Performance Management Coursework

Name: Robert Irvine

Module Leader: Maureen Royce

Module Title: Performance Management

Module Code: LBSHM3008

Question 1.
 The purpose of this answer is to evaluate the impact of strategic direction on appraisal
through an analysis of case study interviews conducted in class – using a theoretical
framework to explore the differences resulting from a culture of development as opposed
to control.

Appraisals are defined by Torrington, Weightman and Johns (1989) as “The process
of judging a person’s performance and reporting that judgement.”

The CIPD factsheet defines appraisals, and states that on that on their own they are
not classed as performance management, but an important tool used in a managing
performance. It goes on to say;

“The performance appraisal or review is essentially an opportunity for the individual

and those concerned with their performance – most usually their line manager - to get
together to engage in a dialogue about the individual’s performance, development and the
support required from the manager. It should not be a top down process or an opportunity
for one person to ask questions and the other to reply. It should be a free flowing
conversation in which a range of views are exchanged.”

Both definitions generally express the same meaning with the CIPD going into more
detail into how an appraisal should be conducted and takes the obvious bias of being
more developmental. As groups we were tasked with conducting our own appraisals
using case studies on organisations and during this answer will I will refer to certain
aspects on how we conducted our own appraisals.

Not all business’s have a performance management system (PMS) in place, although
most still use some form of an developmental review meeting, whether it be annually or
more frequently, and are used to allow those involved to review performance since the
last review, and set goals for the future. Performance management as said by Armstrong
and Baron (1998) is;

“A strategic and integrated approach to increase the effectiveness of organisations by

improving the performance of the people who work in them and by developing the
capabilities of teams and individual contributors.”

From this it is important to take note that performance management should be

strategic, in that it looks the broader issues at hand, as well as long term goals in relation
to the company’s overall objectives, and also well integrated, so that it ties in well with
the other aspects of the business. Appraisals are just one tool of performance management
and should provide information to the appraiser which can be fed back into the
performance management system, and be used to improve overall performance.

There is much debate over the nature of hard and soft human resource management,
which can be directly translated to control and development for the purpose of this
answer. Many organisations appraisals are feared due to their perceived hidden political
agendas, for example, one organisation may use its appraisals when compiling
redundancy information and recommendations, as well as for performance related pay
(PRP). On the other side there are companies that use their appraisals to highlight certain
skills, competencies, and behaviours which can be developed through training, coaching,
as well as to bolster motivation, which is then to be constantly monitored and improved
over time, and evaluated. Both approaches will set out targets, especially the more
controlling appraisals, which will put more stress on statistics and set realistic goals for a
worker to work towards, for example increase sales by 5% from last year.

In our appraisal (Organisation B) in which the company’s objectives were to provide

work for vulnerable adults, we thought best to role play a more developmental appraisal,
for which which we researched on how one was to conduct such an appraisal. Authors
such as Torrington, Weightman and Johns (1989) also talk about the two different types
of a performance appraisal “judgment-orientated and development-oriented”, and state
that with a judgment-orientated appraisal there is more focus on the past and
measurement against the organisational objectives, were a “judgment” has already been
made and it is for the appraiser to “tell” and the appraisee to just listen. They also state
that the development-oriented appraisal looks more into the future and allows the
appraisee to self review.

Torrington, Weightman and Johns (1989) also cite Maier (1976), of which stated three
alternative methods for conducting an interview / appraisal, which are the “tell and sell”,
the “tell and listen”, and the last is the “problem solving”. The first is highly controlling
in its nature, and goes a long with the idea of the appraiser being the judge, simply
informing the appraisee of what needs to be done to improve. The second, “tell and
listen” is similar to the first and is still quite controlling however does give the appraisee
the opportunity to have their say and maybe change the outcome of the appraisal. The last
was the way we wanted to conduct our appraisal and was the “problem solving” method.

We prepared our role play so that it would have a free flowing conversation in which
the appraisee would be prompted into talking about themselves and giving them the
capacity to judge themselves, and talk about how their needs in furthering their
development. It must be remembered though that even though the appraiser is allowing
the appraisee to discuss their performance, they still make the decisions and in most
situations would be their line manager and it is important that nepotism does not get in the
way of a constructive appraisal.

An organisations strategy can largely alter the way in which an appraisal can be
carried out and also if it is to focus more on control, or development. If a company’s
strategy is to cut costs, and not to invest in the employee’s for whatever reason, maybe
high turnover of staff for example, then we would most likely see appraisals which are
quite controlling and look at short to medium term fixes, by looking at the past
performance of the appraisee and from that setting targets to meet for the near future. A
good yet overused example of such a organisational strategy could be observed in many
call centres, in which management is hard, staff turnover is high, and there is a large
focus on efficiency, constantly setting targets for workers and rewards for meeting them.

An organisation with a more developmental PMS and appraisals will most likely
feature a strategy opposite to the one above, and will most likely invest in staff, nurturing
them, giving them the skills and training needed to perform well. An example of such
 would be a marketing department in which creativity and innovation is needed, so a
developmental softer approach is used to create the environment in which it can take
place, along with workers with the skills and behaviours to do so.

We conducted two appraisals in our role play, which both focused on establishing
possible candidates for a future managerial role. The first appraisee (B) we decided to
overcome her reluctance of change, we encouraged her by enrolling her into a coaching
program to help improve her skills, as well as IT training courses, this displays a clear use
of soft HRM, using tools of a PMS you would expect to see such as coaching, mentoring,
e.t.c. With appraisee (C) although on paper she would have seemed the perfect candidate,
peer reviews had stated she was disliked for her ‘bossy’ like behaviour so we decided that
we would use the appraisal to hopefully align her with the organisational objectives and
the outcome of the appraisal was that she was to attend team building activities to
improve her interpersonal skills.

Question 2

In this answer I will look at a specific company and make recommendations for keeping
disillusionment to a minimum in the context of performance management systems.