Upload
katelin-gumm
View
243
Download
8
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
PERFORMANCE PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENTMANAGEMENT
Herman AguinisHerman Aguinis
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
PERFORMANCE PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENTMANAGEMENT
Herman AguinisHerman Aguinis
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance Management in Context: Performance Management in Context: OverviewOverview
Definition of Performance Management (PM) The Performance Management Contribution Disadvantages/Dangers of Poorly-implemented PM
systems Definition of Reward Systems Aims and role of PM Systems Characteristics of an Ideal PM system Integration with Other Human Resources and
Development Activities
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance Management: DefinitionPerformance Management: Definition
Continuous Process ofIdentifying performance of individuals and teamsMeasuring performance of individuals and teamsDeveloping performance of individuals and teams
andAligning performance with the strategic goals of the
organization
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
PM is NOT performance PM is NOT performance appraisalappraisal
• PM– Strategic business
considerations– Ongoing feedback– So employee can
improve performance– Driven by line manager
• Performance appraisal– Assesses employee
• Strengths & • Weaknesses
– Once a year– Lacks ongoing feedback– Driven by HR
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Contributions of PM Contributions of PM For EmployeesFor Employees
The definitions of job and success are clarifiedMotivation to perform is increasedSelf-esteem is increasedSelf-insight and development and enhanced
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Contributions of PMContributions of PMFor ManagersFor Managers
Supervisors’ views of performance are communicated more clearly
Managers gain insight about subordinatesThere is better and more timely differentiation
between good and poor performersEmployees become more competent
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Contributions of PM Contributions of PM For Organization/HR FunctionFor Organization/HR Function
Organizational goals are made clearOrganizational change is facilitated Administrative actions are more fair and
appropriateThere is better protection from lawsuits
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Disadvantages/Dangers of Disadvantages/Dangers of Poorly-implemented PM Systems Poorly-implemented PM Systems
for Employeesfor Employees
• Lowered self-esteem• Employee burnout and job dissatisfaction• Damaged relationships• Use of false or misleading information
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Disadvantages/Dangers of Disadvantages/Dangers of Poorly-implemented PM Systems Poorly-implemented PM Systems
for Managersfor Managers
• Increased turnover• Decreased motivation to perform• Unjustified demands on managers’ resources• Varying and unfair standards and ratings
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
• Wasted time and money• Unclear ratings system• Emerging biases• Increased risk of litigation
Disadvantages/Dangers of Disadvantages/Dangers of Poorly-implemented PM Systems Poorly-implemented PM Systems
for Organizationfor Organization
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Reward Systems: DefinitionReward Systems: Definition
Set of mechanisms for distributingTangible returns
andIntangible or relational returns
As part of an employment relationship
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Tangible returnsTangible returns
Cash compensationBase payCost-of-Living & Contingent PayIncentives (short- and long-term)
Benefits, such as Income ProtectionAllowancesWork/life focus
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Intangible returnsIntangible returns
Relational returns, such asRecognition and statusEmployment securityChallenging work Learning opportunities
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Returns and Their Degree of DependencyReturns and Their Degree of Dependencyon the Performance Management Systemon the Performance Management System
Return Cost of Living Adjustment Income Protection Work/life Focus Allowances Relational Returns Base Pay Contingent Pay Short-term Incentives Long-term Incentives
Degree of Dependency• Low• Low• Moderate• Moderate• Moderate• Moderate• High• High• High
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Purposes of PM Systems:Purposes of PM Systems:OverviewOverview
StrategicAdministrativeInformationalDevelopmentalOrganizational maintenanceDocumentation
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Strategic PurposeStrategic Purpose
Link employee behavior with organization’s goals
Communicate most crucial business strategic initiatives
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Administrative PurposeAdministrative Purpose
Provide information for making decisions re:Salary adjustmentsPromotionsRetention or terminationRecognition of individual performanceLayoffs
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Informational PurposeInformational Purpose
Communicate to Employees:ExpectationsWhat is importantHow they are doingHow to improve
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Developmental PurposeDevelopmental Purpose
Performance feedback/coachingIdentification of individual strengths and
weaknessesCauses of performance deficienciesTailor development of individual career path
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Organizational Maintenance PurposeOrganizational Maintenance Purpose
Plan effective workforceAssess future training needsEvaluate performance at organizational levelEvaluate effectiveness of HR interventions
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Documentational PurposeDocumentational Purpose
Validate selection instrumentsDocument administrative decisionsHelp meet legal requirements
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Characteristics of an Ideal PM SystemCharacteristics of an Ideal PM System
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Congruent with organizational strategyCongruent with organizational strategy
• Consistent with organization’s strategy• Aligned with unit and organizational goals
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
ThoroughThorough
• All employees are evaluated• All major job responsibilities are evaluated• Evaluations cover performance for entire
review period• Feedback is given on both positive and
negative performance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
PracticalPractical
• Available• Easy to use• Acceptable to decision makers• Benefits outweigh costs
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
MeaningfulMeaningful
• Standards are important and relevant• System measures ONLY what employee can
control• Results have consequences Evaluations
occur regularly and at appropriate times• System provides for continuing skill
development of evaluators
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
SpecificSpecific
Concrete and detailed guidance to employees • what’s expected • how to meet the expectations
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Identifies effective and ineffective performanceIdentifies effective and ineffective performance
• Distinguish between effective and ineffective– Behaviors– Results
• Provide ability to identify employees with various levels of performance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
ReliableReliable
• Consistent• Free of error• Inter-rater reliability
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
ValidValid
• Relevant (measures what is important)• Not deficient (doesn’t measure unimportant
facets of job)• Not contaminated (only measures what the
employee can control)
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Acceptable and FairAcceptable and Fair
• Perception of Distributive Justice– Work performed evaluation received reward
• Perception of Procedural Justice– Fairness of procedures used to:
• Determine ratings• Link ratings to rewards
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
InclusiveInclusive
• Represents concerns of all involved– When system is created, employees should help
with deciding• What should be measured• How it should be measured
– Employee should provide input on performance prior to evaluation meeting
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Open (Open (NoNo Secrets) Secrets)
• Frequent, ongoing evaluations and feedback• 2-way communications in appraisal meeting• Clear standards, ongoing communication• Communications are factual, open, honest
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
CorrectableCorrectable
• Recognizes that human judgment is fallible• Appeals process provided
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
StandardizedStandardized
• Ongoing training of managers to provide• Consistent evaluations across
– People– Time
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
EthicalEthical
• Supervisor suppresses self-interest• Supervisor rates only where she has sufficient
information about the performance dimension • Supervisor respects employee privacy
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Integration with other Human Resources Integration with other Human Resources and Development activitiesand Development activities
PM provides information for:Development of training to meet organizational
needsWorkforce planningRecruitment and hiring decisionsDevelopment of compensation systems
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
CHAPTER 2CHAPTER 2
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–39
Performance Management Process:Performance Management Process:OverviewOverview
PrerequisitesPerformance PlanningPerformance ExecutionPerformance AssessmentPerformance ReviewPerformance Renewal and Recontracting
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–40
Performance Management ProcessPerformance Management Process
Performance Review
Performance Renewal and Recontracting
Performance Assessment
Performance Execution
Performance PlanningPrerequisites
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–41
PrerequisitesPrerequisites
A. Knowledge of the organization’s mission and strategic goals
B. Knowledge of the job in question
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–42
A.A. Knowledge of mission Knowledge of mission and strategic goals and strategic goals
• Strategic planning – Purpose or reason for organization’s
existence– Where organization is going– Organizational goals– Strategies for attaining goals
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–43
Mission and GoalsMission and Goals
Cascade effect throughout organization
Organization Unit Employee
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–44
B.B. Knowledge of the jobKnowledge of the job
• Job analysis of key components– Activities, tasks, products, services, processes
• KSAs required to do the job– Knowledge– Skills– Abilities
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–45
Job DescriptionJob Description
• Job duties• KSAs• Working conditions
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–46
