Application of Performance Management System in a University - Coursework Example

Author’s Name Instructor’s Name Course Date Application of Performance Management System in a University Introduction Performance management system in both public and private institutions has come to be one of the most important components for managing performance of employees. This system is crucial in all sectors including educational institutions (Bianchi 2012). However, there is a long road ahead for institutions to ensure that they perfect their frameworks and deliver to customers. In this connection, the following paper analyses the application of performance management systems a university. The first part of the paper outlines the objectives, targets and initiatives that could be considered in the process of applying this management system. The reasons for this parameter will also be discussed as well as the importance of the same to a university. The second part includes the steps that will be followed in the implementation process of the performance management system. A clear connection of these two sections will be ensured to create a link and flow in the entire paper. Finally, a conclusion of the paper has been given to provide a summary. The selected references have been cited in the document with the final list of the same at the end of the paper. The discussion presented in this document is drawn from the best literature materials done by human resources management professionals and writers. They include the writings done by various scholars, including academic journals. Some of the works of these scholars have helped many institutions to improve their management systems and thus able to provide better services. Twenty literature materials have been sourced after a wide academic research. Information from the best practice publications including some observations have been coined to provide a road map for the development, implementation as well as evaluation of performance management systems. Overview of the Management Performance System It is crucial for employers to understand the importance of managing employee performance. The aim is to help in establishing a workforce that is motivated and understands what an institution needs to achieve at a specific period. Performance management involves the alignment of the institution, based on the employees’ competency, skills, as well as development plans. The emphasis is on the improvement of services, learning and development initiatives (IAU Press 1998). Further, the implementation of the plan requires the creation of a high performance workforce. Employee performance involves certain aspects that make it functional , which are intended to improve employees’ motivation and help to capitalize on institutional performance, as well as employee contributions. Experienced and university researchers, as well human resource management experts have identified several elements that are vital for effective implementation and maintenance of performance management systems(Baxter and Chua 2003). Further, there are decisions that should be made among all stakeholders in an institution to ensure the design is suitable for a given university or institution of learning. This include the purpose that the system wishes to achieve such as serving to support pay decisions, development of employee performance or reduction of their numbers, among other aspects (Ewell 1999). It should however be noted that a performance management system in the university that wishes to achieve too many objectives might die too soon. This is because it lacks focus and weight. In addition, there is no one system suitable for all institutions, since every organization has its own objectives and vision. On the other hand, performance measurement relates to the method of quantifying the competence and usefulness of accomplishments (Kaplan and Norton 2001). The term performance is normally used in the field of economics, work performance, as well as capital investment and profits. An institution needs to have an internal way through which performance is measured based on the planned objectives. The comparison should be made between the planned and actual deliverables in an institution. Objectives, Initiatives and Performance Measurement It is incredible to formulate a management system without first coming up with clear objectives to be achieved within a specified time (Baxter and Chua 2003). Failure to have objectives, which are well understood by the employees and other stakeholders, means that the plan is heading nowhere. The purpose for any system of management should be determined by the university needs, culture, as well how the system integrates with other human resource management systems in the institutions. Some of the objectives of performance management system for a university could be: Improvement of decision-making processes Enhancement of performance for development or individual employees Efficient recruitment and placement of employees Development of employees through training Reward and incentive programs Dispute resolution mechanisms Increase of university income Improving client base through enhanced service provision to students Reduction of performance costs such as administration expenditure and so on. However, one vital caveat to remember is that although performance management for decision-making and development of employees are related, the two objectives are not always supported well by one system (Miller 2007). If university wishes to use performance management system for making decision in its operations, then appraisal information should be used in determining pay increases, transfers, promotions, assignments, reduction of the number of employees or any other administrative human resource actions. This information is also used to determine job experiences, training, mentoring or other developmental activities in the university where employees can engage in developing their capabilities. The objectives should be specific with well-defined tasks including the inclusion of time within which plan should be implemented (Miller 2007). They need to be measurable and achievable. This means that the objectives should be within the brackets of the institution’s budget as well as being simple to understand and interpreted by employees. Apparently, the university management team needs to consider several initiatives to ensure that the above initiatives are successfully met. The first point to take in mind is the involvement of all relevant bodies and individuals in decision-making process. The employees’ representatives should be involved as well. After the objectives have been set, it is important to communicate to the relevant persons, department or any other concerned party. The changes made in the system should be well communicated and employees should be informed on what is expected of them in good time. The motivation program should be set to ensure that all employees and departmental heads share a common goal. This ensures that the employees share the common goals and are committed to the course. Consequently, the achievement of the changes set out becomes easier for the management of the university. Measurement of Performance As stated above, it is crucial to monitor and measure the progress of performance of the system