The document discusses performance appraisal practices in organizations, focusing on the differences between first-line managers with highly engaged versus lowly engaged departments. It highlights the significance of context in conducting appraisals and suggests implications for policy design to enhance employee engagement. The authors call for practical approaches to training managers and adapting performance appraisal tools to align with operational realities.

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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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

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
How our discussions will work
A
A
A
Question
Question
Question

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
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
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
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
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
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