Annual Performance Review Performance- MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about theAnnual Performance Reviewfor Performance Management. Answer: Introduction The annual performance reviews adapted by various organizations all over the world has been criticized by several scholars as they consider that the method is not sufficiently effective for the performance management of the employees. In this essay, three essays will be discussed to find out whether there is any other method to increase the employee performance level in order to benefit the organizations. Discussion In the first article, Looking Forward to Performance Improvement: A Field Test of the Feed forward Interview for Performance Management by Marie Hlne Budworth, Gary P. Latham, And Laxmikant Manroop, the authors have questioned the usefulness of the performance appraisal interview as the other scholars researching in this field have indicated previously that most of the time these interviews can be negative towards the performance of an employee. Therefore, another methodology has been derived from the previous researches, feed forward interview. The primary purpose of this is to grow a knowledge base of the best practice of the employees in future through a discourse between the employee and the manager. As this methodology has still not been developed to be implemented in various organizations, this research has been experimented the outcome of the fee forward interview and the conventional performance appraisal. Principally the feed forward interview has been derived from the theory of appreciative inquiry (Budworth, Latham and Manroop 2015). This concept refers to the constructive psychological movement and focus on the strength, value and success of the discourse which can be transformational. Therefore, this interview may indicate to a positive change in the employee behavior. This interview also indicates to the improvement of personal behavior between the manager and the employee. The authors have stated that the adjustment of the feed forward interview is guided by four theoretical reflections. Firstly, the employee is asked to recall an incident of his or her successful performance, secondly, the manager focuses on the incidents where both the organization and the employee has been benefitted from the outstanding performance without having any kind of conflict of interests. Thirdly, this practice is also related with understanding the message of the employee and finally the motivation al force of the cognitive inconsistency is used to create the behavioral motivation. For this research, twenty five managers of the customer service and sales team of a business firm in Canada had participated with one hundred forty five employees of the firm. The outcome of the field work has suggested that the feed forward interview has boosted the performance of the employee than the feedback based conventional interviews (Budworth, Latham and Manroop 2015). Therefore, it may be considered as a useful method for the human resource team in any organization who are looking for ways to increase the performance level of their employees. When the fast forward interview has been implemented in a practical situation, the researchers have realized that the managers need a systematic training for conducting the interview. Through the feed forward interview the managers need to set a goal for the employees. They are required to create a mental link between a particular scenario in future a nd a desired response of the goal. These interviews may refer to the individual goals of the employees; therefore the managers can search for situations that fit in that framework. However, there are few limitations to the future implementation of the feed forward interview for instance; this can only be effective in situations where the manager and the employee both have certain focus and goals. The individual efficacy should also be measured beforehand (Budworth, Latham and Manroop 2015). However, even if there are various limitations in the process, the authors have referred that the feed forward interview increases the performance of the employees to a great level. It may also improve the individual relationships between the authority and the employees and may mitigate some of the negative impacts of the conventional feedback based performance appraisal process. Therefore it can be derived from the article that feed forward interviews create a positive atmosphere for the employe es. The other performance reviews have been criticized several times for being unproductive for the further boost of the employee performances; however this process seems to be effective for the employees. In the second article, Only 55 Percent of Employees Feel As Though Performance Management Appraisals Are Effective by Dan Pontefract, the author has reviewed the past researches done on performance management conducted between the year 2000 and 2011. However, he has indicated that most of the researches had stated that around forty four percent of the organizations make an effective usage of technology for delivering the performance management. Even after years of development of technology, most of the organizations do not consider the performance management tools. Considering the other studies on the topic, around fifty five percent of the respondents think that the performance development process has a positive impact on the organization, but twenty eight percent of them had believed that their organizations already have an effective tool for performance management. Considering the 2000 and 2014 reports of the human resource professional the author has indicated that there have not been many changes in fourteen years. Around fifty three percent of the employees had graded their organizations as C+ to B and only two per cent of employees