Performance Management Systems Southwood School – A Case Study Performance Management Systems By Fiona Robson

Areas covered in this presentation What is performance management (PM)? The differences between PM and performance appraisal. The benefits of PM: To the organization. To managers. To employees. An introduction to the case study organization. Best practices in PM. Practical issues surrounding PM © 2008 SHRM

Differences between performance management and performance appraisal Armstrong (2006) defines performance management as: “the formal assessment and rating of individuals by their managers” The same author defines performance appraisal as: “a continuous and much wider, more comprehensive process… which clarifies mutual expectations and emphasizes the support role of managers” © 2008 SHRM

Overview of differences Performance Appraisal Performance Management Top down-assessment Joint process through dialogue Annual appraisal meeting Continuous review with one or more formal reviews Use of ratings Ratings less common Monolithic system Flexible process Focus on quantified objectives Focus on values and behaviors as well as objectives Often linked to pay Less likely to be directly linked to pay Owned by the HR department Owned by line managers Source: Armstrong and Baron (2005) © 2008 SHRM

Benefits to the organization Demonstrates the organization’s commitment to the development of its staff. Contributes to meeting accreditations standards, such as Investors in People in the UK. Provides the opportunity to ensure all employees are aware of the goals and objectives of the organization and the role that they have to play in this process. © 2008 SHRM

Facilitates a two-way dialogue with their staff. Benefits to managers Facilitates a two-way dialogue with their staff. Identifies any potential issues. Enables managers to gain a greater understanding of the motivation and future plans of their staff. Provides an opportunity to disseminate goals and objectives to employees. May lead to a more motivated and communicative workforce. © 2008 SHRM

Clarifies their expectations. Benefits to employees Clarifies their expectations. Enhances their understanding of the contribution they make to the organization. Provides an opportunity to have a discussion with their manager and talk about any issues: a two-way process. Provides recognition of strengths and achievements. Helps identify development opportunities. © 2008 SHRM

Southwood School: Contextual information High School in the UK (state school) Established nearly 40 years ago 800 students aged 13-18 120 staff 80 teachers 40 support staff (nonteaching staff) Average staff retention rate: 72% Average length of service: 5+ years © 2008 SHRM

Southwood School: History of performance management The teachers are required by law to follow the government-mandated performance management process. In the past, the support staff have used the same process. Support staff are unhappy at taking part in a process, which is largely inappropriate. Performance management is perceived quite negatively by the majority of support staff. © 2008 SHRM

Both parties should be prepared for meetings and dedicate their time. Best practices for PM Both parties should be prepared for meetings and dedicate their time. Appraisers must show their commitment to the process to engage appraisees. It should be a two-way process where issues are discussed. Effective training must be provided to meet the needs of appraisers and appraisees. There should be no surprises at the review meetings; any prior incidents should have been dealt with after the event. © 2008 SHRM

Practical issues: An overview Who should carry out performance management interviews? How often should they be carried out? When should they be reviewed? What is the focus and purpose? How structured should they be? How can they be monitored? © 2008 SHRM

Terminology used in this case study Appraiser—the manager who is taking part in the performance management process by reviewing past performance and looking to the future with the appraisee (employee). Appraisee—the employee who is the ‘subject’ of the performance management process. He or she will take part in the discussions with the appraiser (usually the line manager). © 2008 SHRM

Now you are ready to read the Southwood School Case Study When you have read the case study, there are a number of activities to help develop your understanding of performance management. © 2008 SHRM

References Armstrong, M., & Baron, A. (2005). Managing Performance: Performance Management in Action. London: CIPD Armstrong, M. (2006). A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice. 10th edition. London: Kogan Page. © 2008 SHRM