performance management system (PMS)

A performance management system is defined as an efficient approach to measure worker performance. A company brings into line its goals and objective with the available resources, labour, or materials, and it ensures commitment and motivation. The studies show that a business with an operative performance management system will have high inspired employees with a high level of job fulfilment. On the other hand, a poorly applied performance management system will not inspire its workers; hence this will directly affect their performance and output among others, (Singh and Twalo 2015). A company expects an employee to observe the performance management systems with any exception.

Performance management

Performance management is a manner of merging goal setting, performance review, and employee growth into a shared system and checking if the staff performance is in support of the company objective. It is through performance management, where the supervisor outlines and assesses the worker competencies and rewards him. Kuvaas, et al. 2016, stated that the company must engage both the managers and employees by putting down objectives that provide the management system with current information. The employee performance is directly connecting to the company’s overall performance; this will be explained by Shields et al. 2015, appendices 1; it shows that employees’ performance is related to his competency and behaviour at work. Likewise, individual skill has a significant effect on teamwork efficiency, which directly affects the overall organization competency.

Objectives of compelling performances management systems

The purposes of performance management system include;-

• Goal setting- this involves setting and defining the goals that will aim at attaining the organization’s objectives. Goals are vital in any organization, and practical goal setting will focus on what is essential for the employee and organization, they help in attaining individual objectives. Additionally, they help in achieving initial results that help in work development.
• The setting of employee expectation- an effective performance management system should set a clear expectation for managers and employees. Where employees know their roles, duties, and accountability are likely to perform well and be consistent in their work, and fruitful.
• Active communication- communication ensures employees are engaged; therefore, businesses that effectively communicate with employees, and the team will have assured of secession planning and high performing workforce.
• Set performance standards- this helps in ensuring employee commitment, realistic rules, determining of amount of resources to be allocated, encourage cooperation within employee and management. Effective performance management should identify the improvements in the system and note what is missing.
• Individual training and performance plan- the performance management system should identify the training needs and the required development. Should help an employee to acquire the needed skills. Therefore the organization must identify skills or training requirements, plan and budget for the training, apply the skills to critical areas, and then set up organization goals to take in to account the new skills.

Components of a performance management system

There different criteria that an organization can use to measure the performance of each employee. Whichever way the company decides to use, the aim is the same, to measure how an employee’s performance is affecting his work and the company’s overall goals in the long run. Shields et al. 2015, has identified the performance management cycle and highlighted that all stakeholders must take responsibility and accountability on their assessment, appendices 2. The review shows that performance management is continuous engagement and is future-oriented. Since the assignment targets public and private institutions, it will check the scenario in both public and private learning institutions. So the review is expected to take any of the following approaches;-

• Manager review

In his study, the employee or the students will give an assessment of the report on the lecturer or managers based on their reviews appraisal outcome. The evaluation aims at understanding the core skills and competence needed to lead the team. Also, it will use to identify which employee more development needs support.

• 360 performance review

Here the employees can review and be reviewed by others. It gives rounded feedback since the employee receives reviews from his peers and managers. It makes the staff understand his strength and weaknesses, which offers him an opportunity to develop.

• Engagement review

The review’s objective is to understand what matters most to the employees and determine if they are engaged in their work or not. It allows the employees to air their concerns and comment on what they think has been done well by the company.

• Social recognition

Here the employers use specific tools to recognize employees either by creating meaningful relationships or encourage the employee to celebrate small success. It promotes the sharing of feedback between the management, employee, and the organization.

• Goal setting

In performance management, goal setting is crucial as it leads to high job performance. In this case, goal setting for the whole team stimulates the personalities to do their best. Therefore the system should upkeep goal management.

• Goal alignment

The review establishes whether the set goals support the objective of the company. Thus, the administration should ensure employees set goals works upwardly towards achieving the organizations’ goals.

• Succession planning

Here the company aims at transferring employee success to another team through coaching and ensuring move upward to the next challenge. What made an employee a good fit as is conveyed to other staff through training.

Contextual factors

According to Cardy and Leonard 2014, in performance management, there are factors (contextual factors) that management considers when coming up with the policy. They consist of internal factors, external factors, and individual factors.

Internal factors

These are factors coming within the organizations, and they affect the performance management of any organization. They include;-

• Organizational culture- Culture comes first in any organization, Boyce et al. 2015. It donates to administrative efficiency, which in turn makes a company focus on cultural standards and norms. Most effective establishments have a solid mission and extraordinary measures of employee contribution, which give rise to empowered staff. Therefore, performance management should ensure the same employee empowerment when conducting employee appraisals. Also, Awino et al. 2018 stated that there is a connection between robust culture and high-level performance and deprived culture and squat performance. However, though culture is an essential factor in production, institutes cannot delineate it, quantify it, or modify it.
• Employee relations climate- according to (Anitha, 2014) working atmosphere, teamwork, and staff relationship has a weighty impact on employee commitment and performance. Therefore, performance management should uphold programs that would enrich pear relationships, appendices 3.
• Organizational structure- (Guadalupe et al., 2014) found out that changes in institutions’ construction of the managerial team to variations in the firm’s expansion. The organization determines how the information will pass from top to the low-level employees. If the organization has no clear structure, it will be hard to implement the performance management functionalities.
• Sector- Sector determines how the performance management for an organization will grow. Public institutions are facing constant changes, hence disruptive to performance improvement. (Buick et al. 2015), public institutions have established valuable strategies and tools for institute performance management development.
• Size- according to Jung and Lee 2016, organization size restrains the influence of the analysts since the total of permanent workers is limited. Andrews and Boyne 2014, added that the chore complication and mass of public service institutions are proportionate to funds allocated to administration departments.

