Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Frazer Rendell, e-trinity Consulting - engagement and managing performance

298 views

Published on

Workshop D presentation at the Bristol Business School ‘Unlocking Performance through Employee Engagement' Conference.

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Frazer Rendell, e-trinity Consulting - engagement and managing performance

  1. 1. 1 www.cranfield.ac.uk/som www.engageforsuccess.org How to be a more engaging performance manager Frazer Rendell, Director, e-trinity Consulting Chair – PM TAG and SE Region TAG Paul Beesley, Director, Beyond Theory EfS Steering Group and PM TAG EFS Bristol 25th June 2019
  2. 2. 2 Background • Performance Appraisal (PA) is a significant HR practice (Hutchinson,2013; Armstrong,2015) • Numerous prescriptions (Biron et al.,2011; Haines and St-Onge, 2012) • Effectiveness is widely questioned (Aquinis et al.,2011, Lawler et al., 2012) • Theory and practice is often mismatched (Postuma and Campion, 2008; Pukalos et al.,2015, Hutchinson, 2013). • Search for alternative approaches (Buckingham and Goodall, 2015; Hirsch et al., 2011; Ledford et al.,2016; Holley, 2015; Ewenstien et al.,2016). • However there is limited research into the actual practices of enacting PA (Stiles et al,.2014). • The first-line manager (FLM) is significant in the enactment and employee experience of HR practices (Purcell and Hutchinson,2007) • The FLM is a crucial enabler of employee engagement (McCloud and Clarke, 2009; CIPD,2016; Bailey et al,.2017) How does the conduct of performance appraisals differ between first-line managers with highly and lowly engaged departments?
  3. 3. 3 Qualitative research approach Policy and Process HR Director Policy Owner High Engagement Dept. A: Customer Service Manager ----------------- Employees Dept. C: Accounts Payable Manager --------------------- Employees Low Engagement Dept. B: Security Manager ---------------- Employees Dept. D: Client Experience Manager ------------------- Employees • UK Retail Property Management Company • Embedded Case Study • 25 Semi-structured interviews • Voice recorded and transcribed • PA policy documents • Data analyzed by coding and cross comparison.
  4. 4. 4 FLMs with highly engaged departments conduct performance appraisals differently from FLM’s with lowly engaged departments. Themes Highly Engaged Lowly Engaged First-line manager view of performance appraisal Positive and constructively used. Viewed as negative – a waste of time. Adaptation to operational processes and jobs Highly adapted to department context. Low adaption to department context. Expectations setting Purposes and values based Objectives and targets not always set. Short term commercial targets. Adherence to rules and standards. Performance appraisal tools and forms Used actively to support and record manager-employee discussions and appraisals . Used mainly for formal appraisal meetings.
  5. 5. 5 Research findings continued Themes Highly Engaged Lowly Engaged Employees skills, circumstances and needs Manager acknowledges and positively manages employee differences. Manager treats employees as if they are all the same. Development and training Employee desires to develop skills are recognised and supported, even if difficult to provide training and development opportunities. Minimal recognition of employee desire for training and development. Training provided is typically compliance based. Recognition Use of personal awards, gifts and celebrations to support desired behaviours and achievements . Recognition focused on the team. Use of formal recognition policies. Recognition focused on individuals. Perceived as inconsistent and unfair by employees. Cooperation across the department Employees manage their own performance and actively supported colleagues. Employees focused on their own performance. Perceived fairness High – fairness is perceived as based on employee contributions, abilities and circumstances. Low – treatment is perceived as inconsistent and favouring specific roles or individuals.
  6. 6. 6 Implications for practice or policy The design and implementation of the PA policy, processes and tools should consider the local operational context in which the policy will be enacted. • Focus on the “purpose” of enabling performance. • Take account of existing operational processes and performance management practices. • Recognise the PA policy and tools may be adapted to the context • some aspects may not be helpful or useful to the FLM or employees, for example, targets, measurement and ratings mechanisms. • Judge the success of the PA policy by its outcomes • Adopt a light touch approach to measuring and securing compliance with the policy and process.