Generic Job DescriptionsGeneric Job Descriptions
Occupational Informational Network (O*Net) http://online.onetcenter.org/
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–47
Job analysisJob analysis
• Use a variety of tools– Interviews– Observation– Questionnaires (available on Internet)
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–48
Job analysis follow-upJob analysis follow-up
• All incumbents should – review information and – provide feedback
re:– Task
• Frequency• Criticality
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–49
Performance Planning:Performance Planning:ResultsResults
Key accountabilities
Specific objectives
Performance standards
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–50
Key AccountabilitiesKey Accountabilities
Broad areas of a job for which
the employee is responsible for producing results
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–51
Specific ObjectivesSpecific Objectives
Statements of outcomes Important Measurable
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–52
Performance StandardsPerformance Standards
• “Yardstick” to evaluate how well employees have achieved each objective
• Information on acceptable and unacceptable performance, such asqualityquantity costtime
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–53
Performance Planning:Performance Planning:BehaviorsBehaviors
How a job is done
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–54
Performance Planning:Performance Planning:CompetenciesCompetencies
• Measurable clusters of KSAs
• Critical in determining how results will be achieved
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–55
Performance Planning:Performance Planning:Development PlanDevelopment Plan
Areas for improvement Goals to be achieved in each area of
improvement
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–56
Performance Execution:Performance Execution:Employee ResponsibilitiesEmployee Responsibilities
Commitment to goal achievement Ongoing requests for feedback and coaching Communication with supervisor Collecting and sharing performance data Preparing for performance reviews
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–57
Performance Execution:Performance Execution:Manager ResponsibilitiesManager Responsibilities
• Observation and documentation• Updates• Feedback• Resources• Reinforcement
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–58
Performance AssessmentPerformance Assessment
• Manager assessment• Self-assessment• Other sources (e.g., peers, customers, etc.)
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–59
Multiple Assessments Are NecessaryMultiple Assessments Are Necessary
Increase employee ownershipIncrease commitmentProvide informationEnsure mutual understanding
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–60
Performance ReviewPerformance ReviewOverview of Appraisal MeetingOverview of Appraisal Meeting
• Past– Behaviors and results
• Present– Compensation to be received
• Future– New goals and development plans
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–61
Six Steps for Conducting Six Steps for Conducting Productive Performance ReviewsProductive Performance Reviews
1. Identify what the employee has done well and poorly
2. Solicit feedback3. Discuss the implications of changing behaviors
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–62
Six Steps for Conducting Six Steps for Conducting Productive Performance ReviewsProductive Performance Reviews
4. Explain how skills used in past achievements can help overcome any performance problems
5. Agree on an action plan6. Set a follow-up meeting and agree on
behaviors, actions, attitudes to be evaluated
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–63
Performance Renewal andPerformance Renewal andRecontractingRecontracting
• Same as/different from Performance Planning– Uses insights and information from previous
phases– Cycle begins again
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 2–64
Performance Management ProcessPerformance Management ProcessSummary: Key PointsSummary: Key Points
Ongoing processEach component is important
If one is implemented poorly, whole system suffersLinks between components must be clear
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
CHAPTER 3CHAPTER 3
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance Management and Strategic Performance Management and Strategic Planning: OverviewPlanning: Overview
Definition and Purposes of Strategic PlanningLinking Performance Management to the
Strategic Plan– Strategic Planning – Developing Strategic Plans at the Unit Level– Job Descriptions– Individual and Team Performance
Building Support
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Strategic Planning: Definition Strategic Planning: Definition
• Process– Describe organization’s destination– Assess barriers– Select approaches for moving forward
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Strategic Planning: GoalStrategic Planning: Goal
• Allocate resources – to provide organization – with competitive advantage
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Strategic Planning: PurposesStrategic Planning: Purposes
Help define the organization’s identity Help organization prepare for the future Enhance ability to adapt to environmental
change Provide focus and allow for better
allocation of resources
(continued on next slide)
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Strategic Planning: PurposesStrategic Planning: Purposes
Produce an organizational culture of cooperation
Allow for the consideration of new options and opportunities
Provide employees with information to direct daily activities
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Strategic Planning : OverviewStrategic Planning : Overview
1. Environmental Analysis2. Mission3. Vision4. Goals5. Strategies
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Environmental AnalysisEnvironmental Analysis
Identifies external and internal trends• To understand broad industry issues• To make decisions using “big picture” context
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
External trendsExternal trends
• Opportunities: – environmental characteristics that can help
the organization succeed
• Threats: – environmental characteristics that can
prevent the organization from being successful
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
External trends – External trends – Factors to ConsiderFactors to Consider
• Economic• Political/legal • Social
• Technological• Competitors• Customers• Suppliers
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Internal trendsInternal trends
• Strengths: – internal characteristics that the organization
can use for its advantage• Weaknesses:
– internal characteristics that can hinder the success of the organization
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Internal trends – Internal trends – Factors to ConsiderFactors to Consider
• Organizational structure• Organizational culture• Politics• Processes• Size
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Gap AnalysisGap Analysis
Analyzes:External environment (opportunities and threats)
vis-à-vis
Internal environment(strengths and weaknesses)
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Gap analysis determines:Gap analysis determines:
Opportunity + Strength = Leverage
Opportunity + Weakness = Constraint
Threat + Strength = Vulnerability
Threat + Weakness = Problem
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Strategic Planning for the OrganizationStrategic Planning for the Organization
Environmental and Gap Analyses provide information for organizations to decide:Who they areWhat they do
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
MissionMission
A good mission statement answers:Why does the organization exist?What is the scope of the organization’s activities?Who are the customers served?What are the products or services offered?
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Mission Statement contains:Mission Statement contains:
A. Information on organization’s Basic product/service to be offered Primary market/customer groups Unique benefits and advantages of
product/services Technology to be used Concern for survival through growth and
profitability
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Mission Statement Mission Statement maymay contain: contain:
B. Information on organization’s values and beliefs Managerial philosophy Public image sought by organization Self-concept of business adopted by
Employees Stockholders
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
VisionVision
• Statement of future aspirations• Focuses attention on what is important• Provides context for evaluating
– Opportunities– Threats
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
A Good Vision Statement is:A Good Vision Statement is:
BriefVerifiableBound by a TimelineCurrent
FocusedUnderstandableInspiringA stretch
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Purposes for Setting GoalsPurposes for Setting Goals
• Formalize expected achievements• Provide motivation• Provide tangible targets • Provide basis for good decisions• Provide basis for performance measurement
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
StrategiesStrategies
• Create strategies or Game Plans or “How to” procedures to address issues of:– Growth– Survival– Turnaround– Stability– Innovation– Leadership
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
How the HR Function contributes:How the HR Function contributes:
• Communicate knowledge of strategic plan• Provide knowledge of KSAs needed for
strategy implementation• Propose reward systems
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Strategic Plans at the Unit LevelStrategic Plans at the Unit Level
• Organization Mission statement, Vision statement, Goals, and Strategies
Must clearly align with
And be congruent with
• Every Unit Mission statement, Vision statement, Goals, and Strategies
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Alignment of Strategic Plan with Alignment of Strategic Plan with PerformancePerformance
Organization’s Strategic PlanMission, Vision, Goals, Strategies
Unit’s Strategic PlanMission, Vision, Goals,
StrategiesJob Description
Tasks, KSAs
Individual and Team PerformanceResults, Behaviors, Developmental Plan
Critical to involve all levels of management
Critical to involve all employees
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Job DescriptionsJob Descriptions
• Tasks and KSAs are congruent with Organization and Unit strategic plans
• Activities described support mission and vision of Organization and Unit
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Individual and Team PerformanceIndividual and Team Performance
Organization and Unit mission, vision, goals lead toPerformance management system, which
Motivates employees Aligns development plans with organization priorities
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Strategic Plan Strategic Plan Choices in PM System DesignChoices in PM System Design
• Criteria (Behavior vs. Results)• Participation (Low vs. High)• Temporal Dimension (Short Term vs. Long Term)• Level of Criteria (Individual vs. Team/Group)• System Orientation (Developmental vs.
