Issues in Employee Performance - Research Paper Example

 Issues in Employee Performance The case of the Information Commissioner’s Office describes at the best, the role of Information Systems (IS) governance which refers to the strategic linkage between investments in IT and the generation of profitability through it. Performance in such companies is best achieved by linking the IT goals and strategies with the overall business and corporate goals (Dameri & Perego, 2010). Fundamental to the notion of IS governance and the management of IT in firms is the interplay between decision making and accountability. The information systems governance employed by companies depends on their business goals. Therefore, there has to be a strong alignment between the business goals and the role of IT in such companies to ensure successful performance management. Hence, companies whose focus is on cutting down costs will prefer IS systems that are centralized in nature, as opposed to ones whose main aim is to ensure differentiation in a globalized marketplace in which case the systems will be managed in a decentralized manner (Dameri & Perego, 2010). Performance management of companies that deal in information systems tends to be complex and somewhat different from others. In these cases, the role of performance management shifts to one where the positive as well as the negative areas of IT initiatives need to be quantified in order to be measured. Unfortunately, however, research suggests an absence of a particular framework that can be used to assess the value addition by information systems (Dameri & Perego, 2010). Researchers Renata Paola Dameri and Angela Perego have identified four core areas for analyzing the performance if Information Systems department (Dameri & Perego, 2010). These include its contribution and value to the business, the extent to which it is customer-oriented, the processes involved and the aspect of innovation and change management (Dameri & Perego, 2010). The first aspect dealing with contribution and value emphasizes the contribution that the Information Systems’ department is making to the overall organizational goals as well as the improvements in the performance of the organization brought about by it. Measures of doing so, as advocated by researchers in the field of IT Payoff, are often deployed in this area (Dameri & Perego, 2010). The second aspect deals with the extent to which the information systems are channelized towards catering to the needs of both internal and external users (Dameri & Perego, 2010). In this analysis, qualitative and perceptual techniques rather than mere numbers are more important in gauging customer satisfaction. Under the third aspect, the efficiency of the IS department is measured in terms of the efficiency of its technical processes and the quality of its human resources. In this case, quantitative techniques are used for the evaluation of “System Quality” (Dameri & Perego, 2010). Several aspects of employees are considered including their workload, extent to which they bear capacity along with their employment on significant tasks and projects, quickness in execution, capability at managing projects, capability at managing applications and problems as well as the optimal use of technical resources. The fourth and final aspect deals with the ability of the IS function to ensure that the technical systems are updated (Dameri & Perego, 2010). This refers to not just technical soundness but also the ability of systems to be agile, that is, to be flexible enough to change whenever there’s a change in the business. This is not possible without having employees who have sound technical IS education and expertise as well as the culture of the organization (whether or not it allows for flexibility) along with the lifespan of the applications used and efficiency of research and development. The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) method can be used for ICO since it is a method used extensively for the measurement of performance targets as far as information security management is concerned. The major advantage of this method is that it not just monitors employee performance but also measures it in the context of non-monetary factors such as customer satisfaction, “internal processes” as well “innovation and learning” (Dameri & Perego, 2010). Furthermore, the BSC would establish a cause-effect association between the strategic goals and measures for performance in ICO, thereby allowing for precision in control and monitoring of results. Also, the poor performing areas can be traced to those responsible for it, leading to better management of employees. Martinsons et al. (1999) has provided a basis for using the BSC in the management of IT resources (including the concerned personnel) (Dameri & Perego, 2010). This involves assessing to the contribution of the IT department to the overall business value ( including whether the data is confidential, integral, available when required and authentic), its value addition for end users, its ability to punctually deliver cost-effective solutions to the end users and the development of continuous improvement targets for employees. Another useful tool that can be deployed by ICO for performance management is the Performance appraisal. A performance appraisal system can be defined as the process that determines the acceptable level of an employee’s performance capability over a defined time horizon. These systems have specific standards on the scale of which employees’ skills are assesses. However, it has been seen that this system has not managed to retain a highly skilled workforce in the organizations. While considering all these tools it is critical to recognize the fact that employees have various needs that need to be fulfilled by organizations in order to maintain the