, HR needs to put the appropriate as-needed support structure in place for managers. For example, role-playing how to deliver a performance-related message with a manager can be far more impactful than telling employees to read their goals online in the performance management system. The latter assumes that everyone is going to adhere to the request as well as be able to grasp the corresponding, often tacit, context.KPIS:Key Performance Indicators are quantifiable measurements, agreed to beforehand, that reflect the critical success factors of an organization. They will differ depending on the organization. Whatever Key Performance Indicators are selected, they must reflect the organization's goals, they must be key to its success,and they must be quantifiable (measurable). Key Performance Indicators usually are long-term considerations. The definition of what they are and how they are measured do not change often. The goals for a particular Key Performance Indicator may change as the organization's goals change, or as it gets closer to achieving a goal.Lastly, in addition to making sure the performance management process begins with the desired outcomes in mind, talent managers must involve employees on a daily basis. If employees are given once a year to promote their accomplishments without being offered the opportunity to be an active participant in the review process, it’s a recipe for disengagement and discontent.Going into one’s annual performance review with the hope that management remembers key achievements with the same intensity as the employee — without the support of an automated performance management solution that keeps all parties on the same page — is like walking across a tightrope. Relegating performance management to once a year cultivates a victim scenario because things are forgotten and the opportunity to give feedback in the moment is lost.
- First, every company needs to have a true north — and that needs to come from the leadership team. Executives need to clearly communicate organizational objectives to management. Managers need to reinforce these expectations with employees. HR needs to guide and drive sustainable standards across the company.Second, “sheep-dipping” managers once or twice a year won’t cut it in today’s highly competitive environment. The term refers to a process whereby sheep are dipped once a year or seasonally to prevent diseases, which lies in contrast to the premise that performance management ought to be a daily, year-round initiative. In addition to strategic training initiatives, HR needs to put the appropriate as-needed support structure in place for managers. For example, role-playing how to deliver a performance-related message with a manager can be far more impactful than telling employees to read their goals online in the performance management system. The latter assumes that everyone is going to adhere to the request as well as be able to grasp the corresponding, often tacit, context.KPIS:Key Performance Indicators are quantifiable measurements, agreed to beforehand, that reflect the critical success factors of an organization. They will differ depending on the organization. Whatever Key Performance Indicators are selected, they must reflect the organization's goals, they must be key to its success,and they must be quantifiable (measurable). Key Performance Indicators usually are long-term considerations. The definition of what they are and how they are measured do not change often. The goals for a particular Key Performance Indicator may change as the organization's goals change, or as it gets closer to achieving a goal.Lastly, in addition to making sure the performance management process begins with the desired outcomes in mind, talent managers must involve employees on a daily basis. If employees are given once a year to promote their accomplishments without being offered the opportunity to be an active participant in the review process, it’s a recipe for disengagement and discontent.Going into one’s annual performance review with the hope that management remembers key achievements with the same intensity as the employee — without the support of an automated performance management solution that keeps all parties on the same page — is like walking across a tightrope. Relegating performance management to once a year cultivates a victim scenario because things are forgotten and the opportunity to give feedback in the moment is lost.
- Clearly define what business outcomes, behaviors and competencies you plan to measureInvolve employees in setting goals and objectivesApply multi rater feedback when it makes sense. i.e 360 feedbackCollect important details about your workforce talent profiles-P3Avoid complex rating systems in the interest of transparency
- Other Drake’s solutions are ready and can be specially customized to resolve your needs of management intervention at any level of the interconnected HR system cycle to overcome inefficient practices at high costs depleting the profitability of your business… From Recruitment to Separation Drake is ready to assist you… to improve the status of your currents processes or to implement those necessary ones… we are there at only one call distance…