• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Define performance & choosing a measurement approach
 

Define performance & choosing a measurement approach

on

  • 1,313 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,313
Views on SlideShare
1,313
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
38
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • {}

Define performance & choosing a measurement approach Define performance & choosing a measurement approach Presentation Transcript

  • Defining Performance and Choosing a Measurement Approach: Overview Defining Performance Determinants of Performance Performance Dimensions Approaches to Measuring Performance Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Defining Performance Performance is: • Behavior • What employees do Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Defining Performance Performance is NOT: • Results or Outcomes • What employees produce Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Behaviors labeled as Performance are: 1. Evaluative – Negative – Neutral – Positive 1. Multidimensional – Many different kinds of behaviors – Advance or hinder organizational goals Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Behaviors are Not always – Observable – Measurable Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Results/Consequences may be used – To infer behavior – As proxy for behavioral measure Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Determinants of Performance Performance = Declarative Knowledge X Procedural Knowledge X Motivation Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • A. Declarative Knowledge • Information about – – – – Facts Labels Principles Goals • Understanding of task requirements Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • B. Procedural Knowledge • Knowing – What to do – How to do it Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 • Skills – – – – – Cognitive Physical Perceptual Motor Interpersonal Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • C. Motivation • Choices – Expenditure of effort – Level of effort – Persistence of effort Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Implications for Addressing Performance Problems • Managers need information to accurately identify source(s) of performance problems • Performance management systems must – Measure performance AND – Provide information on SOURCE(s) of problems Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Factors Influencing Determinants of Performance: • Individual characteristics – Procedural knowledge – Declarative knowledge – Motivation • HR practices • Work environment Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Performance Dimensions: Types of multi-dimensional behaviors: • Task performance • Contextual performance – Pro-social behaviors – Organizational citizenship Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Task performance Activities that • transform raw materials • help with the transformation process – Replenishing – Distributing – Supporting Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Contextual performance Behaviors that • contribute to organization’s effectiveness and • provide a good environment in which task performance can occur Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Differences Between Task and Contextual Performance • Task Performance • Varies across jobs • Likely to be role prescribed • Influenced by • Abilities • Skills Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 • Contextual Performance • Fairly similar across jobs • Not likely to be role prescribed • Influenced by • Personality Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Why Include Task & Contextual Performance Dimensions in PM system? 1. 2. 3. 4. Global competition Teamwork Customer service Supervisor views Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Job Performance in Context A performer (individual or team) TRAIT Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 In a given situation Engages in certain behaviors That produce various results BEHAVIOR RESULTS Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Approaches to Measuring Performance • Trait Approach – Emphasizes individual traits of employees • Behavior Approach – Emphasizes how employees do the job • Results Approach – Emphasizes what employees produce Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Trait Approach • Emphasis on individual • Evaluate stable traits • Cognitive abilities • Personality • Based on relationship between traits & performance Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Trait Approach (continued) • Appropriate if • Structural changes planned for organization • Disadvantages • Improvement not under individual’s control • Trait may not lead to • Desired behaviors or • Desired results Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Behavior Approach Appropriate if • Employees take a long time to achieve desired outcomes • Link between behaviors and results is not obvious • Outcomes occur in the distant future • Poor results are due to causes beyond the performer’s control Not appropriate if • above conditions are not present Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Results Approach Advantages: • Less time • Lower cost • Data appear objective Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver
  • Results Approach (continued) Most appropriate when: • • • • Workers skilled in necessary behaviors Behaviors and results obviously related Consistent improvement in results over time Many ways to do the job right Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006 Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at Denver