motivation of their workforce. One of the most popular researches in this regard is the Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory. The Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory, as the name implies, consists of a set of needs that are staged in order of priority. There are essentially five stages of needs. The biological and physiological needs which include such things as air, water and food form the most basic needs (Ryan, 2012). Life is not possible without the fulfillment of these needs. Next in the hierarchy are the safety needs. All humans need safety and protection. Unless their safety is ensured, workers cannot put in their best effort (Ryan, 2012). In the contemporary age, job security has become a big problem for companies. Because of the economic recession, employees are being fired in large numbers and while companies are being down sized. This is a potential threat to the safety of workers; hence, performance appraisals cannot be considered valid system for the assessment of the workers’ capabilities with such job insecurity. After getting secure, a worker wants his love and belongingness needs fulfilled. Quite often, people have to live away from their home because of work, and hence, do not get a chance to meet the family quite often. Many employees try to fulfill their love and belongingness needs by interacting with the colleagues. However, not many are successful because all employees share common interests in the context of an organization, and hence, many develop grudges particularly as one of the employees gains more status and reward as compared to others. It is only after the fulfillment of the achievement needs that an employee can concentrate upon personal growth. Needs mentioned on the lowest level are the most basic needs of a human without which, he/she cannot survive, and accordingly it is not possible to work unless they are met. As we go up the triangle, the needs change from extremely essential to opportunistic. The Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory emphasizes that a person cannot concentrate upon improving his performance or upon the self actualization unless all lower level needs have been adequately met (Ryan, 2012). An in-depth analysis of the Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory suggests that appraisal is not the only factor that can convince a worker to improve his/her performance in the work. Instead, there is a wide range of factors that mutually determine the extent to which an individual would concentrate upon polishing his/her skills and improve the performance in work. Therefore, in order to make the worker perform better, it is imperative that the managers take into consideration all of the needs mentioned in the Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory along with their order of priority and address them accordingly. However, it would be wrong for ICO to consider performance appraisal systems solely relating performance to an employee’s pay as is the case with most organizations today (Boice & Kleiner, 1997). ICO must recognize that there are several other types of needs that are more important than salary. According to David McClelland’s model of motivational needs, there are three key drivers of the motivation in an employee which are as follows: 1. Achievement based motivation (n-ach) 2. Affiliation based motivation (n-affil), and 3. Power based motivation (n-pow) (McClelland, 1987) ICO must realize that personality traits vary from individual to individual and play a very important role in the quality of performance of any worker. Some people do not have a strong self control and may lose balance in sheer complexity of circumstances. As an individual gets outraged, his/her ability to think rationally and make well informed decisions is sapped. He/she thinks on the extremes and does not manage to adopt a balanced approach. According to the Social Learning Theory, an employee who has worked in an organization in a specific organizational culture for some time undergoes a considerable change in his/her work behavior as compared to the behavior that he/she displayed at the time he/she joined the organization (H., 2008). The level to which an employee is motivated influences the way he/she acts. Both the individual’s motivation and the work environment shape an employee’s attitudes regarding the organizational performance appraisal system. The commitment of an employee with the organization and the employee’s perception of justice in the process of performance appraisal are two of the most important employee behaviors that govern the usability of his/her performance appraisal in determining his/her true capabilities. A supervisor’s belief in the accuracy and validity of the performance appraisal system in place in an organization has a deep impact on his/her tendency to put effort into completing it rightly. If the distributive justice or the procedural justice is violated, it will alter the supervisor’s understanding of the validity of the performance appraisal system. Similarly, if a supervisor feels that decisions are not made in accordance with the results derived from the performance appraisal system, he/she is least likely to take it seriously. It is extremely difficult to design such a performance appraisal system that would accurately evaluate the performance of workers in an organization. In order to make the performance appraisal systems effective, it is imperative that the top management shows extreme commitment to them. The management of ICO should, therefore, thoroughly integrate the performance appraisal systems into the routinely budgeting, planning, and monitoring systems (Bernardin et al., 1996). A major issue likely to be encountered by the company is that of restricting performance evaluation of its employees to an annual basis which should