1. Case Study One: Alpha Company Transforms Its Goal-Setting Practices
1.1. Explain the reason(s) the Alpha Company decided to change its goal-setting practices
In a dynamic business world that is currently prevailing, the goal-setting process was dramatically forward-oriented. Though it is a brilliant idea to formulate strategies and plans to ensure the future is smooth however the current goal-setting process lacked the dynamic approach and farsightedness. Though considerable support was indeed rendered by the management, it can also be understood that some of the goals might be due to peer pressure and without the absolute and free consent of the employee. The process of infused goal setting is sure to yield no results.
Employees were required to establish goals that were over and above their core role responsibility. There is no iota of doubts that in the interest of employee and employer, it is essential to set a future-oriented goal and aid the employee to develop and grow as a professional being. This will help in preparing the employee for future roles with increased job responsibilities. However, foresightedness should be the only measure of performance which is in turn linked to compensation. The most appropriate approach is to give less than 10% weightage to such goals while the appraisal process.
The primary purpose of the goal-setting process was aimed at improving the overall organizational culture of the organization that will be more vibrate and progressive and to ensures the compensation is directly based on their performance. Despite being in practice for years, the management felt there was a considerable number of avenues for improvement that will further strengthen the goal-setting process.
Apart from the content, the goal-setting process was itself of a task that was time and resource consuming for the employee and manager. For the manager more specifically, it was demanding to break down the goal, set parameters for measures, and finally arrive at the score.
1.2. Summarize the process for goal-setting transformation, the study findings, and recommendations.
Considering the issues associated with the goal-setting process, there was a considerable modification that was introduced to ensure the actual purpose and utility of the procedure is attained. The transformation process started with the successful identification of the issues namely time consuming and irrelevant approach. The transformation process focused on:
• Training and educating the direct stakeholders of the renewed process of the goal-setting by using on-line and off-line sessions.
• The proposed amendments were carried out based on the review and feedback of small pilot groups.
• Resources and time shouldn’t be wasted for breaking down the goals rather the managers should be empowered and educated to link the employee goals with the overall organizational objective.
• The suggestions for such implementation were later included in the new process.
The finding of the transformation process was remarkably positive and progressive. The primary findings of such transformations were :
• The stakeholders were aware of their roles during the goal-setting process and the same was directly linked to the organizational priorities.
• the process that was consuming around three months to finalize with the introduction of the transformation process was reduced considerably in such a manner that no employee is working with no goals throughout the year which wasn’t the case as before.
• The goals should be based remarkably only on the current role requirements. The employees should be rewarded (or not) based on the core job for which they are hired rather than on extra goals that are a long shot for the role.
The recommendations on which the transformation was carried out is the goal-setting was no more “out of the way” performance measurement. The goals were closely linked to the current roles of the employees with moderate significance towards the future role. This ensured the employees were motivated to perform their core tasks and at the same time prepare themselves for future requirements.
2. Case Study Two: Real-Time Performance Measurement and Feedback
2.1. Despite a “strong high-performance culture” explain what issues prompted the Beta Group to make the change.
The performance management system was simple and straight forward with minimal complications and resource consumption. However, with progress in time, managers felt a need to review the process to identify the loopholes and take corrective steps. The performance management was based on a simple rating scale, 5 being the highest, and 1 being the lowest. Noticeable issues with the process were:
The managers were under considerable pressure to complete the evaluation process that was shared with the employee on the anniversary of joining the job. Due to which the managers were working on performance evaluation almost throughout the year. This was time-consuming and limited attention to other important activities. The evaluation process was paperwork that was time-consuming for recording the data, computing them, and finally arriving at the score. Thus the time and effort invested weren’t on par with the results.
Though the process of evaluation is prevailing for a considerable time, however, the managers were not trained to rate employees on actual and free terms. Due to the incapacity of the manager to be honest and transparent, most of the employees were rated almost on a similar scale. Thus the chances of giving actual feedback were rare. The very purpose of the performance evaluation process is to encourage the above-average performers and keep them motivated. For the average performers to indicate they are close enough to be recognized for their extraordinary work and highlight the areas of concerns. But in this case, due to uniform ranting, the actual results weren’t out.
The purpose of the performance management process is to ensure there is direct coordination between the performance of the employee and the compensation. In this case, however, there was no enough monetary reward for benchmark setter. Thus with no real compensation difference, performance management was no utility task.
2.2. Discuss the merits of Beta Group decision to de-emphasize annual reviews and focus more on ongoing performance measurement and feedback
As reviewed in the previous section the performance evaluation process has certain fundamental drawbacks that had to be immediately looked into for better results. Hence the process was investigated and revised. The step towards betterment was to discontinue the practice of annual evaluation and focus predominately on real-time performance. The managers were no more required to assess the employees on an annual basis rather evaluate them every month. The monthly evaluation has three major advantages. One, the managers will be no more burden to evaluate them at the end of the year thus pressurizing them to provide results within a limited time duration. Two, the evaluation process will become transparent and honest since the manager is ranking the employee on current performance with no mentionable time lag. Third, the employee is evaluated on a comprehensive basis rather than on selective performances.
The process was shifted from a paper and pen format to a simple Excel sheet that allowed managers to record their ratings every month. Due to the automation of compilation of data becomes easy and simple and eliminates human error. At the end of the year, the results from the monthly sheets are considered with an appropriate weightage.
Apart from the evaluation process, the particulars for evaluation too have evolved. The manager is no more required to rate the employees on limited parameters that might reflect on the actual performance. A wide variety of performance measurement areas were identified based on which the evaluation was carried out. Apart from this even qualitative comments and feedback were also given due relevance.