This document discusses transforming performance management systems to focus on growth rather than threats or rewards. It notes that most current PM practices damage performance because they are based on a misunderstanding of human responses. The document advocates shifting to systems that focus on purpose, autonomy and mastery. It proposes that effective PM systems should be forward-looking, evaluate both outcomes and behaviors, embrace test-learn-adapt principles, occur simply and frequently in alignment with goals, and decouple pay from objective attainment to fuel both tactical and adaptive performance. A case study example outlines key elements of an improved system, including vision, peer review, learning and a growth mindset.

1. Transforming
performance management
Roger Longden
Manchester Metropolitan University HRM MSc
Friday 23rd March 2018

4. Nigel

6. Victoria

8. Fuel, not
management

9. Goal setting
Evaluation

10. Appraisal rep
Managers - think 33% of their people respond
positively to appraisals
People - 20% say they do
[“Beyond the Bonus” The Institute of Leadership and Management]

11. 79%
[“Global Human Capital Trends” Deloitte University Press 2017]

12. Perception is
reality

14. Threat Reward
Objectivity
Creativity
Problem solving
[See SCARF model
for more detail]

15. Rock
“In the context of neuroscience research, most
PM practices turn out to damage the performance
they are intended to improve. That’s because
they are based on a fundamental
misunderstanding of human responses.”
Dr David Rock - Head of the Neuroleadership Institute

16. Why threat?

17. Tactical - target
orientated
Adaptive - learning
orientated

18. Purpose, autonomy &
mastery
(Dan Pink)

19. Idiosyncratic rater effect
“Although it is implicitly assumed that the
ratings measure the performance of the ratee,
most of what is being measured by the ratings
is the unique rating tendencies of the rater.
Thus ratings reveal more about the rater than
they do about the ratee.”
[Mount, Scullen & Goff, Journal of Applied Psychology]

20. Consequences?

21. Case study
• You are the HR project team at Juniper Networks. You
have been asked to evaluate their performance
management system and make recommendations
• Your brief is to assist in the design of v.2 of the
system to maximise team member buy-in and performance
• In 2’s or 3’s, evaluate the system and report on both
areas where you feel it already works well, and
opportunities for improvement
• Be ready to share your evaluations and recommendations

22. Elements
• Vision, values & “brand system”
• Alignment with business plan
• Evaluation
• Peer review
• Conversation

23. the what
Objectives &
Key Results
Transparency
Collaboration
Alignment
Ambition
Learning
Growth
Cadence Accountability

24. the how
Values
Standards
Behaviours
Context
Integration

25. growth mindset
“…if we believe that human attributes are
malleable and can be improved through training
and practice, we tend to set higher goals and
perform better.”
(Payne et al 2007, Van Yperen et al 2014, Burnette et al 2013).

26. motivation
• Pink - financial reward doesn’t work
• Pivot from external to intrinsic

27. reward
• decouple reward from objective attainment
• manager evaluates based on they would do, not
what they think

28. reward
• Deloitte snapshot questions:
1.Given what I know of this persons performance,
and if it were my money, I would award this
person the highest possible compensation and
bonus [5 point scale from strongly agree to strongly disagree]
2.Given what I know of this person’s performance,
I would always want them on my team [same 5 point scale]
3.This person is at risk of low performance [yes/no]
4.This person is ready for promotion today [yes/no]

29. 5 pillars

30. 1.Forward looking
2.Evaluate on both “what” & “how”
3.TLA - test, learn & adapt
4.Simple, frequent & aligned
5.Decouple pay from attainment
Fuel both tactical & adaptive performance

31. growth@therebegiants.com
+44 161 444 1335
therebegiants.com