When George took on the top job at a prestigious high profile company he thought it would run like clockwork, such was the public perception of this quality business. What he didn't realise was that the reputation was founded on a just a few brilliant people and the product they had developed. The rest were merely trying to manage the chaos. Most people were reactive even though the previous CEO had worked with the Board to develop a very effective set of strategic plans.
George reasoned that if everyone knew what to do, and did it, his life would be easier. He sat down with his senior managers and discovered to his amazement that the first part was missing. They weren't sure what to do. And if they thought they knew, they were not totally convinced, so there was no real motivation to do it. On top of that, there were some amongst them who were positively disruptive which added to the chaos.
He was concerned about his team, and their people working together. He had read Jim Collins' book "Good to Great" and firmly believed that he had "to get the right people on the bus and the wrong people off the bus". He saw this as being the key priority as with the right people he could then work out what had to be done. As Jim Collins put it "if you begin with "who" rather than "what" you can more easily adapt to a changing world."
George approached his external advisors and they showed him the Iceberg Model described by Milkovich and Newman in their book "Compensation". This helped him think about how he could define the right people.
The model helped him define some of the key elements. Those elements more easily identifiable, like the top of the iceberg, are above the water:
Knowledge - Information that a person has in a particular area Skills - Behavioural demonstration of expertise
Those that are "under water" and not visible but rather can only be inferred by actions are:
Self-Concepts - Attitudes, values and self-image Traits - A general disposition to behave in a certain way Motives - Recurrent thoughts that drive behaviour
Psychologists say these last three are judged to be the differentiating competencies - critical factors that distinguish superior performance from average performance.
With his external advisor, he spent time with his key managers defining these underwater traits or "core competencies". He started with the values the organization had established and developed descriptions of the competencies the team thought were necessary to take the business forward.
These described the type of qualities people needed to be successful in the organization. These were then developed into specific behaviours which could be observed.
Interestingly, he noticed a degree of discomfort among the ones he considered disruptive. He knew they realised they did not fit in and he was going to pay particular attention to their behaviour from now on.
He was determined to provide all the help he could to have them change but if this didn't work he realised they would have to get off the bus.
George knew that he had to work together with his key managers and clearly define what people needed to achieve to move forward.
Over a period of weeks he again worked with some external help and his managers to design jobs that delivered the strategic plan which was already in place. They were defined in terms of key result areas and each had measures against them. He examined them in total and satisfied himself that, if they were all delivered, the overall corporate objectives would be achieved.
George had selected some of the "right" people, defined what had to be achieved to deliver the strategic plan and also how they had to work together. He knew he now had to manage his people using this as the framework. This required communicating these requirements to everyone and regularly reviewing progress against them.
He made this the basis of his performance management program, trained all managers in how it worked, how to set goals and how to give feedback. He then had it flow down to the levels below his managers and also had them trained. He felt he was now more in control of the business and could build in development plans for his people to meet the goals and competency standards he had set.
He now felt he had the right people on the bus and a process to manage them and make sure the bus went in the right direction. He could now spend more of his time leading them in that direction and planning how to celebrate their sustained success as an organization and not have to rely on a few key individuals.
By this time performance management is very well-known, but not equally well implemented, because of misunderstandings and misconceptions.
It is often asked how good an organisation is, with getting people to perform exceptionally well.
How many times are people trying to change something about a work situation, in an effort to improve something? Something like a system, a process, work flow, a document and so forth. It happens a lot, not so? But does it make people perform consciously?
How many organisations are there, which just don't make progress with growth, profit, morale or performance. Sometimes an organisation can be good, because the efficient machines make up for human deficiencies and failure. Many organisations have job descriptions in place, but does it make people perform? Many organisations have performance measurement in place, but does it make people perform to their potential? Many organisations even have a strategic plan and derivative business plans, but does it make the employees perform? Many organisations even have the performance areas and performance criteria for each and every job documented, but does it make people perform?
Some organisations also undertake or outsource to consultants the design of improved organisation structures, the re-design of roles and responsibilities, the design and development of electronic systems, the design of job grading systems and many more things, without achieving the desired improved performance.
It seems that performance is a very elusive concept for most persons in positions of authority and in the driving seats of most organisations. What then, is so magical about bringing about performance in the workplace - and with it a culture of work and work ethics?
What about the school systems? Why have the school systems failed to instigate scholarly performance for so long? Why is it that such a small proportion of children perform well in school? Only a handful come up with exceptional results; in all the grades, in all schools worldwide.