have given an A in the performance management (Pontefract 2015). Therefore, it can be said that there is a clear gap between the expectations of the employees and the deliverables of the organization. The primary issue with the improvement of performance management is that the employees do not really want their performance to get managed (Pontefract 2015). The organizations should look beyond the literal meaning of the term. The term rather indicates that the employees need open, regular and useful conversations that can enhance their work procedure and allover performance. This may occur on a weekly or monthly basis. Having an annual performance review session would not help the employees or their motivation lev el. However, the research has indicated that most of the organizations, around fifty two per cent of the organizations conduct an annual review and less than a quarter of the organizations actually follow the advanced technological tools to have an insight of their employees and measure their effectiveness. Moreover, researches have suggested that the organizations should review their performance management technique and consider the advanced technology for further improvement. In the last article, Reinventing Performance Management by Marcus Buckingham and Ashley Goodall, authors indicate that Deloitte has realized from the internal feedbacks from the employees that they need an individual session of the systemic performance management process. Therefore, the company has also realized that the annual meeting or the annual goals are not much effective for enhancing the performance level anymore. Therefore, the company came to a point where they have the new approach that is capable of shifting the amount of time the managers spend behind the close door, talking about the potential outcome of the process. Rather now they are considering focusing on the future and improving each individual performance. This approach focuses more on having an insight on the quarterly or weekly performance measurement of the employees to keep their performance level consistent (Buckingham and Goodall 2015). The company has also reviewed their yearlong performance measurement pr ocesses beginning from 1990s. However, the primary purpose of the research was to identify whether the company realizes the genuine need of the performance measurement process. Three objectives were articulated, the most prominent being the recognition of the performance through different compensations. The internal survey also indicates the immediate supervisors also have a huge impact on the recognition of the individual performance. Therefore the management has planned to have a review from the team leaders after a certain point of time. However, most of the feedback and internal surveys indicated that something is missing in the entire infrastructure of the company relating to the performance management of the employees. Therefore, the redesigned performance management tool enhances the performance snap shots that included four criteria regarding the pay, teamwork, poor performance and promotion and tested the employees through this process (Buckingham and Goodall 2015). This method is a transparent one as these may reveal the true results regarding the thoughts of the team leaders. Therefore these can be aggregated in the annual performance measurement. Through this method, the team leaders will check the performance of their team members on a weekly basis and it will be convey ed to the higher management. By this check-ins, the team leaders can explore the individual weakness and strength of the employees by utilizing the self assessment technique. The company has a hope of having a transparent and fair data about their employees by using this unidirectional performance measurement tool. Conclusion From the above discussion, one can find three different performance management methods. However, amongst those, I consider the feed forward interview to be the most effective one. This method has been primarily derived from the Appreciative Inquiry that is a broad organizational intervention. In this method, the interviewer or the manager creates an atmosphere that lets the subordinate create a positive outlook and a success story. They confirm their own contribution to the organization. Also, in this procedure the managers are expected to have an active listening skill. Through this process the management can find out the deep rooted requirements of the employees and find out the meaningful contributions to the organization. As an outcome of that the annual performance review becomes less relevant, as the feed forward interviews lead the management see the interconnections that make a successful project and benefits the organization. This method may be unlikely to the conventional p erformance review process but it replicates the work environment and enhances higher performance within the organization. Therefore it can also be derived that even if the annual performance reviews have been criticized most of the times, the feed forward interview can be considered to be an effective one for boosting the employee performance. Reference List Buckingham, M. and Goodall, A. (2015). Reinventing Performance Management. Harvard Business Review. Budworth, M., Latham, G. and Manroop, L. (2015). LOOKING FORWARD TO PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT: A FIELD TEST OF THE FEEDFORWARD INTERVIEW FOR PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT. Vol. 54,(No. 1.), pp.Pp. 4554. Pontefract, D. (2015). Only 55 Percent of Employees Feel As Though Performance Management Appraisals Are Effective. [online] Available at: https://https://www.forbes.com/sites/danpontefract/2015/03/31/only-55-percent-of-employees-feel-as-though-performance-management-appraisals-are-effective/#53d030ee3ac7 [Accessed 13 May 2017].