in any institutions. This helps to improve on areas that are not working depending on the planned objectives. Another objective of performance measurement is to understand the strengths of the university in managing its activities including offering an efficient services to its customers and the employees. It also exposes new opportunities that need to be including in the system. Besides these, the process helps to bring out the gaps in the entire strategy including the errors made in the previous steps especially at the planning stage (Miller 2007). The reward and punishment for good and worse performances respectively, are determined after the process of performance measurement has been done. Therefore, the university will be able to know who, when and how to reward or punish an individual employee or various groups or bodies. It also helps to determine the experiences, adaptations, strategies and behavior to be adopted for the achievement of objectives. There are several conventional strategies applied in measurement of performance such as linking the plans with the control measures, use of non-financial performance measures, as well as analyzing both motivational and behavioral parameters. However, it should be noted that some variables are difficult to measure (Otley 1999). These include attitudes of employees towards the management system, motivational levels, research and development, innovativeness and creativity of employees and so on. To some extent, a university can assess the attitudes of employees within the institution by the use of surveys such as questionnaires. This can give the management clue on the levels of reception of the new changes. Application of Balanced Score Card in Performance Measurement in a University Balanced Score is one of the latest and advanced methods of measuring performance of systems in institutions or organization (Cooper and Hopper2007). The basic aspect of this method is establishing a relationship based on cause and effect of various parameters in an organization. Therefore, the main challenge for university management will be to ensure the cause-effect relationship is well developed. This process involves determination of the correlation that exists between the planned objectives and the results. The main advantage of BSC is that it integrates both financial and nonfinancial parameters in performance measurement. In addition, the method ensures there is a linkage between the university’s strategy with the performance, since it is used in clarifying, communicating and managing the entire strategy. Some of the main areas that BSC will seek to address include the relationship the university is having with all stakeholders, the reputation from the public including students, the main areas to excel in, as well as how to improve service delivery. Therefore, the main parameters for the university would be considering its internal and external customers and financial stability. The three components are reinforced by the creativity and innovativeness of the workforce at the decision making level (Kasurinen 2002). However, the driver of these factors is the vision and mission of the university. In formulating and developing the university BSC, as mentioned, the cause-effect relationship should be established in order to ensure that there is correlation between these two aspects (Nørreklit 2003). After this relationship has been developed, the next move is to analyze the extent to which the planned objectives have been met by the relevant bodies or individuals in the university. Therefore, based on the above objectives and initiatives of a university, the following simple table illustrates some of the measures that a university can consider in determining its actualization of the objectives in relation to BSC. Objectives Measures Improvement of decision-making Analyzing the rate of decision making process Enhancement of performance for development Assessing individual or group production based on quality Training of employees The number of employees trained and passed Dispute resolution mechanisms Recording the number of disputes that are directed to the highest level Increase of University income Analyzing, monthly, quarterly or yearly income of the university Increasing the number of students Recording the number of new students Reducing expenditure Comparing the figure on expenses for previous period The above table gives a simple summary of the parameters that university can assess in measuring the performance of its system. Based on the results of the above components, necessary actions can then be taken to make some corrections. Further, the above areas can be subdivided in order to be more specific. Steps in the Implementation of Performance Management System It is prudent to note that it is not enough for a university to have the necessary tools for the implementation of performance management system. Besides this being a necessary component, the most important aspect is to have a dedicated team that is willing to apply all its efforts in ensuring that the changes are effectively implemented (Lapsley and Miller 2004). Therefore, the departmental heads and all employees in the university are expected to be seriously engaged in the implementation process. Several aspects should be considered when implementing performance management system (Norreklit 2000). However, the core of this process is that it shroud be user-friendly and value-adding system, for both employees and the students/customers. The system should be easy and convenient to be used by all stakeholders. This ensures that implementation process is as smooth as possible. After planning and ensuring that all the necessary process are in place for the implementation, the university needs to apply the plans. Implementation involves ensuring that the system is aligned with other HR systems, getting members on board, communicate to employees, automation of the system, pilot testing, training of employees and departmental heads and finally evaluating and improving the system (Miller 2007). Ensuring the System is aligned with other HR Systems in The University It is important to ensure that the performance management system is aligned with other system in the university. A good example is that the same competencies used in the recruitment and placement of employees should as well be used in the performance management. This means that university staff will not only be hired , appraised or trained based on the consistent job description and requirements, but it also sends a strong internal and external message about what the university values. Getting Institution Members on Board As noted above, it is not possible to successfully plan and implement performance management system without involvement of the relevant bodies and persons in the university. These members also need to be motivated by being well informed of the advantages of the new changes to be dome in the university. Many literature materials on the management, note that for the management system to be effective, the commitment of the top management is crucial. If the commitment is strong, then the success of the system is at a better position. Therefore, it is important for the vice chancellor and other senior board directors such as chairperson to apply more efforts in winning support of