Implementing an Employee PerformanSystem Experience Tradition/tutorialoutletdotcom
- 1. Implementing an Employee Performance Management System in a Nonprofit Organization Karen Becker, Nicholas Antuar, Cherie Everett Nonprofit... FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT www.tutorialoutlet.com Implementing an Employee Performance Management System in a Nonprofit Organization Karen Becker, Nicholas Antuar, Cherie Everett Nonprofit organizations are not exempt from the imperatives of employee attraction, retention, and motivation. As competition for staff, donors, and funding increases, the need to manage employee performance will continue to be a critical human resource management issue. This article outlines a study of the introduction of a performance management system in an Australian nonprofit organization and analyzes its design and implementation. It explores how performance management can be introduced and used effectively within a nonprofit environment to benefit staff and the organization. However, the use of performance management is not without its challenges, and the research also identified initial employee resistance and a resulting initial spike in labor turnover. However, findings indicate
- 2. that if nonprofit organizations are willing to undertake consultation with staff and ensure that the organization’s specific context, values, and mission are reflected in the performance management system, it can be a useful tool for managers and a direct benefit to employees. T RADITIONALLY, PERFORMANCE management systems have been implemented as a means of managing and measuring the performance of individuals or teams by providing clear accountability and measures on which to assess performance. The intent is that such systems support the strategy and goals of the organization, and that by having a transparent system, all employees are encouraged to contribute, individually or in groups, to the strategic direction of the organization. While the need for, and benefits of, performance management can be argued very simply, the means through which it is achieved is where the complexity exists. In a nonprofit environment, this complexity can be exacerbated by potentially differing needs, motives, and values of the paid employees (Schepers and others, 2005) and by the existence of unpaid voluntary workers. Although performance management and performance measurement are often considered to be closely related, each represents a specific field of literature in its own right. Performance measurement generally focuses on quantitative measuring of performance at the level of organizations or at least organizational divisions (for example, see Cocca and Alberti, 2010; Taylor, 2009), and even when this issue is investigated specifically in nonprofit organizations (for example,
- 3. Brickley and Van Horn, 2002; Moxham, 2009; Steinberg, 1990), this predominantly financial and organizational focus remains. Although some forms of performance management may draw on performance measurement, in the human resource management literature, performance management typically focuses on the provision of feedback to individual employees or groups of employees, with the underlying philosophy of building an effective employment relationship (Fletcher, 2001; Shields, 2007). The focus of this article remains on the use of performance management, rather than performance measurement, in the nonprofit environment. The goal of this research was to analyze the development and implementation of a performance management system in a nonprofit organization to assess the extent to which general performance management principles and approaches can be applied to a nonprofit context. The findings identify some critical elements of successful development and implementation of a performance management system for nonprofit organizations. Performance Management: The Literature and a Framework The management of employee performance, regardless of sector or industry, has long been a contentious issue. Although many espouse the virtues of performance management systems for aligning employee effort with the strategic direction of the organization (den Hartog, Boselie, and Paauwe, 2004; Fletcher, 2001), performance management also has some vocal critics who claim that its potential is not being realized; worse still, they charge that ineffective or inappropriate use
- 4. has detrimental effects (Winstanley and Stuart-Smith, 1996). Performance management is arguably one of the most contentious human resource management topics, with much written about the effective use and misuse of performance management (for example, see Perrin, 1998). It can be argued that performance management should be treated like any other organizational change, and without due regard for organizational culture or effective change The management of employee performance, regardless of sector or industry, has long been a contentious issue. management processes, it may not deliver the anticipated outcomes (Mento, Jones, and Dirndorfer, 2002; Waddell and Sohal, 1998). Warnings have also been issued against the wholesale importing of performance management systems into nonprofit organizations from the for-profit sector without regard for the particular context of nonprofit organizations (Cheverton, 2007). However, very few comprehensive examples exist highlighting the critical elements for the successful implementation of performance management in the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit organizations have long recognized the importance of their employees and volunteers in the delivery of services; however, managing their performance has often eluded or been avoided by