  7. 7. 7 Implications for practice or policy Develop the practical knowledge and skills of the FLM’s and employees to support effective enactment of the PA policy? • Training FLM’s in the details of policy, process and tools is not enough. • Build FLM’s commitment and buy-in to the PA policy • Equip FLM’s to translate and enact the PA policy in their specific context. • Purpose and tasks • Adapting to operational processes • Enablers of individual and team performance • Develop the practical know-how and skills of FLM’s and employees to constructively discuss future performance.
  8. 8. 8 An offer of free consultancy! We are looking to work with more people to understand what is happening with the enactment of PA in their organisation. Option 1 - Interview process requirements: • Able to identify highly and lowly engaged teams • Those teams identified have been through a complete PA cycle with current manager • 11 x 1 hour interviews • 1 with the PA process owner • 5 each with highly and lowly engaged teams • 1 manager and 4 staff in each team. What’s in it for you? A report of our findings and how it compares to findings in other organisations For more information contact frazer@e-trinityconsultancy.com 07771 667738 Option 2 - Survey approach: • 25 structured questions that can be tailored to meet the organisations culture and PA process
  9. 9. 9
  10. 10. 10 Questions we would like you to address 1. What would an engaging policy on managing performance look, sound and feel like? 2. What tools would need to be available to make managing performance flexible, adaptable and engaging? 3. What training and development will be necessary for managers and employees to make managing performance engaging? 4. How can goal setting and feedback be more engaging for the organisation, managers and employees? 5. How can we make sure that the approach to managing performance is meaningful for the organisation, managers and employees? Making sense of what we had said today
  11. 11. 11 How our discussions will work A A A Question Question Question
  12. 12. 12 Summary: What would an engaging policy on managing performance look, sound and feel like? Please provide a summary of your discussions and your (up to 5) recommendations: 1. ________________________________________________________ 2. ________________________________________________________ 3. ________________________________________________________ 4. ________________________________________________________ 5. ________________________________________________________
  13. 13. 13 Summary: What tools would need to be available to make managing performance flexible, adaptable and engaging? Please provide a summary of your discussions and your (up to 5) recommendations: 1. ________________________________________________________ 2. ________________________________________________________ 3. ________________________________________________________ 4. ________________________________________________________ 5. ________________________________________________________
  14. 14. 14 Summary: What training and development will be necessary for managers and employees to make managing performance engaging? Please provide a summary of your discussions and your (up to 5) recommendations: 1. ________________________________________________________ 2. ________________________________________________________ 3. ________________________________________________________ 4. ________________________________________________________ 5. ________________________________________________________
  15. 15. 15 Summary: How can goal setting and feedback be more engaging for the organisation, managers and employees? Please provide a summary of your discussions and your (up to 5) recommendations: 1. ________________________________________________________ 2. ________________________________________________________ 3. ________________________________________________________ 4. ________________________________________________________ 5. ________________________________________________________
  16. 16. 16 Summary: How can we make sure that the approach to managing performance is meaningful for the organisation, managers and employees? Please provide a summary of your discussions and your (up to 5) recommendations: 1. ________________________________________________________ 2. ________________________________________________________ 3. ________________________________________________________ 4. ________________________________________________________ 5. ________________________________________________________
  17. 17. 17 Please contact Engage for Success or ourselves Frazer Rendell For more information… Beyond Theory Training @BeyondTheoryUK and/or @pebeesley Beyond Theory – business training & coaching and/or paulebeesley Beyond_Theory Paul Beesley www.beyondtheory.co.uk paul@beyondtheory.co.uk 01604 212505 www.e-trinityconsultancy.com frazer@e-trinityconsultancy.com 0203 1310062 Beyond Theory Training @BeyondTheoryUK and/or @pebeesley Beyond Theory – business training & coaching and/or paulebeesley Beyond_Theory @frazerrendell Frazer Rendell
  18. 18. 18

×