Administrative)• Rewards (Pay for Performance vs. Tenure/Position)
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Building Support – Building Support – Answering “What’s In It for Me?”Answering “What’s In It for Me?”
• Top Management: – Help carry out vision
• All levels: – Involvement – Participation – Understanding
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
CHAPTER 4CHAPTER 4
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Defining Performance and Choosing a Defining Performance and Choosing a Measurement Approach: OverviewMeasurement Approach: Overview
Defining PerformanceDeterminants of PerformancePerformance DimensionsApproaches to Measuring Performance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Defining Performance Defining Performance
Performance is:• Behavior• What employees do
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Defining PerformanceDefining Performance
Performance is NOT:• Results or Outcomes• What employees produce
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Behaviors labeled as Performance are:Behaviors labeled as Performance are:
1. Evaluative– Negative– Neutral– Positive
2. Multidimensional– Many different kinds of behaviors– Advance or hinder organizational goals
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Behaviors are Not alwaysBehaviors are Not always
– Observable– Measurable
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Results/Consequences may be usedResults/Consequences may be used
– To infer behavior– As proxy for behavioral measure
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Determinants of PerformanceDeterminants of Performance
Performance =
Declarative Knowledge
X
Procedural Knowledge
X
Motivation
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
A. Declarative KnowledgeA. Declarative Knowledge
• Information about– Facts – Labels– Principles– Goals
• Understanding of task requirements
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
B. Procedural KnowledgeB. Procedural Knowledge
• Knowing– What to do– How to do it
• Skills– Cognitive– Physical– Perceptual– Motor– Interpersonal
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
C. MotivationC. Motivation
• Choices– Expenditure of effort– Level of effort– Persistence of effort
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Implications for Addressing Implications for Addressing Performance ProblemsPerformance Problems
• Managers need information to accurately identify source(s) of performance problems
• Performance management systems must– Measure performance
AND– Provide information on SOURCE(s) of problems
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Factors Influencing Determinants of Factors Influencing Determinants of Performance:Performance:
• Individual characteristics– Procedural knowledge– Declarative knowledge– Motivation
• HR practices• Work environment
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance Dimensions:Performance Dimensions:Types of multi-dimensional behaviors:Types of multi-dimensional behaviors:
• Task performance• Contextual performance
– Pro-social behaviors– Organizational citizenship
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Task performanceTask performance
Activities that • transform raw materials • help with the transformation process
– Replenishing– Distributing– Supporting
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Contextual performanceContextual performance
Behaviors that • contribute to organization’s effectiveness
and• provide a good environment in which task
performance can occur
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Differences Between Differences Between Task and Contextual PerformanceTask and Contextual Performance
• Task Performance• Varies across jobs• Likely to be role
prescribed• Influenced by
• Abilities• Skills
• Contextual Performance• Fairly similar across jobs• Not likely to be role
prescribed• Influenced by
• Personality
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Why Include Task & Contextual Why Include Task & Contextual Performance Dimensions in PM system?Performance Dimensions in PM system?
1. Global competition2. Teamwork3. Customer service 4. Supervisor views
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Job Performance in ContextJob Performance in Context
A performer(individual or
team)
In a given situation
Engages in certain
behaviors
That produce various results
TRAIT BEHAVIOR RESULTS
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Approaches to Measuring PerformanceApproaches to Measuring Performance
• Trait Approach– Emphasizes individual traits of employees
• Behavior Approach– Emphasizes how employees do the job
• Results Approach– Emphasizes what employees produce
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Trait ApproachTrait Approach
• Emphasis on individual• Evaluate stable traits
• Cognitive abilities• Personality
• Based on relationship between traits & performance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Trait Approach (continued)Trait Approach (continued)
• Appropriate if• Structural changes planned for organization
• Disadvantages• Improvement not under individual’s control• Trait may not lead to
• Desired behaviors or • Desired results
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Behavior ApproachBehavior Approach
Appropriate if• Employees take a long time to achieve
desired outcomes• Link between behaviors and results is not
obvious• Outcomes occur in the distant future• Poor results are due to causes beyond the
performer’s controlNot appropriate if • above conditions are not present
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Results ApproachResults Approach
Advantages:• Less time • Lower cost • Data appear objective
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Results Approach (continued)Results Approach (continued)
Most appropriate when:• Workers skilled in necessary behaviors• Behaviors and results obviously related• Consistent improvement in results over time• Many ways to do the job right
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
CHAPTER 5CHAPTER 5
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Defining Performance and Choosing a Defining Performance and Choosing a Measurement Approach: OverviewMeasurement Approach: Overview
Defining PerformanceDeterminants of PerformancePerformance DimensionsApproaches to Measuring Performance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Defining Performance Defining Performance
Performance is:• Behavior• What employees do
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Defining PerformanceDefining Performance
Performance is NOT:• Results or Outcomes• What employees produce
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Behaviors labeled as Performance are:Behaviors labeled as Performance are:
1. Evaluative– Negative– Neutral– Positive
2. Multidimensional– Many different kinds of behaviors– Advance or hinder organizational goals
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Behaviors are Not alwaysBehaviors are Not always
– Observable– Measurable
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Results/Consequences may be usedResults/Consequences may be used
– To infer behavior– As proxy for behavioral measure
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Determinants of PerformanceDeterminants of Performance
Performance =
Declarative Knowledge
X
Procedural Knowledge
X
Motivation
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
A. Declarative KnowledgeA. Declarative Knowledge
• Information about– Facts – Labels– Principles– Goals
• Understanding of task requirements
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
B. Procedural KnowledgeB. Procedural Knowledge
• Knowing– What to do– How to do it
• Skills– Cognitive– Physical– Perceptual– Motor– Interpersonal
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
C. MotivationC. Motivation
• Choices– Expenditure of effort– Level of effort– Persistence of effort
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Implications for Addressing Implications for Addressing Performance ProblemsPerformance Problems
• Managers need information to accurately identify source(s) of performance problems
• Performance management systems must– Measure performance
AND– Provide information on SOURCE(s) of problems
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Factors Influencing Determinants of Factors Influencing Determinants of Performance:Performance:
• Individual characteristics– Procedural knowledge– Declarative knowledge– Motivation
• HR practices• Work environment
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance Dimensions:Performance Dimensions:Types of multi-dimensional behaviors:Types of multi-dimensional behaviors:
• Task performance• Contextual performance
– Pro-social behaviors– Organizational citizenship
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Task performanceTask performance
Activities that • transform raw materials • help with the transformation process
– Replenishing– Distributing– Supporting
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Contextual performanceContextual performance
Behaviors that • contribute to organization’s effectiveness
and• provide a good environment in which task
performance can occur
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Differences Between Differences Between Task and Contextual PerformanceTask and Contextual Performance
• Task Performance• Varies across jobs• Likely to be role
prescribed• Influenced by
• Abilities• Skills
• Contextual Performance• Fairly similar across jobs• Not likely to be role
prescribed• Influenced by
• Personality
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Why Include Task & Contextual Why Include Task & Contextual Performance Dimensions in PM system?Performance Dimensions in PM system?
