Disadvantages of a poorly implemented performance management system
Managing performance is vital in any organization since its goal is to create a framework that would encourage, support and guide-to establish a performance-oriented culture (Osburn, 2012). This is focus on improving through learning and development to achieve organizational objectives (Aguinis, 2013).
Organizations are facing new competitive conditions, and must cope with a dynamic environment, which will lead them to continuous improvement, productivity and doing more with less (Mohrman, 1989). These developments have brought performance management to center stage (Mohrman, 1989).
However, the performance management system is regarded as one of the critical yet troubling areas of human resource development (Austin, 1917 - 1992). The high expectations associated with performance management practices end up being destroyed by the reality of a system that produces more conflict and problems. The challenge is to establish an effective system that will eradicate negativity and produce a positive outcome (Lawler III, 1994).
There are numerous problems that effects the successful implementation of a performance management system (Rademan, 2001).
One of the problems which effects the implementation of a performance management system is low priority on implementation because of work pressure and time constraints (Waal, 2009). And that it might require more time and effort than the organization planned or expected (Waal, 2009). This makes the organization members discouraged by the lack of short-term results and then less time is given to implementing the performance management system.
De Waal and Counet (2009) also noted that insufficient resources and capacity to implement, this happens when organizations can’t free enough resource. The organization must be prepared to invest in resources for a successful implementation.
Another problem of failure to implement performance management is caused by financial problems or if the organization is in an unstable phase (Waal, 2009).
Due to the lack of knowledge and skill required in performance management, there are some fall backs to successfully implementing performance management (Aguinis, Performance Management, fourth edition, 2018).
Ohemeng (2009) notes that decision making is fragmented in different departments instead of one and this creates a problem of who should be responsible and accountable. This could be the problem at the foundation level.
Performance management systems are not always successful and do not get the expected results. Below are the poorly managed systems as follows.
1) Misleading information
2) Feud between subordinates
3) Lack or ineffective communications
4) Unfair standards
There are indications that using an available framework and theories will encourage more strategic link between organization and employees to a result-oriented outcome. Even if the individual goals are not achieved, it would serve the management to concentrate on the crucial business initiatives.
List Of References
Aguinis, H. (2013). Performance Management 3rd Ed. New Jersey: Pearson.
Aguinis, H. (2018). Performance Management, fourth edition. Chicago Business Press.
Austin, J. T. (1917 - 1992). The Criterion problem. Journal of Applied Psychology.
Lawler III, E. E. (1994). Performance management: The next generation. Compensation and Benefits Review. 16-19.
Mohrman, A. M. (1989). Designing performance appraisal systems. San Francisco: Bass Inc. Publishers.
Ohemeng, F. L. (2009). The Ghanaian case. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management. Vol. 9(1). Constraints in the implementation of performance Management Systems in developing Countries.
Osburn, M. (2012). Organisational readiness for introducing a performance management system. SA Journal of Human Resource Management.
Rademan, D. J. (2001). Performance appraisals in the public sector: Are they accurate and fair?
Waal, A. A. (2009). Lessons learned from performance management systems implementations. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 58 Iss: 4.
According to Karima Kourtit & Andre de Waal,(2009), there are some of disadvantages associated with performance management systems for employees, managers & organizations are as follows.
ReplyDelete• Too much internal competition in organization.
• There is too much financial information in performance management systems.
• Highly expensive and too bureaucratic.
• There are too many performance indicators with regard to performance management systems.
• The performance information is too aggregated in system.
• There is not enough strategic information in the system.
• The performance indicators are too subjective and therefore unreliable.
Thank you for the comment Mithun, Further adding that is poorly implemented can have dire consequences in terms of an organization’s goals and the effective management of its human resources (Singh,2014).
DeleteAccording to Campbell (1990) performance is the outcome of three determinants
ReplyDelete1 knowledge about facts and things (termed declarative knowledge); 2 knowledge about how things are done and the skills to do them (termed procedural knowledge and skills); 3 motivation to act, to expend effort, and to persist (termed motivation). Performance management always should be aligned with company strategies and goal and should observe employees contribution to the goal-achieving process. Performance management is not limited to a time frame.
Thank you for the comment Rasika, further adding to it Managing performance is essential for any organization since its primary goal is to create a framework that offers encouragement, support and guidance and helps to establish a performance-orientated culture (Ochurub, Bussin & Goosen, 2012).
DeleteAs you mentioned in your post, "Managing performance is vital in any organization since its goal is to create a framework that would encourage, support, and guide-to establish a performance-oriented culture." To increase the performance of employees, motivation and intrinsic and extrinsic rewards are very important, according to my viewpoint. Motivated employees will continue to be innovative while producing higher-quality work more efficiently. There is no disadvantage—the opportunity cost of motivating employees is essentially zero, assuming no additional capital is required to train managers to be effective motivators (Ali and Anwar, 2021). Motivated employees work best in the interests of the organization, resulting in growth, prosperity, and productivity. Thus, employee motivation and organizational effectiveness are directly related (Manzoor, 2012).
ReplyDeleteAgreed Kalpani, Contemporary organizations are focused on customer preference to optimize profits, the organizations must also realize the importance in building internal competency and capacity to survive and compete in this dynamic business environment. Ensuring employee commitment towards organizational goal has been a critical issue faced by majority of the organization(Varma,2018).
Delete