Performance Management - Planning, Monitoring, Developing, Rating, and Rewarding - Essay Example

Essay: Human resource Performance management Performance management can be defined as a systematic process throughwhich an organization gets its employees involved, as persons and associates of a group so as to improve effectiveness in an organization in the achievement of a firm’s objectives and mission. As a CEO of an electronics company, I would manage employee performance and can be managed them through; Work planning and setting of expectations Monitoring performance continuously Development of performance ability Periodical rating of performance in a summarized fashion Ensuring that good performance is rewarded. Planning So as to make my electronics company an effective organization, as a CEO I would always have work planned out beforehand. Planning simply refers to putting in place performance expectations and objectives for individuals and groups to be able to direct all their efforts towards accomplishing organizational objectives. Thus getting the employees participate in the process of planning will assist them in understanding the objectives of the organization what exactly is needed to be done by them, why it ought to be done and eventually how well the whole task should be executed. There are regulatory obligations that are applied while planning the performance of employees which include establishment of the standards and elements of their plans of performance appraisal. The performance standards and elements applied should be understandable, measurable, verifiable, achievable and equitable. It is through these important elements that employees are held responsible as persons for work responsibilities or assignments. Thus employee performance arrangements should be very flexible to enable them to be adjusted for any changing program goals and work requirements. When applied successfully, these plans can really be valuable working documents that are oftenly discussed and not simply paperwork filed in a drawer and taken out and analyzed only when record ratings are needed (Houldsworth, Jirasinghe, 2007). Monitoring In order to make my organization more effective, projects and assignments given to employees will be continuously monitored. Thus monitoring well simply means constantly measuring performance and giving ongoing response to work groups and employees especially on their development toward accomplishing their objectives. Some of the regulatory obligations for supervising performance comprise of conducting progress and development reviews with the employees whereby their performance is judged against their standards and elements. Continuing monitoring usually provides the chance to authenticate how well the company’s employees are accomplishing the predetermined standards, including making changes to problematic and unrealistic standards. Continuous monitoring can also assist in identification of unacceptable performance at any time given time especially during the period of appraising and thus necessary assistance given so as to address such kind of performance, rather than waiting till the end of period when summary ranking levels are usually assigned. Developing For my organization to be effective there should be evaluation and addressing of employee developmental requirements. In this instance, developing means increasing the ability to perform via such methods as giving assignments aimed at introducing new skills or advanced echelon of responsibility, improvement of work processes, training or primarily other methods. It is a well known fact that providing employees with developmental and training opportunities promotes better performance, assists employees keep up with workplace dynamics such as introducing new technology, and lastly strengthening competences and skills that are job-related. Undertaking processes of performance management usually provides an exceptional opportunity in identification of developmental needs. While planning and supervising work, inherent deficiencies in performance usually become evident and can therefore be easily addressed. It is at this time that areas for the improvement of good performance usually stand out, and thus appropriate action can be effected so as to assist successful employees to even improve further. Rating The other important aspect of good performance management that I can apply is use of rating. This is necessary because from time to time, companies find it profitable to have a summary of employee performance. It is prudent to do this especially when observing and making a comparison of performance over a certain period of time or rather amongst different employees. It is very important for an organization to be aware of who their best performing employees are. Rating, within the framework of official performance appraisal prerequisites, refers to evaluation of group or employee performance against the standards and elements in a worker’s performance arrangement and assignment of a summary ranking of record. However, the ranking of record is usually assigned according to the processes that are included in the company’s appraisal program. This is mostly done on the basis of work performed within the complete appraisal period. Record ranking usually has a bearing on different other employees’ activities for instance granting within-grade compensation hikes and determination of additional maintenance of service credit in decrease in force. It is important to note that even though performance of a group may have an effect on the summary ranking of an employee, a ranking of record is mostly assigned to a person not necessarily to a group (Houldsworth, Jirasinghe, 2007). Rewarding For my company to be effective, as the CEO, I should make good use of rewards. Rewarding primarily refers to recognizing employees, personally and as group members, for their work and acknowledging their input and involvement in the company’s mission. A primary principle of successful management is the fact that all behavior is mostly controlled by its outcomes. Thus those outcomes should and can be informal and formal, and also both negative and positive. Performance that is good is therefore recognized without necessarily having to wait for nominations for awards that are formal to be solicited. This therefore means that recognition is a continuous inherent, aspect of daily experience. Most of the activities that compensate good performance like using “thank you” and do not need a specific regulatory authority. Nevertheless, awards regulations give a wide range of types that can be taken by more formal rewards such as time off, cash and several other nonmonetary objects (John, 2007). These regulations can also cover up a wide variety of inputs that can also be rewarded, from various suggestions to accomplishments by groups. In organizations that are successful, employees and