1. Global competition2. Teamwork3. Customer service 4. Supervisor views
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Job Performance in ContextJob Performance in Context
A performer(individual or
team)
In a given situation
Engages in certain
behaviors
That produce various results
TRAIT BEHAVIOR RESULTS
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Approaches to Measuring PerformanceApproaches to Measuring Performance
• Trait Approach– Emphasizes individual traits of employees
• Behavior Approach– Emphasizes how employees do the job
• Results Approach– Emphasizes what employees produce
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Trait ApproachTrait Approach
• Emphasis on individual• Evaluate stable traits
• Cognitive abilities• Personality
• Based on relationship between traits & performance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Trait Approach (continued)Trait Approach (continued)
• Appropriate if• Structural changes planned for organization
• Disadvantages• Improvement not under individual’s control• Trait may not lead to
• Desired behaviors or • Desired results
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Behavior ApproachBehavior Approach
Appropriate if• Employees take a long time to achieve
desired outcomes• Link between behaviors and results is not
obvious• Outcomes occur in the distant future• Poor results are due to causes beyond the
performer’s controlNot appropriate if • above conditions are not present
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Results ApproachResults Approach
Advantages:• Less time • Lower cost • Data appear objective
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Results Approach (continued)Results Approach (continued)
Most appropriate when:• Workers skilled in necessary behaviors• Behaviors and results obviously related• Consistent improvement in results over time• Many ways to do the job right
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
CHAPTER 6CHAPTER 6
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Gathering Performance Information:Gathering Performance Information:OverviewOverview
• Appraisal Forms• Characteristics of Appraisal Forms• Determining Overall Rating• Appraisal Period and Number of Meetings• Who Should Provide Performance Information?• A Model of Rater Motivation• Preventing Rating Distortion through Rater Training
Programs
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Major Components of Appraisal FormsMajor Components of Appraisal Forms (1)(1)
• Basic Employee Information
• Accountabilities, Objectives, and Standards
• Competencies and Indicators
• Major Achievements and Contributions
• Stakeholder Input
• Employee Comments
• Signatures
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Major Components of Appraisal Forms (2) Major Components of Appraisal Forms (2) (could (could
be included in a separate form)be included in a separate form)
• Developmental Achievements• Developmental
– Needs – Plans– Goals
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Desirable Features for All Appraisal FormsDesirable Features for All Appraisal Forms
• Simplicity• Relevancy• Descriptiveness• Adaptability
• Comprehensiveness• Definitional Clarity• Communication• Time Orientation
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Determining Overall RatingDetermining Overall Rating
• Judgmental strategy
• Mechanical strategy
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Appraisal periodAppraisal period
Number of Meetings• Annual • Semi-annual • Quarterly
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
When Review Is CompletedWhen Review Is Completed
• Anniversary date– Supervisor doesn’t have to fill out forms at same time– Can’t tie rewards to fiscal year
• Fiscal year– Rewards tied to fiscal year– Goals tied to corporate goals– May be burden to supervisor, depending on
implementation
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
6 Types of Formal6 Types of Formal Meetings Meetings (can be combined)(can be combined)
• System Inauguration• Self-Appraisal• Classical Performance Review• Merit/Salary Review• Development Plan• Objective Setting
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Who Should Provide Performance Who Should Provide Performance Information?Information?
Employees should be involved in selecting• Which sources evaluate• Which performance dimensions
When employees are actively involved• Higher acceptance of results• Perception that system is fair
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Who Should Provide Performance Information?Who Should Provide Performance Information?
Direct knowledge of employee performance• Supervisors• Peers• Subordinates• Self• Customers
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
SupervisorsSupervisors
• Advantages– Best position to evaluate performance vs. strategic
goals– Make decisions about rewards
• Disadvantages– Supervisor may not be able to directly observe
performance– Evaluations may be biased
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
PeersPeers
• Advantages– Assess teamwork
• Disadvantages– Possible friendship bias– May be less discriminating
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
SubordinatesSubordinates
• Advantages– Accurate when used for developmental purposes– Good position to assess some competencies
• Disadvantages– Inflated when used for administrative purposes– May fear retaliation (confidentiality is key)
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
SelfSelf
• Advantages– Increased acceptance of decisions– Decreased defensiveness during appraisal interview– Good position to track activities during review period
• Disadvantages– May be more lenient and biased
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Customers (external and internal)Customers (external and internal)
• Advantages– Employees become more focused on meeting
customer expectations• Disadvantages
– Time– Money
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Disagreement Across SourcesDisagreement Across Sources
• Expect disagreement• Ensure employee receives feedback by
source• Assign differential weights to scores by
source, depending on importance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Types of Rating ErrorsTypes of Rating Errors
• Intentional errors– Rating inflation– Rating deflation
• Unintentional errors– Due to complexity of task
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
Expected Positive and Negative Consequences of
Rating Accuracy
Probability of Experiencing Positive & Negative
Consequences
Expected Positive and Negative Consequences of
Rating Distortion
Probability of Experiencing Positive & Negative
Consequences
Motivation to Provide Accurate Ratings
Motivation to Distort Ratings
Rating Behavior
A Model of A Model of RaterRater Motivation Motivation
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Motivations for Rating InflationMotivations for Rating Inflation
• Maximize merit raise/rewards• Encourage employees• Avoid creating written record• Avoid confrontation with employees• Promote undesired employees out of unit• Make manager look good to his/her supervisor
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Motivations for Rating DeflationMotivations for Rating Deflation
• Shock employees• Teach a lesson• Send a message to employee • Build a written record of poor performance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Prevent Rating Distortion through Prevent Rating Distortion through
Rater Training ProgramsRater Training Programs
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Rater Training Programs should cover:Rater Training Programs should cover:
• Information• Motivation• Identifying, observing, recording and
evaluating performance• How to interact with employees when they
receive performance information
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Information - how the system worksInformation - how the system works
• Reasons for implementing the performance management system
• Information on the appraisal form and system mechanics
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Motivation – What’s in it for me?Motivation – What’s in it for me?
• Benefits of providing accurate ratings• Tools for providing accurate ratings
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Identifying, observing, recording, and evaluating Identifying, observing, recording, and evaluating performanceperformance
• How to identify and rank job activities• How to observe, record, measure
performance• How to minimize rating errors
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
How to interact with employees How to interact with employees when they receive performance informationwhen they receive performance information
• How to conduct an appraisal interview• How to train, counsel, and coach
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
CHAPTER 7CHAPTER 7
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Implementing a Performance Implementing a Performance Management System: OverviewManagement System: Overview
• Preparation• Communication Plan• Appeals Process• Training Programs• Pilot Testing• Ongoing Monitoring and Evaluation
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
PreparationPreparation
• Need to gain system buy-in through:– Communication plan regarding
Performance Management system• Including appeals process
– Training programs for raters– Pilot testing system
• Ongoing monitoring and evaluation
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Communication Plan answers:Communication Plan answers:
• What is Performance Management (PM)?• How does PM fit in our strategy?• What’s in it for me?• How does it work?• What are our roles and responsibilities?• How does PM relate to other initiatives?