- 5. managers in the sector. As Kaplan (2001, p. 356) highlights, making the link between “mission and measures” is a critical issue for performance management and applies to nonprofit organizations just as much as it does to public and for-profit organizations. However, what is often unique to nonprofit organizations is the finding that employees may sacrifice potentially higher salaries or benefits elsewhere to work within an organization whose values align with their own (Cheverton, 2007); in effect, they are providing part of their labor as a donation to the particular cause of the organization. Although not all studies have shown decisive pay differentials (for example, see Goddeeris, 1988; Mocan and Tekin, 2003), it is nonetheless critical that nonprofit organizations consider the potential benefits of providing performance feedback to employees. In addition, researchers have found that employees of nonprofit organizations experience higher job satisfaction and are more intrinsically motivated than their for-profit counterparts (Benz, 2005; Devaro and Brookshire, 2007). Although this is often seen as one of the greatest strengths of the sector, it also offers a challenge to managers to develop an environment to retain and motivate these employees. A systematic approach to performance management begins with defining the exact skills, knowledge, and abilities required; classifying the acceptable behaviors; and identifying how outcomes will be appraised (Shields, 2007). Shields (2007) identifies that such a system
- 6. can typically measure one or more of these variables: inputs (competencies), processes or the way in which these inputs are applied (behaviors), and outputs (results). All performance management systems are underpinned by at least one of these variables, and often a combination of behaviors and outputs (Mwita, 2000). Recognition is growing that measuring only outputs is not necessarily the best way to align employee performance with organizational objectives—in the worst scenario, sending a message that the end justifies the means. Identifying the critical behaviors for acceptable performance and the competencies that will contribute to the growth of human capital within the organization is also essential (Kong, 2007). As a result of this growing awareness, a more comprehensive and multidimensional approach to performance management emerged with the introduction of systems such as the balanced scorecard approach (Kaplan and Norton, 1996). Although this approach has been advocated as a means of more effective performance management in the nonprofit sector (Kaplan, 2001; Manville, 2007), its use cannot be claimed to be widespread; even within the private sector, this approach has taken some time to be embraced. Assistant Professor, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Qazvin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran Abstract The present project is a De Waal and Miedema model- based pathological study of implementing p
- 7. erformance management system in Regional Water Company of Gazvin. The main question is whe ther necessary contexts for implementing performance management system exist in statistical popu lation or not. Statistical population includes all employees of regional water company (n=250) and the statistical population involves 165 employees selected by simple random sampling. The main data gathering tool is a researcher-made questionnaire. This research is an applied and descriptive survey. The obtained data has been analyzed by SPSS software, revealing that the structural and b ehavioral dimension of the model including responsibility structure, performance context, integrati on, managerial power, consistency, accountability, managerial style, implementation method and o rganizational communication for implementation of performance management system is favorable in statistical population. Keywords: Pathology, Performance, Performance management, De Waal and Miedema model INTRODUCTION Many studies have been conducted about evaluative methods but none of them has emphasized on a certain method, confirming this necessity that organizational objectives and expectations from performance evaluation should be first determined based on which appropriate method should be selected. Since it is difficult to precisely determine the consequence of individuals’ work and their
- 8. potential capabilities should be considered, it is better to apply a combination of individual, behavioral and functional characteristics in the combinational framework of evaluation methods which compensate the lack of work standards and criteria somehow. Establishing proper management in each organization involves applying appropriate systems and creating appropriate context for optimal use of its available resources. Accepting the fact that human resources are considered as the most important capital in each institute reveals that among various systems and methods of proper human resources management, performance evaluation system is of high importance and its proper implementation causes proper and prompt exploitation of programs and efficiency in organizations. In spite of the practical and rational importance of employees’ evaluation, with respect to the fact that such a managerial action is neglected, evaluation has been 483 Kuwait Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review Vol. 4, No.1; September. 2014 unsuccessful not only in most of organizations, particularly state organizations, but also such an evaluation has been criticized by employees and even mangers for many reasons (Purbey et al., 2007). State management services law approved in 30 September 2007 by common commission of inspecting state management services act of the Parliament, according to article 85 of Constitution of Islamic Republic of Iran submitted to the Parliament, after the agreement of the Parliament on
- 9. its 5-year experimental implementation, was confirmed by Guardian Council in the open session dated 10 October 2007 and communicated to the government to be implemented through a letter from the Parliament speaker in 17 October 2007.