Performance Management 2.0: Inspiring Performance In Our Organizations
“To inspire performance rather than manage performance, we must give people something they can believe in”
The Management Innovation Exchange (MIX): Getting Performance Without Performance Management, November 2012 (www.managementexchange.com)
Typical Client Consultation Exchange – I recall a number of consultations with clients over the years to do with performance management (improvement). One in particular that comes to mind is with an executive who was puzzled about why their organization was under-achieving despite paying above-market salaries and providing excellent working conditions. After a brief exchange, the client pointed to their performance management process impressing upon me that they had invested a good deal of time and money following best practices. Indeed, they had made some significant changes such as conducting performance reviews quarterly instead of yearly and had sharpened how goals were defined with accountability indicators, etc. Yet, much to the amazement of this executive, performance was stagnant.
The above scenario/result is not uncommon and can be described as “Performance Management 1.0” characteristic of setting goals, monitoring, evaluating and rewarding performance. This involves dreaded performance reviews conducted by managers who hate conflict that are based on an assessment of whether performance targets are reached. Typically the process/programs are designed top-down in an effort to “manage” (control) behaviour/performance.
To be clear, my focus in this article is not to highlight bad performance management processes (although as we know there are plenty of those to go around). Rather, I wish to draw attention, based on my experience and also informed by the November 2012 Management Exchange piece I reference above, that even the best-in-class performance management processes (of which there are also many), have become an old and tired management technology in need of redesign if not re-invention. Organizations need to include business priorities typical of the Management 1.0 world of Performance Management yet transcend these to include a people focus to align with 21st Century workplace values. It is a “both/and” proposition.
The MIX article received contributions from business leaders, managers and professionals from around the world on the future of performance management and in particular on the question of “How can we get great performance without performance management?” One of the key observations/conclusions was:
“Competent and intelligent employees want to be led, not managed. The job of managers should be to create the conditions that allow great performance to take place. This usually means they should lead more and manage less.” (p.4)
A New Definition of Performance Management
Re-inventing Performance Management in accordance with a Management 2.0 world starts with the label itself. It turns out that in today’s workplace, performance “management” is read as “If we want good performance, we must manage you”. So MIX contributors submitted a number of new labels to replace “Performance Management”. Of those, Performance Coaching, Performance Engagement and Performance Enabling resonate most with me. I feel that these put the focus squarely on the need to create enabling conditions for a culture of high performance based on individual and organizational purpose, values & priorities.
Inspiring A High Performance Culture
The MIX review found that any strategy to replace performance management should take into account several key themes that will align with a Management 2.0 workplace environment. These are:
- A Deep Commitment to Purpose. Employees need a compelling reason to dedicate themselves fully to their role, team & organization. In essence, each employee needs to be able to answer “why am I here?”; “what is my fit?”; “how am I being allowed to contribute in ways that matter to me?”; “what do we stand for?”; “where are we going?”. The organization will need to provide compelling answers to these fundamental questions. To do so means inspiring people towards higher performance and the performance of the entire organization will soar.
- Greater Employee Autonomy. In 21st Century organizations, greater performance often is associated with delegating responsibilities for accomplishing outcomes rather than prescriptive procedures and policies underlying a command-and-control approach. People need to feel a sense of freedom to initiate change and try new things without fear of punishment for making mistakes. This of course does not mean relinquishing accountability for results; rather it is more of an opening to workforce intelligence and a healthy yielding to the desire to contribute in a more self-directed manner.
- An Open, Collaborative Culture. Most organizations control information in a way that the most (strategic) information is available in the executive suite and this dwindles down to very specific operational procedures and tasks by the time it reaches the front-line ranks. At that time, essentially “you do what you are told and what the job calls for”. Sounds rather regressive, you say! Take an honest look in your own organization. To what extent does your organization have an open and collaborative workplace culture—even for matters affecting strategic goals and direction? Openness inspires how people work together to drive performance; organizations that develop goals collaboratively inspire collective action towards a common purpose.
- Ongoing Dialogue & Feedack. We have come a long way from once-a-year performance reviews. Yet what is still lacking is a top-of-mind ongoing dialogue and feedback as a continuous performance-enhancing conversation between employees and manager(s). This enables real-time adjustments when things get off course. Further, these conversations are not just meant to be about the employee’s performance indicators but also more holistically about how things have been accomplished, the impact made to the organization’s purpose, etc. This shift will bring about a spirit of oneness and collective reason to why “my performance matters”.
- Self-Authoring & Self-Regulating. The traditional command-and-control approach has typically made performance management a top-down process where performance goals are discussed with employees but not generally co-created in a way that includes wider organizational considerations. At best, the co-creation dialogue is focused on the specific behaviours/targets that have already been identified by someone else as the “right” ones. So future performance “enabling” processes should be bottom-up as much as top-down (i.e., collaborative). More self-authoring and self-regulating allowance should be given to honour, encourage and leverage the creative intelligence that goes largely untapped especially in the workforce of the 21st Century.
- A Desire To Build Capabilities. “The conventional model of performance management puts too much emphasis on the performance indicators and not enough on the performer …. to inspire great performance, we must nurture it, not just evaluate it”. (p. 12) Traditional Performance Management practice has often focused on measuring an individual’s performance by comparing to a set of pre-established goals and performance indicators. But what would be the impact to the organization if as much effort was spent actually investing in the individual by building his/her performance capacities? What would this supportive commitment do for morale, engagement, initiative, turn-over and productivity? How might this approach and investment expand the organization’s overall flexibility, adaptability and competitiveness longer-term?
This is where the new label of Performance Coaching resonates. A coaching-based approach to building high-performance in individuals and teams and as a high-achieving corporate culture is being increasingly adopted. It is proving to be both good business from an ROI point of view as well as a good fit in meeting the values/priorities of today’s workplace. (Note: We have described and referenced the amazing ROI results in other articles/blogs and so we won’t repeat that information here. Please see www.businessintegral.com/why-conscious-leadership-is-the-new-management-imperative/ for clickable links to some of these studies.)
All told, it is possible and indeed advisable to shift from a focus on Performance “Management” to Performance “Enabling” Processes that are “Coaching”-Based in order to establish a more autonomous high performance culture that is more reliant on solid leadership than strict management. What is required is a “shift” in leadership mind-set and approach that is more inclusive and collaborative versus a command-and-control style of leadership. This “shift” is increasingly being adopted in a number of the leading organizations around the world with astounding results.
Are you ready to make the Shift?
Joseph Zepedeo, M.Sc. is founder and President of The Integral Business Leadership Group. He is an experienced leadership coach and consultant bringing about transformational change and development at the individual, team and organizational levels. As a highly skilled Leadership Coach, Joseph is passionate about helping people make the shift to a new way of leading for peak performance. He has been described as “an extremely intuitive, insightful and skilled coach”. Connect with Joseph on LinkedIn, Via emailor Twitter.