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Cognitive Biases that affect Cognitive Biases that affect communications effectiveness communications effectiveness
• Selective exposure• Selective perception• Selective retention
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
To minimize effects of cognitive biases:To minimize effects of cognitive biases:
A. Consider employees:• Involve employees in system design• Show how employee needs are met
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
To minimize effects of cognitive biases:To minimize effects of cognitive biases:
B. Emphasize the positive• Use credible communicators• Strike first – create positive attitude• Provide facts and conclusions
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
To minimize effects of cognitive biases:To minimize effects of cognitive biases:
C. Repeat, document, be consistent• Put it in writing• Use multiple channels of communication• Say it, and then – say it again
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Appeals ProcessAppeals Process
• Promote Employee buy-in to PM system– Amicable/Non-retaliatory – Resolution of disagreements
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Appeals ProcessAppeals Process
• Employees can question two types of issue:– Judgmental
• (validity of evaluation)
– Administrative• (whether policies and procedures were followed)
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Appeals ProcessAppeals Process
• Level 1– HR reviews facts, policies, procedures– HR reports to supervisor/employee– HR attempts to negotiate settlement
• Level 2– Arbitrator (panel of peers and managers) and/or– High-level manager – final decision
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Rater Training ProgramsRater Training Programs
• Content Areas to include– Information– Identifying, Observing, Recording, Evaluating– How to Interact with Employees
• Choices of Training Programs to implement– RET– FOR– BO– SL
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
ContentContent
A. Information - how the system works– Reasons for implementing the
performance management system– Information
• the appraisal form• system mechanics
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
ContentContent
B. Identifying, observing, recording, and evaluating performance– How to identify and rank job activities– How to observe, record, and measure
performance– How to minimize rating errors
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
ContentContent
C. How to interact with employees when they receive performance information– How to conduct an appraisal interview– How to train, counsel, and coach
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Choices of Training ProgramsChoices of Training Programs
• Rater Error Training (RET)• Frame of Reference Training (FOR)• Behavioral Observation Training (BO)• Self-leadership Training (SL)
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Rater Error Training (RET)Rater Error Training (RET)
• Goals of Rater Error Training (RET)– Make raters aware of types of rating errors– Help raters minimize errors– Increase rating accuracy
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Intentional rating errorsIntentional rating errors
• Leniency (inflation)• Severity (deflation)• Central tendency
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Unintentional rating errorsUnintentional rating errors
• Similar to Me• Halo• Primacy • First impression• Contrast
• Stereotype• Negativity• Recency• Spillover
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Possible Solutions for Types of Rating ErrorsPossible Solutions for Types of Rating Errors
• Intentional– Focus on motivation– Demonstrate benefits of providing accurate
ratings• Unintentional
– Alert raters to different errors and their causes
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Frame of Reference Training (FOR)Frame of Reference Training (FOR)
• Goal of Frame of Reference Training (FOR)*– Raters develop common frame of reference
• Observing performance• Evaluating performance
*Most appropriate when PM appraisal system focuses on behaviors
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Expected Results of Frame of Reference Training (FOR) Expected Results of Frame of Reference Training (FOR)
• Raters provide consistent, more accurate ratings
• Raters help employees design effective development plans
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Behavioral Observation Training (BO)Behavioral Observation Training (BO)
• Goals of Behavioral Observation Training (BO)– Minimize unintentional rating errors– Improve rater skills by focusing on how
raters:• Observe performance• Store information about performance• Recall information about performance• Use information about performance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Self-leadership Training (SL)Self-leadership Training (SL)
• Goals of Self-leadership Training (SL)– Improve rater confidence in ability to
manage performance– Enhance mental processes– Increase self-efficacy
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Pilot TestingPilot Testing
• Provides ability to – Discover potential problems– Fix them
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Pilot Testing - benefitsPilot Testing - benefits
• Gain information from potential participants• Learn about difficulties/obstacles• Collect recommendations on how to improve • Understand personal reactions• Get early buy-in • Get higher rate of acceptance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Implementing a Pilot TestImplementing a Pilot Test
• Roll out test version with sample group– Staff and jobs generalizable to organization
• Fully implement planned system– All participants keep records of issues encountered– Do not record appraisal scores– Collect input from all participants
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Ongoing Monitoring and EvaluationOngoing Monitoring and Evaluation
• When system is implemented, decide:– How to evaluate system effectiveness– How to measure implementation– How to measure results
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Evaluation data to collect:Evaluation data to collect:
• Reactions to the system• Assessments of requirements
– Operational– Technical
• Effectiveness of performance ratings
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Indicators to considerIndicators to consider
• Number of individuals evaluated• Distribution of performance ratings• Quality of information• Quality of performance discussion meetings• System satisfaction• Cost/benefit ratio• Unit-level and organization-level performance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
CHAPTER 8CHAPTER 8
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance Management and Performance Management and Employee Development: OverviewEmployee Development: Overview
• Personal Developmental Plans• Direct Supervisor’s Role• 360-degree Feedback Systems
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Stakeholders in the Development ProcessStakeholders in the Development Process
• Employees – Help plan their own development– Improve their own performance
• Managers– Help guide the process of development – Support success of process
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Personal Personal DevelopmentalDevelopmental Plans Plans
• Specify actions necessary to improve performance
• Highlight employee’s – Strengths– Areas in need of development
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Personal Developmental Plans answer:Personal Developmental Plans answer:
• How can I continuously learn and grow in the next year?
• How can I do better in the future?• How can I avoid performance problems
of the past?
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Personal Developmental Plans:Personal Developmental Plans:OverviewOverview
• Developmental Plan Objectives• Content of Developmental Plan• Developmental Activities
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Overall Developmental Plan ObjectivesOverall Developmental Plan Objectives
• Encourage:– Continuous learning– Performance improvement– Personal growth
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Specific Developmental Plan ObjectivesSpecific Developmental Plan Objectives
• Improve performance in current job• Sustain performance in current job• Prepare employee for advancement• Enrich employee’s work experience
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Content of Developmental PlanContent of Developmental Plan
• Developmental objectives– New skills or knowledge– Timeline
• How the new skills or knowledge will be acquired– Resources– Strategies
• Standards and measures used to assess achievement of objectives
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Content of Developmental PlanContent of Developmental Plan
• Based on needs of organization and employee• Chosen by employee and direct supervisor• Taking into account
– Employee’s learning preferences– Developmental objective in question– Organization’s available resources
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Developmental Activities Developmental Activities ‘On the job’‘On the job’
• On-the-job-training• Mentoring• Job rotation• Temporary assignments
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Developmental ActivitiesDevelopmental ActivitiesIn addition to ‘on the job’In addition to ‘on the job’
• Courses• Self-guided reading• Getting a degree• Attending a conference• Membership or leadership role
– in professional or trade organization
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Direct Supervisor’s Role:Direct Supervisor’s Role:
• Explain what is necessary • Refer employee to appropriate
developmental activities • Review & make suggestions regarding
developmental objectives
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Direct Supervisor’s Role (ongoing):Direct Supervisor’s Role (ongoing):
• Check on employee’s progress • Provide motivational reinforcement
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
360-degree Feedback Systems360-degree Feedback Systems
Tools to help employees
• Improve performance by using • Performance information • Gathered from many sources
– Superiors– Peers– Customers– Subordinates– The employee
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
360-degree Feedback Systems360-degree Feedback Systems
• Anonymous feedback• Most useful when used
– For DEVELOPMENT – NOT for administrative purposes
• Internet used for collecting data
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Necessary organizational norms include:Necessary organizational norms include:
• Cooperation• Openness and trust• Input and participation valued• Fairness
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Overview of 360-degree Feedback SystemsOverview of 360-degree Feedback Systems
• Advantages of 360-degree Feedback Systems• Risks of 360-degree Feedback Systems• Characteristics of a Good 360-degree
Feedback System
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Advantages of 360-degree Feedback SystemsAdvantages of 360-degree Feedback Systems
• Decreased possibility of biases• Increased awareness of expectations• Increased commitment to improve• Improved self-perception of performance• Improved performance• Reduction of ‘undiscussables’• Increased employee control of their own careers
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Risks of 360-degree Feedback SystemsRisks of 360-degree Feedback Systems
• Unconstructive negative feedback hurts.• Are individuals comfortable with the system?
