Performance Management
Many organisations are questioning whether their PM programmes are contributing fully to their business goals. Often PM programmes were designed some years ago and are underperforming and no longer seem appropriate to today’s environment.
There are a host of reasons and organisations are littered with failing schemes. Sometimes PM:-
- is old and tired and the reasons for doing it have been lost;
- was introduced as a fad without integrating with other HR processes;
- fizzled out in year 2;
- did not cover the right groups;
- wasn’t communicated and sold properly.
So, ask the question – is PM contributing as it should and is it worth the effort?
The conventional wisdom has always been to start PM from top down – to embrace corporate objectives, gain top team commitment, and then move it down through the organisation. The reality is that senior managers are generally already highly motivated, but not necessarily good at performance managing their people. We believe that the payoff from PM is by inducing the whole organisation to raise the game.
Our model is to see individuals in one of four quadrants. The low performance/low potential quadrant we name as “iceberg” – where performance and potential seem frozen. At the extreme will be the “deadwood” in the organisation. At the other extreme are the “superstars” in the “fast track” quadrant – for high potential/high performance individuals. These are people who are already displaying high levels of motivation, and where it can be argued that the PM processes are working well. Maybe the reality is that they don’t need PM as much as conventional wisdom suggests.
The “under-achievers” quadrant contains the real problem children, the enigmas, the infuriators, they could do it but they won’t. They should be a prime focus for PM processes because they are capable of moving into the fast track quadrant. In the “backbone” quadrant are the high performance/low potential people working well within their capabilities. These are the silent majority who are traditionally difficult to fit into PM processes because conversations around their annual performance are inevitable samey “well done John, another decent year”. You know and they know that everyone is reasonably happy, and they are indeed the backbone of the organisation. There is no need to burden them with unnecessary targets, pressures, etc. which may adversely affect their performance. So, the focus of good PM practice should be on un-freezing the icebergs and motivating the under-achievers by re-focusing and re-enthusing.