306 - Performance Management the Death Of the Collegiate system in HE


Published on

Published in: Education, Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Institutional view of PDR is as stated – critical process. Aim of the research was to identify whether the process as it was conducted in non-academic area was effective. Further aim was to identify if as identified through literature review people viewed PDR as a PM tool.Research conducted in non-academic area in central services (move to next slide) – talk to slide.83 members of staff in SBSIn terms of the research the first thing was to define what was meant by ‘effectiveness’. Asked those with responsibility for the policy document ie colleagues in HR. Definition of effectiveness – extent to which process meets stated aims and degree of participation.
  • Case study methodology chosen as through the research I aimed to build a story around how individuals within SBS viewed the PDR process and from that determine the effectiveness of the process, also personal preference.In terms of methods initial survey with follow up interviews. Survey provided initial data on participation rates and whether staff were aware of policy aims, also to identify those willing to participate in the research.Open ended one to one interviews conducted following analysis of survey data and enable me to explore further themes identified in survey data and validate findings from survey data.
  • Participation: all managers were conducting PDRs and reviewers had had PDRs. However just because all members of SBS are participating in the process does not mean that it is effective. A further test of effectiveness outlined by the HR stakeholders is whether the process meets the stated aims.Stated aims: respondents aware of - however could just have looked them up. Explicit expectation of the PDR policy is that staff are engaged in discussions throughout the year, reviewing objectives/performance and development. Through survey identified that reviewers are not having regular follow up meetings and no evidence to suggest that performance, development and objectives are being reviewed post-PDR.
  • In terms of the HR definition of effectiveness, I identified through my research that:The process is effective in terms of participation.Within SBS there is an awareness of the aims of the PDR process.Only one-third of reviewees who responded to the survey are having regular discussions/follow-up meetings with their line-managers suggesting a lack of compliance with the process post-PDR.Of the reviewers who responded to the survey only one is having regular meetings with their reviewees. Should be reviewing 3 areas post-PDR (performance/objectives/development)none of the reviewers are discussing performance with their reviewees.
  •  This requirement to extend the range of measures to include non-financial measures led to the development of a range of new techniques. such as activity-based costing/management (ABC/M), the balanced scorecard (BSC), value-based management (VBM), rolling forecasting, and target costing.  One of the most commonly adopted practices has been the BSC.  
  • 306 - Performance Management the Death Of the Collegiate system in HE

    1. 1. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT:The Death of the Collegiate System inHigher Education3 April 2012CLAIRE POVAH & TOM FINNIGAN
    2. 2. AGENDAWelcome and IntroductionsWhat is Performance Management followed by InteractiveExercisePerformance Development Reviews , a wolf in sheep’s clothingPerformance Management Systems vs Organisational Culture – aBattle of WillsQuestion & Answer Session
    3. 3. Operational PMCIPD Survey Report (2009) ‘Performance management in action:current trends and practice’Methodologies include• Performance Appraisal/Performance Development Reviews• 360 Degree Feedback• Regular Review Meetings• Objective setting
    4. 4. Strategic PMMethodologies include• Six Sigma• Balanced Scorecard (BSC)• Total Quality Management (TQM)• Activity-based Costing
    5. 5. Performance Management SystemsInteractive Session• Get into groups of about 8 and nominate a speaker, consider the following questions…• Which performance management tools are you aware are used in your organisation?• How well are they adopted in your organisation? Rank this on a scale of 1-4 (1 = “tick box exercise”; 4 = widely adopted)• How effective do you feel these are? Rank on a scale of 1-4 (1 = not effective at all; 4 = extremely effective)10 minutes to discuss this then will feed back.
    6. 6. Performance Management SystemsStrategic Methodologies• Six Sigma• Balanced Scorecard (BSC)• Total Quality Management (TQM)• Activity-based CostingOperational Methodologies• Performance Appraisal/Performance Development Reviews• 360 Degree Feedback• Regular Review Meetings• Objective setting
    7. 7. Performance Development Reviews, a wolfin sheep’s clothing
    8. 8. Performance DevelopmentReviews – The Research“The Performance and Development Review is a critical processfor enhancing individual and organisational performance.” Lancaster University PDR Policy (2010)• Aim of the research• Methodology and methods• Findings
    9. 9. Student Based Services –Organisation Structure Director of Student Based Services Student Registry Centre for Enterprise, Employability & Careers Colleges & Student Life
    10. 10. Methodology and MethodsMethodology: Methods:Case Study Survey & Interviews Example image
    11. 11. Findings Effectiveness in terms of:Participation Meeting the stated aims Linking organisational/faculty/departmental & individual goals. Clarify role expectations & performance required. Facilitate the giving/receiving of feedback. Support individuals in planning & fulfilling their ongoing development. Example image Offer an opportunity to discuss individual circumstances & wider experiences at work. Support individuals and their departments as roles, expectations & structures change.
    12. 12. Findings• Process is effective in terms of participation• There is an awareness of the aims of the PDR process• Only one-third of reviewees are having regular discussions/follow-up meetings with their line-managers.• Of the reviewers who responded to the survey only one is having regular meetings with their reviewees.
    13. 13. Findings• Reviewers and reviewees value the process in terms of the opportunity it provides to sit down and have one-to-ones.• The one-size fits all approach impacts on engagement with the process.• Process is viewed as a bureaucratic, tick-box exercise by both parties, the perception being that neither side has bought into the process.
    14. 14. Findings Example image
    16. 16. Performance Development Reviews, a wolfin sheep’s clothing
    17. 17. Performance Management: The Death ofthe Collegiate System in Higher Education
    18. 18. Performance Management Systems vsOrganisational Culture – a battle of wills
    19. 19. AGENDAIntroduction to Management Control SystemsBalance Score Card as an exampleKPIsPerformance Management SystemsQuestions
    20. 20. Management Control Systems• Where did they come from?• What do they seek to do?• In a MCS almost everything in the organisationis included as part of the overall control system” Malmi and Brown (2008)
    21. 21. Balanced Score Card• The BSC was developed by Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton in 1992.• The BSC relies on using a range of measures termed Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).• “The perception that implementation of a BSC, in and of itself, will lead to organizational alignment is a fairy tale”. Deem et al. (2010)
    22. 22. KPIs in HE• KPIs are part of everyday life in the higher education (HE) sector• 1999 first group of KPIs for UK universities (HEFCE 1999).“Choosing relevant KPIs requires thinking to be aligned withstrategies and objectives; once this is done the choice of measuresof success is often an obvious one” Cronin (2007 p.13)
    23. 23. The Role of KPIs• KPIs should reflect and measure progress along the strategic direction of the organisation.“personal rewards or incentives often result in staff resisting orpreventing change in order to deliver KPIs that benefit themrather than the organisation” Brooks (2005)
    24. 24. KPIs – problems of usage• Organisations identify too many KPIs• Continue to rely on historical data• Ignore the culture of the organisation• Fail to consider the leadership style of the managers
    25. 25. Performance Management Systems• A PMS as an overall control system, which not only undertakes the measurement of performance it also seeks to undertake the management of performance.• What do you need to set one up?
    26. 26. PMS – analytical framework byFerreira and Otley (2009) Example image
    27. 27. Ferreira and Otley’s PerformanceManagement Framework - Adapted Example image
    28. 28. Performance Management Systems“The literature in the area of performance management systems(PMSs) and management control systems (MCSs) increasinglyrecognises the need for research to be based on more coherenttheoretical foundations” Ferreira and Otley (2009 p.263)
    29. 29. Questions