User acceptance is crucial.• If few raters, anonymity is compromised.• Raters may become overloaded.• Stock values may drop.
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Characteristics of a Good 360-degree Feedback SystemCharacteristics of a Good 360-degree Feedback System
• Anonymity• Observation of employee
performance• Avoidance of survey
fatigue• Raters are trained
• Used for developmental purposes only
• Emphasis on behaviors• Raters go beyond ratings• Feedback interpretation• Follow-up
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
CHAPTER 9CHAPTER 9
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance Management Skills:Performance Management Skills:OverviewOverview
• Coaching• Coaching Styles• Coaching Process• Performance Review Meetings
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Coaching: DefinitionCoaching: Definition
• Manager – Interacts with employee and– Takes active role and interest in performance
• Collaborative ongoing process– Directing employee behavior– Motivating employee behavior– Rewarding employee behavior
• Concerned with long-term performance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Major Coaching Functions:Major Coaching Functions:
• Give advice• Provide guidance• Provide support• Give confidence• Promote greater competence
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Key Coaching Behaviors Key Coaching Behaviors
• Establish developmental objectives• Communicate effectively• Motivate employees• Document performance• Give feedback• Diagnose performance problems• Develop employees
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
The Good Coach QuestionnaireThe Good Coach Questionnaire
Do you listen to your employees? Do you understand their individual needs? Do you encourage employees to express
their feelings openly? Do you give tangible and intangible support
for development? Do your employees know your expectations
about their performance?
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
The Good Coach Questionnaire (continued)The Good Coach Questionnaire (continued)
Do you encourage open and honest discussions and problem solving?
Do you help your employees create action plans that will
Solve problems?Create changes?
Do you help your employees explore potential areas of
Growth?Development?
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Coaching StylesCoaching Styles
More Assertive Less assertive
Task & Fact oriented Driver Analyzer
People oriented Persuader Amiable
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Adaptive coaches use all stylesAdaptive coaches use all stylesaccording to employee needs:according to employee needs:
• Sometimes providing direction• Sometimes persuading• Sometimes showing empathy• Sometimes paying close attention to rules and
established procedures
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Set Developmenta
l Goals
Identify Developmental Resources &
Strategies
Implement strategies
Observe and Document
Developmental Behavior
Give Feedback
Coaching ProcessCoaching Process
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Coaching Process:Coaching Process:Steps covered in Chapter 8Steps covered in Chapter 8
• Set Developmental Goals• Identify Resources and Strategies
Needed to Implement Developmental Goals
• Implement Developmental Goals
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Coaching Process:Coaching Process: Overview of remaining stepsOverview of remaining steps
• Observe and Document Developmental Behavior and Outcomes
• Give Feedback– Praise– Negative Feedback
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Observe and Document Developmental Behavior Observe and Document Developmental Behavior and Outcomesand Outcomes
Constraints:• Time• Situation• Activity
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Organizational Activities Organizational Activities to improve documentation of performanceto improve documentation of performance
• Good communication plan to get manager buy-in• Training programs
– Rater error training– Frame-of-reference training– Behavioral observation training– Self-leadership training
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Reasons to document performanceReasons to document performance
• Minimize cognitive load• Create trust• Plan for the future• Legal protection
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Recommendations for DocumentationRecommendations for Documentation
• Be specific• Use adjectives and adverbs sparingly• Balance positives with negatives• Focus on job-related information• Be comprehensive• Standardize procedures• Describe observable behavior
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Giving FeedbackGiving Feedback
• Main purposes:– Help build confidence– Develop competence– Enhance involvement– Improve future performance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Potential costs of failing to provide feedback:Potential costs of failing to provide feedback:
• Employees are deprived of chance to improve their own performance
• Chronic poor performance• Employees have inaccurate perceptions of
how their performance is regarded by others
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
To be effective, feedback should:To be effective, feedback should:
• Be timely• Be frequent• Be specific• Be verifiable• Be consistent (over time and across employees)• Be given privately• Provide context and consequences
(continued next slide)
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
To be effective, feedback should:To be effective, feedback should: (continued)(continued)
• Describe first, evaluate second• Cover the continuum of performance• Identify patterns• Demonstrate confidence in employee• Allow for both advice and idea generation
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Guidelines for Giving PraiseGuidelines for Giving Praise
• Be sincere – only give praise when it is deserved
• Give praise about specific behaviors or results• Take your time• Be comfortable with act of praising• Emphasize the positive
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Giving Negative FeedbackGiving Negative Feedback
Managers avoid giving negative feedback due to:• Negative reactions and consequences• Negative experiences in the past• Playing “god”• Need for irrefutable and conclusive evidence
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Negative feedback is most useful when it:Negative feedback is most useful when it:
• Identifies warning signs and performance problem is still manageable
• Clarifies unwanted behaviors and consequences
• Focuses on behaviors that can be changed• Comes from a credible source• Is supported by data
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Feedback Sessions should always answer:Feedback Sessions should always answer:
• How is your job going?• What can be done to make it better?
