Performance Management and Problem Solving Process Program - Research Proposal Example

Running head: PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT Performance Management and Problem – Solving Process Program: An Integrated Performance Management Approach I. Introduction Through an effective implementation of a strategic problem solving process program, performance management will surely translate the success of business through its human resource. Maximizing the resources in business aligned with the company’s goals will aid organization for improvement. To ensure that the company’s objectives are constantly and effectively being met, institutions also supervise the performance of every employee. In fact, this practice of performance management is now a fundamental part of modern governance arrangement (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2004). Performance management, as described by Daniels and Daniels (2004), is when the institution handles both the critical elements of performance, which are behavior and results, to make sure that the employees are meeting the agreed standards that result to higher productivity and motivation. Nonetheless, performance management is not free from any problem. Still, it is the case that even if the institution assesses how its employees are performing and points out what needs to be done for improvement, performance management does not necessarily ensure the success of a high performing business through its human resource. That is to say, performance management has its very own shortcomings (Dooren, no date). According to Regenesys (2011), some of the issues of performance management identified by Saravanja are lack of integration, decision challenges, lack of leadership support, incompetence, communication challenges, inspiration challenges, lack of monitoring, lack of evaluation, and implementation failure. Hence, there is a real need to improve the problem of implementation of performance management. In this regard, this paper shall mainly delve at strategically addressing the shortcomings of performance management, in particular, its implementation issues. Specifically, this intends to answer three points. First, it aims to identify a problem area of performance management. Second, it points toward proposing a program to strategically solve this identified problem of performance management. Last, its purpose is to explain how to determine and assess the effectiveness of such proposed performance management problem solving process program. II. Statement of the Problem Given this gathered data, basically, this paper identifies implementation of performance management as its problem area. Doreen (no date) stated that performance management needs strategic implementation especially in the occasions of its change management aspect. It is the case that the situation of business depends significantly on the performance of its human resource. To have a successful business entails the effective performance of its people. Hence, effective business means effective performance management. The questions that frame this paper are the following: What are the issues concerning implementation of performance management? How implementation problems of performance management affect institutions? What are the processes that can probably solve the performance management problem of implementation? What program can be implemented to avoid this identified implementation problem in performance management? How can the program be strategically and effectively implemented to address the problem area of implementation in performance management? III. Review of Related Literature In order to understand how the following solving problem processes is contextualized to address the problem, these literatures are scrutinized and presented. This aims at providing the readers a cursory outlook at how the various data are sought to answer the questions and problems of this research project. The presented books and articles may not be a representative of the complete array of the information on performance management problem solving processes. The section aims at providing a short overview of the available information on the topic under study to help the readers grasp an outlook on how to understand the performance management, its problem area, and processes that can address the identified issue. a) Performance Management Performance management has become an integral part of organization since it contributes to effectiveness of business through maximizing its people. It is a continuous process which means adaptation to changes should be strategically handled. With performance management, the most fundamental aim is to keep everyone in the organization aligned toward the same sets of objectives because this can offer the institution a higher possibility of attaining such goals (Aspect Software, Inc., 2012). As described by Daniels and Daniels (2004), performance management involves dealing with behavior and results, which are both critical elements of performance. Basically, organizational effectiveness lies on its management through taking part in motivating employees to perform at their very best (Daniels & Daniels, 2004). Employees’ behaviors result to improvement of performance of any organization so it is ensured that employees are meeting the agreed standards that result to higher productivity and motivation (Daniels & Daniels, 2004). Meanwhile, the advantages of performance management in business are manifold that is why performance management has become an integral element within many best practice standard management processes (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2004). According to Mark and Nayyar – Stone (2002), one of its chief benefits includes improvement in service quality and outcomes. Likewise, it improves resource allocation since it helps in justifying the budget or service cuts (Mark & Nayyar – Stone, 2002). For the individual employees, it makes the work environment more interesting and more satisfying too (Mark & Nayyar – Stone, 2002). Since it clarifies the scope of work as well as the roles expected from them, and offers self – insight as well as development opportunities, correspondingly, it improves the motivation as well as self – esteem of employees that assists them in advancing their performances (Daniels & Daniels, 2004). This is for the reason that it creates a performance – based culture that is aligned with the company’s objectives (Aspect Software, Inc., 2012). Nonetheless, despite the provided benefits, it is not without any problem (Dooren, no date). In some cases, performance management fails too. Some of the reasons for failure of performance management are lack of integration, decision challenges, lack of leadership support, incompetence, communication challenges, inspiration challenges, lack of monitoring, lack of evaluation, and implementation failure (Regenesys, 2011). Hence, there is a real need to improve the problem of implementation of performance management With poor design and ineffective implementation of performance management systems, its disadvantages may possibly be the reverse of the following advantages. First, due to ineffective performance management, some employees may quit which leads to those who stay to feel less driven (Van der Walt, 2004). This causes irreversible damages to the work relationships left behind (Van der Walt, 2004). Second, mishandled performance management system could block ambitions of employees in cases of disagreement of the evaluation process like the criticism towards staff members (Van der Walt, 2004). It can be a major cause of frustration and pessimism among those involved. Third, it can possibly block innovation because ideas are only limited based on the agreed work plan for a year (Van der Walt, 2004). Hence, if poorly designed and not implemented well, results cannot be advantageous for the company. b) Problem Solving Processes Problem solving processes can address concerns and can yield effective results if designed implemented successfully. Fundamentally, such strategic techniques for performance management are helpful for continuous improvement. Managing by problem solving results is to improved processes as well as results. Problem solving process is an approach that demands a radical change in management focus. The critical factor in problem solving approach is a rational process that involves a clear understanding of what the problem is. Hence, what performance management tools can offer is the ability to scrutinize the root causes of problems and implement corrective actions (Aspect Software, Inc., 2012). In order to figure out the root cause of a problem, the 5 – whys analysis can be used (Asian Development Bank, 2009). Asking the question “why” at least five times can uncover the levels of symptoms that can lead to the main origin of the problem. However, there are some instances in which a problem is caused by more than one main reason. Such problems can no longer be addressed by the 5 – whys technique. In this regard, Ishikawa diagram also known as fishbone or cause – and – effect diagram can be used. This method assists people in communicating the main origin of the problem as well as the other potential contributing factors (Gregory, 1992). This diagram is drawn resembling to the fish skeleton in which the right side shows the issue or problem or process condition while the left side shows the major causes under the categories (Gregory, 1992). Meanwhile, another effective problem solving tool that can be used is the PCDA technique. According to Langley, Nolan, Nolan, Norman, and Provost (1996), PCDA or plan – check – do – act is an effective four – step management tool that is employed for the continuous improvement. First is to plan. The objectives should be clearly defined as well as the processes that are indeed necessary to deliver the target goals. This planning process includes the identification and describing clearly what the problem is. The problem must be defined via a concise problem statement because if this first step is unsuccessful, the real problem would not be addressed properly. There is a need to check the problem through collecting the evidences to prove that such is really the existing dilemma that needs to be addressed. This process also includes the identification of the possible impacts or opportunities. Second, do implement the plan. Third is to check. This means that the actual results should be checked against the expected or target goals defined in the plan. This is necessary to check any differences. This gathered information is needed for the last step. Last is to act. Act means to execute corrective actions that are necessary to be applied so that the main goal will be achieved. However, analysis on such differences is necessary to determine the origin of the problem. In determining the problem, where to apply the necessary changes can be determined. This would contribute to the improvement of a problem area to (Langley, et al., 1996). On the one hand, the Agent – Based Simulation (ABS) model is an analytical tool that is extremely helpful for management, in particular, when dealing with behavior (Siebers & Aikelin, no date). This model is appropriate in analyzing both the heterogeneous equilibrium and the non – equilibrium systems. It also allows try out different management strategies before implementing them (Siebers & Aikelin, no date). Bonebeau (2002) suggested that in ABS models, there is a collection of autonomous and proactive decision making entities in which each of these entities individually evaluates the situation. From this individual assessment, each makes decisions based on a set of flexible rules (Bonabeau, 2002). Particularly, this approach is very much suited for modelling people as well as their behavior. In every organization, proactive behavior is important among employees. According to Van Riemsdijk, Destani and Winikoff (2008), proactive behavior of agents is aligned with the goals of the company. Proactivity involves self – started, long – term oriented and persistent service behavior in which these qualities are beyond the requirements expected from them (Rank, Carsten, Unger and Spector, 2008). This proactivity is associated with the employee’s personal initiative, self – efficacy, sense of autonomy, task complexity, affective organizational commitment, and transformational leadership (Rank et al., 2008). On the overall, these problem solving processes are not intended for addressing huge problems. But the thing is such problem solving techniques can be the initial steps in achieving solutions for the problems. These performance management tools can offer the identification of the causes of the problem as well as the actions that can be implemented to correct them. It aims for continuous improvement of an organization through optimizing its human resource. c) The Role of Human Resource Management System Individual and organizational performance is only effective when the institution has the behaviors, motivation, competencies, and opportunities that are necessary for achieving the company’s objectives. In performance management, the human resource management system has four major tasks to play. It includes management of behaviors, motivation, competencies, and opportunities (Jackson & Schuler, 2002). Performance management is not as simple as motivating individual employees to work on their assigned tasks. Managing behaviors inside the realm of workplace includes managing social interactions (Murphy & Jackson, 1999). In the process of managing behaviors, HR is in the position to harness different interpersonal skills among the employees to stimulate their performance opportunities (Jackson & Schuler, 2002). This indicates that the HR works to motivate the rest of the team to be productive in achieving the common goals through harmonious social interaction. According to Jackson and Schuler (2002), the task of the HR is to serve as a motivational force that influences the behaviors of employees that they exert towards the short and long – term goals. Apart from that, the HR is tasked to manage competencies inside the workplace. This means that employees should have the skills, knowledge and attitudes needed to perform the role expected from them. According to Wright and Snell (1998), a strategic approach to managing competencies requires to deal with two types of competencies. First is to support the behaviors needed currently that are aligned with the company’s objectives (Wright & Snell, 1998). Second is to ensure that the work environment is ready to perform new tasks required in the future (Wright & Snell, 1998). Managing the behaviors, innovation and competencies does not translate to success. Of course, there is a possibility of failure. That is why the HR is also assigned to function to manage bringing new opportunities through staffing employees with different perspectives and ideas. According to Bouty (2000), innovative organizations search for means to prevent the failure through making opportunities among its employees to go beyond their limitations that may perhaps serve as impediments to information flow. IV. Implementation The recommended program in addressing the problem area of implementation in performance management is an “Integrated Performance Management Approach”. The problem of implementation failure includes weaknesses in many levels of performance management. In this regard, it is important to re – design the performance management system. It should be taken into consideration that performance management is a continuous process which only means that changes in some aspect is inevitable. Given this, these changes must be addressed by such particular solutions. The system aims to address the implementation problems in an integrated manner. Likewise, this aims to offer long – term solutions that can improve the organizational efficacy as a whole. In order to remedy the implementation problem of performance management, first is to re – design. There is a need to consult and do pilot testing of a new design of performance management. Second is integration. The HR culture and structure should undergo strategic planning too. Of course, the company’s objectives must be major key consideration in such strategic planning of the HR culture and structure. Third is leadership. The commitment, competence, vision and mission must be set clear. Fourth is competence. Knowledge, attitude and skills that are best suited for the needs of the company must be strictly followed. Fifth is implementation. Implement the change in management design. In the implementation process, it is indeed necessary to document every significant step to follow and note what is achieved. Also, time in implementing the program should also be managed. In this program, the allotted time frame is a year due to re – designing of system. A year is enough to see how the performance of employees has improved. Sixth is motivation. Keep on motivating the employees to do their best as they work. Seventh is reward system. The high performers should be acknowledged and rewarded so that they will be much more motivated while the others will strive hard for their efforts to be recognized. Eighth is communication. Continuously provide them feedback that will lead to their development and also stimulate positive changes in behavior. Ninth is monitoring. Continue to monitor employees and in cases of misconduct, warn them early and give corrective action if necessary. This is also to assert the control on them that they should behave accordingly to the company’s standards. Last is evaluation. Evaluate them on a regular basis so that the development can be observed. V. Reinforcers In order to successfully achieve the expected results, the human resource management will function as reinforcers. In all the steps of the proposed program, the HR’s presence must be visible to the employees. The HR is tasked to manage the employees’ behaviors, motivation, competencies, and opportunities. HR’s best interest is to motivate the behaviors of employees