How to Manage Performance
Posted on April 08, 2024 by Martin Hahn, One of Thousands of Career Coaches on Noomii.
This article discusses performance management consisting of defining expectations, monitoring performance, and reviewing performance twice a year.
Managers get things done through people. To do this well they must manage and improve the performance of people. This involves three key activities:
■ Defining expectations;
■ Monitoring and managing performance throughout the year;
■ Reviewing performance formally at periodic intervals, for example once or twice a year.
This is the performance management cycle. This cycle implies that performance management is a continuous process consisting of planning (defining expectations) to monitoring (managing performance throughout the year) to reviewing performance against expectations and on the basis of that review, reformulating the plan.
Planning Performance
Performance planning is carried out jointly by the manager in charge and the individual members of the team in question. The aim is to reach an agreement (often called a performance and development agreement) on what needs to be done by both parties. The starting point for the plan is a role profile which defines the results, knowledge and skills, and behaviors required. This should be agreed as the basis for deciding on objectives and performance measures. Performance development plans are derived from an analysis of role requirements and performance in meeting them.
Monitoring Performance
Managers need to measure performance. It is an integral part of the continuing process of management. A manager should therefore be ready, willing and able to deal with performance issues as they arise. It should not be left to the end of the year.
The performance Management Cycle
The process of continuing assessment should be carried out by reference to agreed objectives and to work, development and improvement plans. Progress reviews can take place informally or through an existing system of team meetings.
But there should be more formal interim reviews at predetermined points in the year or quarterly. For some teams or individual jobs these points could be related to ‘milestones’ contained in project and work plans. Deciding when such meetings should take place would be up to individual managers in consultation with their staff and would not be a laid-down part of a ‘system’.
Managers would be encouraged to consider how to accommodate the need for regular dialogue within the established pattern of briefings, team or group meetings or project review meetings.
In addition to the collective meetings, managers may have regular one-to-one meetings with their staff. If performance management is to be effective, there needs to be a continuing agenda through these regular meetings to ensure that good progress is being made towards achieving the objectives agreed for each key result area.
Reviewing performance
Although performance management is a continuous process, it is still necessary to have a formal review once or twice yearly. This acts as a focal point for the consideration of key performance and development issues, provides an opportunity to take stock and forms the basis for performance and development planning.
Many managers are extraordinarily reluctant to conduct such meetings at all or at best their reviews are perfunctory. All sorts of reasons are given for this: ‘I haven’t got enough time’, ‘It’s not necessary, I am already reviewing performance on a day-to-day basis,’ ‘I don’t like sitting down and making formal criticisms of someone.’
The answers to these objections are simple:
■ ‘Surely you can spare an hour or so to spend quality time with your staff if only to show that you are interested in their progress and prepared to give them your support’.
■ ‘That may well be so, but isn’t it a good idea to carry out a systematic review of progress so that both parties are in a better position to plan for the future?’ Towards better management
■ ‘Performance reviews are not just about criticizing people. They are opportunities to recognize achievements as well as agreeing any areas where improvement is required and planning how this should take place’.
The performance review meeting is the means through which the five primary performance management elements of agreement, measurement, feedback, positive reinforcement and dialogue can be put to good use.
The review should be rooted in the reality of the employee’s performance. It is concrete, not abstract and it allows managers and individuals to take a positive look together at how performance can become better in the future and how any problems in meeting performance standards and achieving objectives can be resolved. Individuals should be encouraged to assess their own performance and become active agents for change in improving their results. The manager as a coach is there to adopt his or her proper enabling role; coaching and providing support and guidance.
There should be no surprises in a formal review if performance issues have been dealt with as they should have been as they arise during the year. Traditional appraisals are often no more than an analysis of where those involved are now, and where they have come from. This static and historical approach is not what performance management is about.
The true role of performance management is to look forward to what needs to be done by people to achieve the purpose of the job, to meet new challenges, to make even better use of their knowledge, skills and abilities, to develop the capabilities of employees by establishing a self-managed learning agenda and to reach agreement on any areas where performance needs to be improved and how that improvement should take place. This process also helps managers to improve their ability to lead, guide and develop the individuals and teams who are responsible.