External factors

These are factors outside the organizations, and it has no control over them. They include economic, national culture, political, legal, and competition. External forces expertise systems and financial incentives can shrink the employee morale to work (Jacobsen et al. 2014. Also, Spekle and Verbeeten 2014, stated that applying a performance management system for enticement purposes will harmfully affect institution growth. Therefore the effectiveness of the performance management system widely depends on how managers are going to use the system. DeNisi and Smith (2014), advises that the organization’s strategic goals can create a pleasant climate and environment to transform the organization level and individual level of performance. These ensure individual and team development.

Individual factors- nature of job and characteristics of the people

Employee understanding of performance management is influenced by whether the performance fall-short of ambition of the institutional past performance and performance of the colleagues; this is, according to Nielsen 2014. The individual objective will affect his current work, hence the current performance of the institution. Additionally, employee morale and know-how will determine how the employee relates to other staff. Mostly, an employee in public institutions is no mainly motivated compared to private institution employees. Therefore, they may not take the performance appraisal seriously. Employee performance is behavioural, and when the organization is managing the performance of a team or single staff, the management considers both behaviour and results, Dugguh and Dennis (2014).

Effectiveness of players in performance management in institutions

Staffs are critical to any organization’s success. Where there is authentic and steady communication between employees and administration, employees can know the organization’s goals and expectations. Additionally, the managers devote list time on supervising them, while staff relishes greater independence, and there is reduced misunderstanding. Zhang et al. (2015) stated that organizations that concentrated on junior leadership focused uniformly on top management team members improved team efficiency and corporate performance, while management, which distinguished among specific members, declined both outcomes. According to Asfaw et al. (2015), training and developing employees will impact considerably on employee performance and efficiency.

Analyzing the performance management system for both private and public universities

This analysis aims to determine the impact of performance management system performance in both private and public universities. Application of a performance management system is a big challenge to managers in the public institution; this is because the resource allocation for this task is low compared with other departments, which indicated a deficiency in the employee appraisal process, Makhubela et al. 20016. Amin et al. 2014, advised that if the university needs to increase its performance, it should first act on the job description, training, and involvement in performance appraisal.

Similarities of performance management systems for these two institutions;

1. Andrews and Boyne 2014, suggest that there is a non-linear influence of both job complexity and size of managerial intensity, which leads to dominant administrative mechanisms in universities, both private and public.
2. According to Makhubela et al. 2016, he noted that staff working on all-purpose positions performed poorly in the appraisal compared to those in administrative and specialized areas, indicating a severe shortcoming in their appraisal method in both institutions.
3. Makhubela et al. 2016, also revealed that the staff was not involved in the development of a performance management system, which indicates a lack of input, and that the appraisals not directed for growth since no feedback provided after evaluations. They were not involved in goal setting.
4. (Hvidman and Andersen, (2014, theoretical development suggests that the management activities have diverse impacts on results in both public and private institutions hence smooth transmission of management actions through the sectors.

How performance management systems for these two institutions differ from each other;

1. According to Arnaboldi et al. 2015, management performance is a challenge fronting manager in public institutions since there are hitches in measuring performance. Also, there is deleterious staff morale, which is affecting their performance hence the growth of the organization. And, no ready organization performance checks are making the task complex and demanding for public service managers. Thus the performance management system implementation becomes ineffective to the institution.
2. Because of the complication and size of the public institutions, more resources are allotted to administration rather than to the academic department (Andrews and Boyne 2014).

Observations from critical evaluation of the Performance Management System in the two institutions

From the above analysis, it’s clear that both institutions faced the same complexity of tasks that makes it hard for the managers to plan and implement an effective performance management system. It’s also hard for the organization to get accurate appraisal results since more emphasis is put on senior managers and professionals, hence not involving staff at the lower levels of the institution. It affects the institution’s performance because policies apply across the entire organization; therefore, there is no staff participation.

Recommendations to improve the effectiveness of performance management going forward

Both private and public universities face challenges that each organization should address to achieve an efficient performance management system that will ensure both employee and institution growth. Some of the recommendations include;-

• The institutions should ensure proper institution goals, and functional. Adequate implementation of the organization’s goals works hand in hand with appropriate performance management. The management should ensure resource allocation to the sophisticated department instead of allocating more funds to a few departments.
• Performance appraisal should aim at training the low-level staff and provide feedback after the assessment. It will help general position employees get involved in the decision making, hence encouraging them to participate in goal development which supports their growth
• The institutions should first develop organization performance checks that will ensure employee growth. The institution should also focus on working on staff morale, mostly in public institutions. Improved staff morale will result in improved organizational performance. It will tackle the challenges managers in public institutions are facing.
• Also, more resources were being allocated to administration departments rather than in academic departments; performance managers should proper allocation will motivate employees in all departments, hence improve teamwork, which has a positive effect on the institution development.

Implementation of these recommendations will result in an effective performance management system that builds employee’s growth which in turn leads to institution growth and development.

Conclusion,

According to Albrecht et al. 2015, organizations and more so the human resources personnel should move outside the unchanging administration of yearly engagement and involve in performance management, employee selection, training, and employee growth. The public sector should view performance management as an enabler to organizational development. (Makhubela et al. 2016)appraisals should aim at something, and staff in general positions should be involved in setting goals, and feedback sessions provided. Training programs should address these institutional and managerial deficits.