to be competent enough to perform satisfactory work that is aligned with the company’s objectives. In this regard, the program’s success is guaranteed. VI. Evaluation Evaluation process will be done annually. The program’s success will be determined and measured at two levels. First is at the individual level. The individual level concerns the achieved behavioral results. This is done through objectively answering structured appraisal forms among each employee. This is to distinguish if their performances have improved or not. Second is at the organizational level which focuses at the actual results translated by the employees’ behavior. This is to determine if the performances of the employees have significantly contributed to the development of the company through the following measures: organizational solidity and of course, financial stability. In cases of ineffective level/s of program or program itself, be open to re – design again some aspects that must be changed for the improvement of the employees’ performance and the organization as a whole. VII. Summary The problem area of performance management that is identified in this paper is its implementation issue. In this regard, performance management problem solving process is applied to address this concern. In addressing the implementation problem of performance management, the recommended strategic program is the “Integrated Performance Management Approach” which is a multi – level approach which aims to address the implementation problems in an integrated manner. Also, it aims to offer long – term solutions that can improve the organizational efficacy as a whole. Given that performance management is a continuous process, it is necessary to modify some aspects of the process to improve performance and business as a whole. VIII. Conclusion Implementation problem of performance management arises many problems, not only to the individual employees but to the whole system. That is why it is needed to be solved by applying the problem solving process program because “Integrated Performance Management Approach” takes into consideration that performance management is a continuous process. Since it is a 10 – step process, it improves organizational efficacy as a whole through continuously motivating and monitoring the performance of employees. In the long run, it can improve organizational efficacy as a whole. This program is a very straightforward approach. However, when it is to be applied in other problem areas, the key consideration is first, define the problem, then re – design accordingly to this identified problem. References Asian Development Bank (ADB) (2009). Five whys technique. Retrieved from http://www.adb.org/publications/five-whys-technique Aspect Software, Inc. (2012). Insight on: Performance management tools that drive action, not just reports. Retrieved from http://www.aspect.com/Documents/Papers/Performance-Management_Tools-that-Drive-InsightOn_WP.pdf Bonabeau, E. (2002) Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA 99(3): 7280-7287. Bouty, I. (2000). Interpersonal and interaction influences on informal resource exchanges between R&D researchers across organizational boundaries. Academy of Management Journal 43: 50-65. Daniels, A.C., and Daniels, J.E. (2004). Performance management: Changing behavior that drives organizational effectiveness (4th Eds.). Performance Management Publications. Dooren, W.V. (no date). Better performance management: Some single and double loop standards. Retrieved from http://www.lafollette.wisc.edu/publicservice/performance/van%20dooren%20Better%20Performance%20Revised%20WVD.pdf Gregory, F.H. (1992). Cause, effect, efficiency & soft systems models. Journal of the Operational Research Society 44 (4): 333-344. Jackson, S.E. and Schuler, R.S. (2002). Managing individual performance: A strategic perspective. In S. Sonnentag. Psychological Management of Individual Performance. John Wiley & Sons . Ltd . Langley, G.J., Nolan, K.L., Nolan, T.W., Norman, C.L. and Provost, L.P. (1996). The improvement guide: A practical approach to enhancing organizational performance. Jossey-Bass. Mark, K. and Nayyar – Stone, R. (2002). Assessing the benefits of performance management in Eastern Europe: Experience in Hungary, Albania, and Georgia. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute. Retrieved from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/NISPAcee/UNPAN004371.pdf Murphy, P. R ., & Jackson, S . E. (1999). Managing work role performance : Challenges for twentyfirst century organizations and their employees . In D.R. Ilgen & E.D. Pulakos (Eds .), The changing nature of performance, pp . 325-365. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass . Pollitt, C., and Bouckaert, G. (2004). Public management reform: A comparative analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rank, J., Carsten, J., Unger, J.M. and Spector, P.E. (2007) Proactive customer service performance: Relationships with individual, task, and leadership variables. Human Performance 20: 363-390. Regenesys (2011). 10 reasons why performance management fails and how to remedy them. Retrieved from http://regenesys.co.za/2011/03/10-reasons-why-performance-management-fails-and-how-to-remedy-them/ Siebers, P. and Aickelin, U. (no date). A first approach on modelling staff proactiveness in retail simulation models. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1108/1108.3019.pdf Wright, P. M., & Snell, S . A. (1998). Toward a unifying framework for exploring fit and flexibility in strategic human resource management. Academy of Management Review 23: 765-772 . Van der Walt, G. (2004). Managing performance in the public sector: concepts, consideration and challenges. Paarl: Juta & Co Ltd. Van Riemsdijk, B., Dastani, M. and Winikoff, M. (2008) Goals in agent systems: A unifying framework. In Padgham L, Parkes DC, Müller J P and Parsons S (Eds.) Proceedings of the 7th international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems. Estoril, Portugal, May 12-16, pp. 713-720. Read More