Where then, is the missing link or links? What are the secrets? Are they buried so mystically deep underground that nobody seems to be able to dig it up to the surface of mother earth? Not even the best of human brains; after all the foregoing scientific research and development?
Organisations often broadcast they have implemented a system of performance management. The goals and objectives are embodied in the job descriptions and they do performance measurement quarterly, bi-annually or annually. The problem is that employees remain on previous performance levels and nothing occurs to increase their motivation, morale or inspiration to perform better.
The readers will be able to recite many more examples out of own experience.
Many persons still seem to take recourse to autocratic behaviour, although many countries claim to operate in a democratic society for decades now and in some cases centuries. In other words, many managers still try to get movement by applying a military, dictatorship style to try and enforce discipline or poor decisions. Others may hide their inabilities behind an aloof attitude of outdated protocol of superiority and make themselves unapproachable.
The big remaining question is therefore: How to get it right, with the correct tactics and how to utilise it for the children also?
The solution lies in a systematic work process, with automatic self-control and integrated performance measurement built in, to motivate and inspire all employees, to reach and surpass their strategic and organisation goals, on a voluntary basis, regularly.
In many organisations performance management is only partly installed. The real answer lies in the complete implementation of a performance management system.
It is a process, where the desire to perform comes naturally, for everyone involved. In this process all the pieces of the puzzle like strategic planning, business plans, goal-setting, job descriptions, performance measurement, performance areas and performance criteria fall into place, to form a integrated whole that makes sense to all. It is also a process where self-control and initiative by individuals form the foundation for the building blocks of the whole process.
The benefits of this systematic work process are increased enthusiasm, dedication, productivity, performance, profitability and work result satisfaction for both employees and employers alike. Just visualise what it can do for any person trying to boost a career?
The principles and benefits are universal worldwide and apply to all types of organisations be it private businesses, corporate businesses, government bodies, non-profit organisations or social/religious institutions.
With this information one can pave the way for general stress relief, increased performance and ease of reporting throughout all management levels up to The Board of Directors.
It is possible to get all employees to reconcile personal goals with organisation goals. One can turn around any marginal business and increase productivity and profitability for any organisation, with the transparent and hidden forces embedded in this process. It can be applied by organisations or a single department or section inside an organisation; as well as an individual person.
This process is a natural, self-inspired performance process and are appropriately referred to as "The self-propelled performance process (SPPP)".
First of all, deriving from the strategic plan, a commitment analysis must be done, where a job mission statement is drawn up for each job. The job mission statement is a job definition in terms of purpose, customers, product and scope. The aim with this analysis is to determine the continuous key objectives and performance standards for each job position.
Following the commitment analysis, is the work analysis of a particular job in terms of the reporting structure and job description. If a job description is not available, then a systems analysis can be done to draw up a job description. The aim with this analysis is to determine the continuous critical objectives and performance standards for each job.
Finally, a job needs analysis must be done in terms of necessary time limited action plans. The aim with this analysis is to determine the time limited specific objectives and performance standards.
A proper and sustainable performance management and reporting system can only be devised after completion of these three types of analysis.
The most important part of performance management is to have performance management meetings where performance and corrective actions are discussed on a regular ongoing basis.
You can get abundant information about career, family, child and internet related subjects at the career builders club, where amazement and fun awaits all visitors.
Article Source :
About Author
Both Paul Phillips & Pierre Duplessis111 Pierre Duplessis111 are contributors for EditorialToday. The above articles have been edited for relevancy and timeliness. All write-ups, reviews, tips and guides published by EditorialToday.com and its partners or affiliates are for informational purposes only. They should not be used for any legal or any other type of advice. We do not endorse any author, contributor, writer or article posted by our team.
Paul Phillips has sinced written about articles on various topics from Diabetes Treatment, Property Investment and Internet Marketing. Paul Phillips is a Director of Horizon Management Group; a specialist human resource management consulting firm. He has over 30 years experience in HR and, while based in Australia, has worked in a number of overseas locations.. Paul Phillips's top article generates over 18100 views. to your Favourites.
Pierre Duplessis111 Pierre Duplessis111 has sinced written about articles on various topics from Self Esteem, Education. Pierre du Plessis (MBL, 1982, UNISA) is a business consultant, co-owner of Leaders Circle, author of several e-books and training manuals, previous Corporate Logistics and Procurement Manager, ex-army infantry soldier as Officer in Charge of Battalion Ope. Pierre Duplessis111 Pierre Duplessis111's top article generates over 1600 views. to your Favourites.