Unit- 8. Performance Management and employee development

1. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
AND
EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT
Prof. Preeti Bhaskar
Symbiosis Centre for Management Studies, NOIDA
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

2. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Stakeholders 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
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

3. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Personal Developmental Plans
• Specify actions necessary to
improve performance
• Highlight employee’s
–Strengths
–Areas in need of development
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
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?
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

5. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Personal Developmental Plans:
Overview
• Developmental Plan Objectives
• Content of Developmental Plan
• Developmental Activities
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

6. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Overall Developmental Plan Objectives
• Encourage:
–Continuous learning
–Performance improvement
–Personal growth
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

7. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Specific Developmental Plan
Objectives
• Improve performance in current
job
• Sustain performance in current
job
• Prepare employee for
advancement
• Enrich employee’s work
experiencePrentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

8. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Content 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
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

9. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Content 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
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

10. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Developmental Activities
‘On the job’
• On-the-job-training
• Mentoring
• Job rotation
• Temporary assignments
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

11. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Developmental Activities
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
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

12. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Direct Supervisor’s Role:
• Explain what is necessary
• Refer employee to appropriate
developmental activities
• Review & make suggestions
regarding developmental
objectives
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

13. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Direct Supervisor’s Role (ongoing):
• Check on employee’s
progress
• Provide motivational
reinforcement
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

14. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
360-degree Feedback Systems
Tools to help employees
• Improve performance by using
• Performance information
• Gathered from many sources
– Superiors
– Peers
– Customers
– Subordinates
– The employee
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

15. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
360-degree Feedback Systems
• Anonymous feedback
• Most useful when used
– For DEVELOPMENT
– NOT for administrative purposes
• Internet used for collecting data
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

16. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

17. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

18. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

19. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

20. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Necessary organizational norms
include:
• Cooperation
• Openness and trust
• Input and participation
valued
• Fairness
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

21. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
360-degree Feedback Systems
• Gathered from many sources
– Superiors
– Peers
– Customers
– Subordinates
– The employee
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
•Anonymous feedback
•Most useful when used
•For DEVELOPMENT
•NOT for administrative purposes
•Internet used for collecting data

22. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Advantages of 360-degree Feedback
Systems
• Decreased possibility of biases
• Increased awareness of expectations
• Increased commitment
• Improved self-perception of performance
• Improved performance
• Increased employee control of their own
careers
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

23. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Risks 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..
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

24. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Process for conducting 360-degree
Feedback Systems
1. All stakeholder (Superiors, Peers
,Customers, Subordinates,) do the
rating.
2. Employee also rate themselves on
various performance dimension.
3. Compare the self perception and
information provided by others.
4. Gap Analysis is conducted to identify
the difference between self
perception and the perception of
others
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

25. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Role of technology in conducting 360-
degree Performance Appraisal
1. Reduce Paper work
2. Easy collection of data & analysis of
data
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Outsource the work to consultancy company
• Send E-Mail message with instruction and time
frames for assessment to each employee
rated.
• Collection of data & analysis of data is done by
consultancy company .
• Send report to Managers and the employee
who has been rated .
• Development plans are created on the basis

26. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Examples of vendor offering 360
degree feedback system
• Panoraamic feedback
• Halogen Software
• Thee Booth Company
• Development dimensions international
• Mindsolve
• IRI consultant to management
Prentice Hall, Inc. ©
2006

27. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Characteristics 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
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006