– Job– Product– Services
• How can you better serve your customers?– Internal– External
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Supervisory roles in managing performanceSupervisory roles in managing performance
• Judge– Evaluate performance– Allocate rewards
• Coach– Help employee solve performance problems– Identify performance weaknesses– Design developmental plans
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance Review Formal MeetingsPerformance Review Formal Meetings
Possible types of formal meetings:1. System Inauguration2. Self-Appraisal3. Classical Performance Review4. Merit/Salary Review5. Developmental Plan6. Objective Setting
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Steps to take before meeting:Steps to take before meeting:
• Give at least 2-weeks notice• Block sufficient time• Arrange to meet in a private location without
interruptions
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Merged Performance Review MeetingMerged Performance Review MeetingComponentsComponents
1. Explanation of meeting purpose2. Employee self-appraisal3. Supervisor & employee share rating and rationale4. Developmental discussion5. Employee summary6. Rewards discussion7. Follow-up meeting arrangement8. Approval and appeals process discussion9. Final recap
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Possible defensive behaviors of employeesPossible defensive behaviors of employees
• Fight response– Blaming others– Staring at supervisor– Raising voice– Other aggressive responses
• Flight response– Looking/turning away– Speaking softly– Continually changing the subject– Quickly agreeing without basis– Other passive responses
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
To prevent/reduce defensive behaviorsTo prevent/reduce defensive behaviors
• Establish and maintain rapport• Be empathetic• Observe verbal and nonverbal cues• Minimize threats• Encourage participation
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
When defensiveness is unavoidable:When defensiveness is unavoidable:
Recognize itAllow its expression
If situation becomes intolerableReschedule the meeting for a later time
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
CHAPTER 10CHAPTER 10
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Reward Systems and Legal IssuesReward Systems and Legal IssuesOverviewOverview
• Reward Systems• Legal Issues
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Reward Systems: OverviewReward Systems: Overview
• Traditional and Contingent Pay (CP) Plans– Reasons for Introducing CP Plans– Possible Problems Associated with CP– Selecting a CP Plan
• Putting Pay in Context• Pay Structures
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Traditional PayTraditional Pay
• Salary and salary increases are based on– Position– Seniority
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Contingent Pay (CP)Contingent Pay (CP)
• Salary and salary increases are based on– Job performance
• Also called: Pay for Performance• If not added to base pay, called:
– Variable pay
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Reasons for Introducing CPReasons for Introducing CP
• Performance management is more effective when rewards are tied to results
• CP Plans force organizations to:– Clearly define effective performance– Determine what factors are necessary
• CP plans help to recruit and retain top performers• CP plans project good corporate image
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
CP plans help improve motivation when:CP plans help improve motivation when:
• Employees see clear link between their efforts and resulting performance (Expectancy)
• Employees see clear link between their performance level and rewards received (Instrumentality)
• Employees value the rewards available (Valence)
motivation = expectancy x instrumentality x valence
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Possible Problems Associated with CPPossible Problems Associated with CP
• Poor performance management system• Rewarding counterproductive behavior• Insignificant rewards• The reward becomes the driver • Extrinsic vs. intrinsic motivation• Disproportionately large rewards for executives
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Selecting a CP Plan: Issues to considerSelecting a CP Plan: Issues to consider
A. Culture of organizationB. Strategic direction of organization
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
A. Culture of organization: A. Culture of organization: Types of organizationsTypes of organizations
• Traditional– Top-down decision making– Vertical communication– Jobs that are clearly defined
• Involvement– Shared decision making– Lateral communications– Loosely defined roles
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
CP systems for different organizational cultures:CP systems for different organizational cultures:
• Traditional organizations– Piece rate– Sales commissions– Group incentives
• Involvement organizations– Profit sharing– Skill-based pay
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
B: CP Plans to enhance Strategic Directions:B: CP Plans to enhance Strategic Directions:
• Employee development– Skill based pay
• Customer service– Competency based pay– Gainsharing
• Overall Profit– Executive pay– Profit or stock sharing
• Productivity– Individual
• Piece rate• Sales commissions
– Group• Gainsharing• Group incentives
• Teamwork– Team sales commissions– Gainsharing– Competency based pay
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Putting Pay in ContextPutting Pay in Context
A reward increases the chance that• Specific behaviors and results will be repeated, or• Employee will engage in new behavior and
produce better results
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Rewards can include:Rewards can include:
• Pay• Recognition
– Public– Private– Status
• Time
• Trust & Respect• Challenge• Responsibility• Freedom• Relationships
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
How to Make Rewards WorkHow to Make Rewards Work
• Define and measure performance first and then allocate rewards
• Only use rewards that are available• Make sure all employees are eligible• Rewards should be both
– Financial– Non-financial
(continued)
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
How to Make Rewards Work How to Make Rewards Work (continued)(continued)
• Rewards should be:– Visible– Contingent– Timely– Reversible
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Pay StructuresPay Structures
• Job Evaluation• Broad-banding
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Pay structuresPay structures
An organization’s pay structureClassifies jobs
Into categoriesBased on their relative worth
Is designed by job evaluation methods
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Job evaluationJob evaluation
• Method of data collection– Determine the worth of various jobs to– Create a pay structure
• Consideration of – KSAs required for each job– Value of job for organization– How much other organizations pay
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Types of job evaluation methods:Types of job evaluation methods:
• Ranking• Classification• Point
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Job evaluation methods: Job evaluation methods: RankingRanking
• Create job descriptions• Compare job descriptions • Rank jobs
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Advantages of using Ranking methodAdvantages of using Ranking method
• Requires little time• Minimal effort needed for administration
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Disadvantages of using Ranking methodDisadvantages of using Ranking method
• Criteria for ranking may not be clear:• Distances between each rank may not
be equal
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Job evaluation methods: Job evaluation methods: ClassificationClassification
• A series of classes or grades are created• Each job is placed within a job class
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Advantages of using Classification methodAdvantages of using Classification method
• Jobs can be quickly slotted into structure• Employees accept method because it seems
valid
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Disadvantages of using Classification methodDisadvantages of using Classification method
• Requires extensive time and effort for administration
• Differences between classification levels may not be equal
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Job evaluation methods:Job evaluation methods: Point method Point method
• Identify compensable factors (job characteristics)• Scale factors (e.g. on a scale of 1 – 5)• Assign a weight to each factor so the sum of the
weights for all factors = 100%
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Advantages of using Point methodAdvantages of using Point method
• Establish worth of each job relative to all other jobs within organization
• Comprehensive measurement of relative worth of each job in organization
• Easy to rank jobs when total points are known for each job
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Disadvantages of using Point methodDisadvantages of using Point method
• Requires extensive administrative– Time– Effort
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Does job evaluation method matter?Does job evaluation method matter?
– Fairness– Evaluators
• Impartial• Objective
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Compensation surveysCompensation surveys
• Information on– Base pay– All other types of compensation
• Conducted in-house or by consultants, such as:www.salary.com or www.haypaynet.com
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Broad-banding:Broad-banding:
Pay structure collapses job classes into fewer categories
Advantages:• Provides flexibility in rewarding people• Reflects changes in organization structure• Provides better base for rewarding growth in
competence• Gives more responsibility for pay decisions to
managers• Provides better basis for rewarding career progression
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Reward Systems: SummaryReward Systems: Summary
• Traditional and Contingent Pay (CP) Plans– Reasons for Introducing CP Plans– Possible Problems Associated with CP– Selecting a CP Plan
• Putting Pay in Context• Pay Structures
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Legal Issues: OverviewLegal Issues: Overview
• Performance Management and the Law• Some Legal Principles Affecting PM• Laws Affecting PM
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance Management and the LawPerformance Management and the Law
• Performance management systems are legally sound, if they are fair:– Procedures are standardized– Same procedures are used with all employees
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Some Legal Principles Affecting PM:Some Legal Principles Affecting PM:OverviewOverview
• Employment-at-will• Negligence• Defamation• Misrepresentation• Adverse Impact• Illegal Discrimination
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Employment-at-willEmployment-at-will
• Employment relationship can be ended at any time by– Employer– Employee
• Exceptions– Implied contract– Possible violation of legal rights
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
NegligenceNegligence
• If organization documents describe a systemand• It is Not implemented as described,• Employee can challenge evaluation,
charging negligence
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
DefamationDefamation
• Disclosure of performance information that is– Untrue and– Unfavorable
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
MisrepresentationMisrepresentation
