Performance Management is a key process in the talent management repertoire. If this key process is done well most of the other processes will fall in place and align beautifully. One of the down stream processes that depends to a large extent on a robust performance management framework is the employee development process. One part of the learning needs comes from what was mirrored in the PMS outcomes; i.e. the areas for improvement and enhancement in the coming year based on the observed performance in context.
The problem most designers don't notice is that this key process is bound to fail if you couple it too tightly with the performance appraisal. The best strategy would be to keep the two distinct and separated in time by what we can call as a "Cooling off Window" The best would be to have the development discussion after a 3 to 4 month window down stream from the appraisal process itself.
That way you would avoid a lot of unwanted discussion around the gaps in the performance observed from feedback. Normally you would notice that when it comes to the appraisal process most people get very defensive about areas of improvement and so it gets difficult to have any meaningful dialogue. On one hand employee is defensive about improvement areas as it is tied down to appraisal scores and performance bands which ultimately determine compensation rise and other downside related to pay. On the other the same points go into determining what areas could be improvement focus.
However this does not mean that you can short cut the performance appraisal and feedback. The rigor of the feedback mechanisms - timely, periodic (2 to 3 times in a window of 6 months) and context specific still holds good.
By keeping a cooling off window the two processes get done at different times. The feedback at time of learning needs should also factor in context specific inputs given to the employees when working on their job and performing their roles. This reinforces the inputs on improvement areas. Combine this with multi rater feedback where the employee is given feedback on areas to improve and areas of strength and this becomes a design synergy.
So next time you find that people are not forthcoming and development needs identified were not relevant to the context of the employee double check if you had the cooling off window or did you try to combine the performance appraisal with the development discussion.
The problem most designers don't notice is that this key process is bound to fail if you couple it too tightly with the performance appraisal. The best strategy would be to keep the two distinct and separated in time by what we can call as a "Cooling off Window" The best would be to have the development discussion after a 3 to 4 month window down stream from the appraisal process itself.
That way you would avoid a lot of unwanted discussion around the gaps in the performance observed from feedback. Normally you would notice that when it comes to the appraisal process most people get very defensive about areas of improvement and so it gets difficult to have any meaningful dialogue. On one hand employee is defensive about improvement areas as it is tied down to appraisal scores and performance bands which ultimately determine compensation rise and other downside related to pay. On the other the same points go into determining what areas could be improvement focus.
However this does not mean that you can short cut the performance appraisal and feedback. The rigor of the feedback mechanisms - timely, periodic (2 to 3 times in a window of 6 months) and context specific still holds good.
By keeping a cooling off window the two processes get done at different times. The feedback at time of learning needs should also factor in context specific inputs given to the employees when working on their job and performing their roles. This reinforces the inputs on improvement areas. Combine this with multi rater feedback where the employee is given feedback on areas to improve and areas of strength and this becomes a design synergy.
So next time you find that people are not forthcoming and development needs identified were not relevant to the context of the employee double check if you had the cooling off window or did you try to combine the performance appraisal with the development discussion.
No comments:
Post a Comment