not be the case. Performance management and appraisal ought to be a continuous, year round process and not a one-time event (Armstrong, 2009). It is not fair to judge employees by their last minute efforts rather than their year round performance. Therefore, workers have a right to know throughout the year how they are performing, where they can improve, and most importantly, how to improve along those dimensions. Another issue likely to be encountered by ICO in its performance management initiatives is that of dealing with underperforming workers. There may be huge differentials in the quality of work across employees due to ambiguity concerning the expectations of the supervisor, little feedback, lack of access to resources required for the task, feedback regarding career development as well as empowerment. By incorporating these simple rules in its culture, ICO can massively enhance its business value. According to research, there are three core problematic areas that need to be addressed during performance management which ICO must address. Firstly, it is not easy to define the performance of employees. According to Bernardin and Beatty, performance is mostly wrongly assumed as being person-specific rather than being objective and outcome-specific (Bernardin & Beatty, 1984). It is argued that evaluating an individual on the basis of his personal traits and competencies is not a fair way of judging his performance and results in bias. On the other hand, if ICO focuses solely on an outcome-based approach, there is potential for workers to cross the ethical boundaries of the firm just to ensure that the task is done. It also breeds learned helplessness amongst employees by holding them responsible for outcomes which may be beyond their control. The challenge to ICO is therefore to ensure a system of performance management whereby both outcomes and competencies are incorporated. As far as the second area of performance evaluation is concerned, there is growing consensus that ratings whose main objective is to ensure the career progression or termination of employees are far more biased than those whose purpose is to develop employees’ skills or provide feedback (Cleveland & Murphy, 1992). One way for ICO to overcome this in its process is to ensure year-round, frequent ratings. Also, ensuring an adequate reward structure for raters whose ratings are accurate would ensure lesser bias. Furthermore, it is often useful to design the performance evaluation in a way that is objective and that consists of close-ended questions rather than open-ended ones so as to establish trust with employees. ICO should also ensure that, in the rating process, the employee is not considered as the sole cause of underperformance; rather, a holistic view is required whereby all potential (internal and external) causes for the poor performance are evaluated. This shall enable greater impartiality with respect to the process (Cleveland & Murphy, 1992). Finally, feedback is the most sensitive area as far as workers’ motivations are concerned. A constructive feedback can enhance employee morale and motivate him to strive for better results, whereas, a destructive feedback can backfire on the purpose of the evaluation process by lowering trust amongst employees. However, ICO must bear in mind the fact that evaluation whereby the performance improvements are suggested to the poor performers does not always achieve its intended results. It is a human tendency for employees to view their supervisors in a less favorable light after the evaluation. Furthermore, in an IT concern such as the ICO, new technologies often result in disruptions of life and career development of employees; the performance evaluation meeting may consider this and incorporate this issue to show genuine commitment to the employee’s improvement (London et al., 1999). To conclude, considering that the ICO encompasses innovation and change associated with IT trends, it is imperative that its performance management setup be flexible and not rigid. The first step towards successful performance management for ICO would be to setup employees’ goals by directly linking them to organizational goals. This coupled with a systems-oriented approach shall enable employees to escape the blame game. Also, raters ought to be evaluated to reduce chances of bias along with sessions to provide life and career counseling to poor performing employees. References Armstrong, M., 2009. Armstrong's Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice. 11th ed. London: Kogan Page Limited. Bernardin, H.J. & Beatty, R.W., 1984. Performance appraisal: Assessing human behavior at work. Boston: Kent Publishing. Bernardin, H.J. et al., 1996. Performance appraisal design,development, and implementation. In Handbook of human resource management. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers. Boice, D.F. & Kleiner, B.H., 1997. Designing effective performance appraisal systems. Work Study, 46(6), pp.197 - 201. Cleveland, J..N. & Murphy, K.R., 1992. Analyzing performance appraisal as goal-directed behavior. In Research in personnel and human resources management. Greenwich: JAI Press. pp.121-85. Dameri, R.P. & Perego, A., 2010. Translate IS Governance Framework into Practice: The Role of IT Service Management and IS Performance Evaluation. In European Conference on Information Management & Evaluation. Milano, 2010. Academic Conferences Ltd. H., S.D., 2008. Learning Theories: An Educational Perspective. 5th ed. London: Pearson International. London, M., Larsen, H.H. & Thisted, L.N., 1999. Relationships between feedback and self-development. Group& Organization Management, 24(1), pp.5-27. McClelland, D.C., 1987. Human motivation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ryan, R.M., 2012. The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Read More