almost all departmental heads so that implementation process can be easier. Communication to Employees As already stated, informing the employees in the university about the objectives of the systems including the performance measurement strategies is crucial. The communication should be consistent from the beginning of the process. If the system changes are many and containing potential threats to employees, it is advisable to have a change-management team (Malmi and Brown 2008). Employees must be told about advantages and disadvantages of the new system or changes in the university. There should be ample time for them to comment and bring their views about the same. Notices should be given out or the use of slogans, marketing, campaigns and so on. This will help in proper understanding and commitment from the university staff and departments. Automaton of the System The process of development of performance management system requires a lot of paper work and documentation. University is a huge institution and thus requires many administrative duties. This means that administrators are left following and looking for papers with procedure, rules and policies on the new system, instead of concentrating on the implementation of the same (Salter and Tapper 2002). Therefore, to avoid this, it is necessary to automate the system for quick access and implementation. It ensures that workload is reduced, quick service delivery and monitoring process. However, the institution should balance time, resources, as well as development and maintenance costs. Automation can be done through development of a software, to integrate the system with others in the university. Pilot Testing Pilot testing will involve application of the system in a number of units or departments in the university, before implementing it on a larger scale. This process helps to show if the system is functioning smoothly and efficiently (Pitman 2000). It also assists in knowing if departmental heads and supervisors, including other employees understand how it works. Corrections, if any, can be done at this level. Training of Staff Members It is important to ensure that employees and staff members are trained for the smooth implementation process (Bentley 2012). They need to understand how the system works. This will also help to manage any crisis that may occur including receiving feedback effectively. Monitoring, Evaluating and improving the system The progress of performance management systems should be monitored and evaluated on continuous basis (Clark 1998). This should be followed by necessary changes and improvements. There is no perfect system of management. Monitoring should be done on all stages including training and completion of tasks. Human resource departments from various schools or faculties can be issued with copies of completed tasks for assessment. Conclusion Performance management system is important for any university, institution or organization to achieve its goals. It provides direction through which employees’ efficiency and welfare can be improved. It helps in knowing the strengths and weaknesses of an institution. The successful implementation of performance management systems means that an organization has enhanced is service delivery a step farther. However, it must be emphasized that universities and organization should invest in human resource for the successful implementation of performance management systems. It is also important to have proper mechanisms in place to measure the performance of individuals or groups in the process. This helps to gauge the extent to which planned objectives have been met. Implementation requires involvement of all parties concerned including employees in the university. There should be proper training of staff members. Further, communication of progress and what is expected should be enhanced. Pilot test and automation of the system should as well be carried out. Finally, the system should be monitored and evaluated for any improvements to be done. Reference Baxter, J. and Chua, W (2003), Alternative Management accounting Research – Whence and whither, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 28, pp. 97-126. Bentley S. (2012), ‘Management System In Institutions , Springer, Internet Resource. Bianchi, C. (2012), ‘Enhancing Performance Management and Sustainable Organizational Growth through System-Dynamics Modelling’, in Grösser, S.N. and Zeier, R. (Eds.), Systemic Management for Intelligent Organizations, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 143-161. Cooper, D. and Hopper, T. (2007) Critical theorising in management accounting research. In Chapman, C., Hopwood, A., and Shields, M. Handbook of Management Accounting Research, vol. 1, pp. 207-245. Clark, B. (1998), Creating Entrepreneurial Universities, Oxford: IAU Press. Deem, R. (1998), ‘New ‘Managerialism’ and higher education: The management of performances and cultures in universities in the United Kingdom’, International Studies in Sociology of Education, Vol. 8(1): 47-70. Ewell, P.T. (1999), ‘Linking Performance measures to resource allocation: exploring unmapped terrain’, Quality in Higher Education, vol. 5 (3): 191-208. Ferreira and Otley (2009), The design and use of performance management systems: An extended framework for analysis, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 263-282. Fitzgerald, L. and Moon, P., (1996), ‘Delivering the goods at TNT: the role of the performance measurement system’, Management Accounting Research, 7, pp431-457. Kaplan R.S. and Norton D.P. (2001). “Transforming the Balanced Scorecard from Performance Measurement to Strategic Management: Part I”, Accounting Horizons, Vol.15, No.1, pp.87-104. Kasurinen, T. (2002), Exploring management accounting change: the case of balanced scorecard implementation, Management Accounting Research, Vol 13, pp. 323-343 Lapsley, I. and Miller, P. (2004), ‘Transforming universities: The uncertain, erratic path’, Financial Accountability and Management, Vol. 20(2): 103-106. Malmi, T and Brown, D (2008) Management control systems as a package, Management Accounting Research, 287-300. Miller, B.A. (2007), Assessing organizational performance in Higher Education, SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass. Nørreklit H. (2003) The Balanced Scorecard: what is the score? A rhetorical analysis of the Balanced Scorecard, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Volume 28, Issue 6, pp. 591-619 Norreklit, H. (2000), ‘The balance on the balanced scorecard – a critical analysis of its assumptions’, Management Accounting Research, Vol 11, pp. 65-88 Otley, D.T. (1999), ‘Performance Management: a Framework for Management Control Systems Research’, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 10 (4): 363-382. Otley D. (2001), ‘On extending the boundaries of management accounting research: developing systems for performance management’, British Accounting Review,Vol. 33,pp.243–261. Pitman, T. (2000), ‘Perceptions of academics and students as customers: A survey of administrative staff in higher education’, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, vol. 22 (2): 165-175. Salter, B. and Tapper, T. (2002), ‘The external pressures on the internal governance of universities’, Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 3 (3): 245-256. Read More