managers have been committed to good performance management practices, naturally throughout their lives, implementing each major component procedure well. Objectives are put in place and routine planning of work is done. Development towards those objectives is measured and company’s staff gets response. Standards that are high are set and a lot of care taken to advance the necessary skills required in achieving them. Thus informal and formal rewards are utilized to identify performance and results that achieve the set mission. This therefore means that all the above five element processes functioning in harmony and supporting one another accomplish natural, efficient performance management (John, 2007). As a CEO the concept of Herzberg’s Motivation-Hygiene Theory also known as (Two Factor Theory) can help one understand better employee motivation and attitudes. Clinical Psychologist Fredrick Herzberg pioneered “job enrichment” and is regarded as being one of the greatest imaginative thinkers in motivational and management theory. Herzberg conducted research to determine what factors in an employee’s work atmosphere contributed to dissatisfaction and satisfaction. In 1959, he published The Motivation to Work where he shared his findings. Herzberg discovered that factors that lead to job satisfaction and most possibly motivation differ from those that lead to job dissatisfaction. He thus came up with the motivation-hygiene theory to explain his findings. He referred to satisfiers as motivators and dissatisfiers as hygiene factors. The phrase “hygiene” was used here in the logic that they are mostly regarded as maintenance factors that are essential in avoidance of dissatisfaction but that independently cannot provide satisfaction. Factors leading to satisfaction include recognition, achievement, advancement, responsibility, work itself and growth. On the other hand, factors that cause dissatisfaction include supervision, salary, company policy, relationship with peers, work conditions and relationship with the boss. Herzberg thought that since the factors that cause satisfaction differ from those that cause dissatisfaction, the 2 sentiments can’t merely be taken as opposites of each other. The same way the converse of satisfaction is not dissatisfaction, but relatively, no satisfaction. Likewise the converse of dissatisfaction is no dissatisfaction. Herzberg explained that two separate human requirements are shown, foremost the physiological requirements that money can fulfill such as purchasing shelter and food. Secondly the psychological requirements that need achievement and growth, and this can be fulfilled by actions that make one to grow. It is clear therefore that the factors that determine if there is dissatisfaction or lack of dissatisfaction are usually not aspects of the work itself, but relatively external factors. He called these hygiene factors as “KITA” factors, where KITA refers to Kick In The A…., which is the process of giving incentives or a punishment threat to make an individual do something. Herzberg further argues that these give only success that is short-run since the actual motivator factors that establish whether satisfaction is present or absent are mostly inherent to the occupation itself and not necessarily resulting from stick and carrot incentives. This therefore means that for motivation-hygiene theory to hold, management should not only give hygiene factors to shun dissatisfied employees but must also give factors inherent to the occupation itself so as to make employees be satisfied with their work. He argued that job enrichment is needed for inherent motivation and that is constantly management procedure. Managers therefore should provide employees with occupations that have enough challenge so as to make use of the full capacity of the employee. They should also give more responsibility to employees who demonstrate higher levels of ability. Lastly if the work does not require a lot of employee’s full capacities, then the company should reflect on automating all the task or replacement of the staff with one with lower level of skills, since if the employee is not utilized fully, then there will be a problem in motivation (Herzberg, Mausner, Snyderman, 1993). As a CEO and an employer the 3 most important individual power include; expert power, legitimate power, and referent power and are explained below; Expert power can be referred to as an individual’s capacity to influence other’s performance due to his/her known abilities, skills and knowledge. Individuals like physicians are perceived to have special skills ,knowledge or expertise and thus exert power. This also applies to accountants, computer specialists, economist and engineers who have power due to their expertise. This special expertise therefore enables leaders perform responsibilities and gives them a better understanding of the environment around them. Expertise however is a source of power if and only if colleagues are dependent upon the individual for the knowledge, ability and skill that is possessed by the leader. Thus the more significant an issue is to the followers, and the more the particular person in charge is perceived to have expertise in the given area, the bigger the power the given leader will possess (Richard, 2008) Legitimate power is actually a person’s capability to influence the performance of others due to the position that is held by him/her. Legitimate is also known as position power and is usually derived from a position of power/authority or influence within the organization, mostly called known as “formal authority”. This is to mean that the company has bestowed to a person occupying a specific position the right to authority and influence and thus able to direct a given number of individuals (Stephen, 2009). Referent power is derived from an individual’s capability to influence the behavior of others since they respect, admire or like the individual. This type of power develops out of respect of an individual and a need to be like that individual. This type of power can be seen in business leaders who possess good reputation, charisma and attractive individual characteristics. References Works Cited Herzberg F, Mausner B.,Snyderman B. (1993). The Motivation to Work. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc. Houldsworth Elizabeth, J. D. (2007). Managing and Measuring Employee Performance. New York: Kogan Page Ltd. John, S. (2007). Managing Employee Performance and Reward:Concepts,Practices,Strategies. London: Cambridge. Richard, D. (2008). The Leadership Experience. New York: Thomson Learning Inc. Stephen, R. (2009). Organisational Beahviour:Global and Southern African Perspectives. Cape Town: Pearson Education South Africa. http://www.nationalforum.com/Electronic%20Journal%20Volumes/Lunenburg,%20Fred%20C%20Power%20and%20Leadership-An%20Influence%20Process%20IJMBA%20V15%20N1%202012.pdf Read More