• Disclosure of performance information that is– Untrue and– Favorable
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Adverse Impact / Unintentional DiscriminationAdverse Impact / Unintentional Discrimination
• PM system has unintentional impact on a protected class
• Organization must demonstrate:– Specific KSA is a business requirement for the job– All affected employees are evaluated in the same way
• Organization should review ongoing performance score data by protected class to implement corrective action as necessary
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Illegal Discrimination or Disparate TreatmentIllegal Discrimination or Disparate Treatment
• Raters assign different scores to employees based on factors that are NOT related to performance
• Employees receive different treatment as result of such ratings
• Employees can claim they were intentionally and illegally treated differently due to their status
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Employee claim of illegal discrimination:Employee claim of illegal discrimination:
• Direct evidence of discrimination, or• Evidence regarding the following:
– Membership in protected class– Adverse employment decision– Performance level deserved reward/different
treatment– How others were treated (not in protected class)
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Employer response to claim of illegal discriminationEmployer response to claim of illegal discrimination
• Legitimate and non-discriminatory reason for action• Related to performance
• Note: Good performance management system and subsequent performance-related decision, used consistently with all employees, provides defense
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Laws Affecting PM:Laws Affecting PM:
During past few decades, several countries have passed laws prohibiting discrimination based on:•Race or Ethnicity•Sex•Religion•National Origin•Age•Disability status•Sexual orientation
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Laws in the United Kingdom:Laws in the United Kingdom:
• Equal Pay Act of 1970• Race Relations Act of 1976• Sex Discrimination Act of 1975• Disability Discrimination Act of 1995• Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation)
Regulations 2003• Employment Equality (Religion or Belief)
Regulations 2003
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Laws in the United States of AmericaLaws in the United States of America
• Equal Pay Act of 1963• Civil Rights Act of 1964• Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
(as amended in 1986)• Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Characteristics of Legally Sound PM SystemsCharacteristics of Legally Sound PM Systems
• Organization:– The system is formally explained and communicated to all
employees – The system includes a formal appeals process – Procedures are standardized and uniform for all employees
within a job group – The system includes procedures to detect potentially
discriminatory effects or biases and abuses in the system
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Characteristics of Legally Sound PM SystemsCharacteristics of Legally Sound PM Systems
• Management– Supervisors are provided with formal training and information
on how to manage the performance of their employees – Performance information is gathered from multiple, diverse,
and unbiased raters – The system includes thorough and consistent documentation
including specific examples of performance based on first-hand knowledge
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Characteristics of Legally Sound PM SystemsCharacteristics of Legally Sound PM Systems
• Employees– Performance dimensions and standards are:
• Clearly defined and explained to the employee, • Job-related, and • Within the control of the employee
– Employees are given • Timely information on performance deficiencies and • Opportunities to correct them
– Employees are given a voice in the review process and treated with courtesy and civility throughout the process
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Legal Issues: SummaryLegal Issues: Summary
• Performance Management and the Law• Some Legal Principles Affecting PM• Laws Affecting PM
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
CHAPTER 11CHAPTER 11
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Managing Team Performance:Managing Team Performance:OverviewOverview
• Definition and Importance of Teams• Types of Teams and Implications for PM• Purposes and Challenges of Team PM• Including Team Performance in the PM
System• Rewarding Team Performance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Definition of TeamDefinition of Team
Two or more people – Interact
• Dynamically• Independently
– Share common and valued• Goal, Objective or Mission
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Importance of TeamsImportance of Teams
• Global pressures• Flexibility in flatter organizations• Complexity of products and services• Rapidly changing environments
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance Management & TeamsPerformance Management & Teams
• PM systems should target:– Individual performance– Individual’s contribution to team performance– Performance of entire team
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
General principles of PM relating to teamsGeneral principles of PM relating to teams
1. Design and implement best possible system2. Consider dangers of poorly implemented
system
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Managing for Improved Team PerformanceManaging for Improved Team Performance
• Don’t limit team processes with other task or organizational requirements
• Provide good team design and organizational support
• Give feedback only on processes that the team members can control
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Types of TeamsTypes of Teams
• Classified by– Complexity of task– Membership configuration
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Complexity of Task ranges from:Complexity of Task ranges from:
• Routine– Well defined– Few deviations in how work is done– Outcomes easily assessed
- to -• Non-routine
– Not defined well– No clear specifications on how to do the work– Outcomes are long term and difficult to assess
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Membership Configuration includesMembership Configuration includes
• Length of time team expects to work together• Stability of team membership
Static Dynamic
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Types of Teams Based on Types of Teams Based on Membership Configuration and Task ComplexityMembership Configuration and Task Complexity
Dynamic ° Network
Teams Membership Configuration
° Project Teams
Static ° Work and
Service Teams
Routine Non-Routine Task Complexity
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Types of TeamsTypes of Teams
• Work or Service Teams• Project Teams• Network Teams
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Work or Service TeamsWork or Service Teams
• Intact • Routine tasks• Share similar skill sets
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Project TeamsProject Teams
• Assembled for specific purpose• Tasks outside core product or service • Members from different functional areas
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Network TeamsNetwork Teams
• Membership not constrained by – Time or space– Organizational boundaries
• Teams may include– Temporary or full-time workers– Customers– Vendors– Consultants
• Work is extremely non-routine
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Examples of PM Approaches by Type of TeamExamples of PM Approaches by Type of Team
• Type of Team– Work & Service Team
– Project Team
– Network Team
• Type of PM Approach– Peer ratings
– Ongoing measurements
– Development of competencies
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Purposes of Team PMPurposes of Team PM
• Traditional goals of any PM System• Specific to Team performance:
– Make all team members accountable– Motivate all team members to have a stake in team
performance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Challenges of Team PMChallenges of Team PM
• How do we assess relative individual contribution?
• How do we balance individual and team performance?
• How do we identify individual and team measures of performance?
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Including Team Performance in the PM SystemIncluding Team Performance in the PM System
• Prerequisites• Performance Planning• Performance Execution• Performance Assessment• Performance Review• Performance Renewal and Re-Contracting
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance Management ProcessPerformance Management Process
Performance Review
Performance Renewal and Re-contracting
Performance Assessment
Performance Execution
Performance PlanningPrerequisites
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
PrerequisitesPrerequisites
• Knowledge of mission– Organization– Team
• Knowledge of job to be performed by the team
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance PlanningPerformance Planning
• Results expected of the team• Behaviors expected of team members• Developmental objectives to be achieved by
team and its members
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance ExecutionPerformance Execution
Team responsibilities1. Commit to goal achievement2. Seek feedback from
• Each other• Supervisor
3. Communicate openly & regularly4. Conduct regular & realistic peer-
appraisals
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance ExecutionPerformance Execution
Supervisor responsibilities1. Observe and document
• Team performance• Relative contribution of team members
2. Update team on any changes in goals of the organization
3. Provide resources & reinforcement
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance AssessmentPerformance Assessment
Types of Assessments• Self-appraisals• Peer evaluations• Supervisor evaluation• Outsider appraisals (if appropriate)
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance AssessmentPerformance Assessment
Kinds of Performance to be Assessed• Individual task performance• Individual contextual performance• Team performance
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Dimensions of Team Performance to assess:Dimensions of Team Performance to assess:
• Effectiveness• Efficiency• Learning and growth• Team member satisfaction
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance ReviewPerformance Review
• Two meetings with supervisor or review board– Team meeting– Individual meeting
• Emphasis on past, present and future
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Team meetingTeam meeting
• Discuss overall team – Performance– Results
• Information comes from:– Team members– Other teams/outsiders– Supervisor’s evaluation
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Individual meetingIndividual meeting
• Discuss how individual behavior contributed to team performance
• Information comes from:– Self-appraisal– Peer ratings– Supervisor’s evaluation
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance Renewal and Re-ContractingPerformance Renewal and Re-Contracting
• Make adjustments to performance plan• Include plan for individual performance as it
affects team functioning
Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at DenverPrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Making Team-based Rewards EffectiveMaking Team-based Rewards Effective
• All employees should be eligible• Rewards should be
– Visible– Contingent– Reversible
• Avoid factors which cause reward systems to fail
• Consider variable pay systems (in addition to individual bonuses)