Hi, I'm Elanco, working as Deputy General Manager, HR for a very reputed company in Pune. We are trying hard to make Performance Management System (PMS) more effective so that a performance culture prevails in the organization. We find that job descriptions (JD) and Key Result Areas (KRA) are very routinely written and do not reflect the organizational requirements. Now the task is how to educate the people on the system?
An informal interaction with a cross-section of staff reveals that they don't have faith in the system. "I am doing my job, why should I put it on paper again? I don't know why I have not been promoted." Such reactions are common.
My CEO says, as an HR professional, you should ensure that JDs and KRAs are written properly and should look more meaningful. So, I am just taxing my brain on how to handle this issue. Any suggestions or similar experiences, please share.
With regards,
Elanco
Email: appanelanco@yahoo.com
From United States, Columbus
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
An informal interaction with a cross-section of staff reveals that they don't have faith in the system. "I am doing my job, why should I put it on paper again? I don't know why I have not been promoted." Such reactions are common.
My CEO says, as an HR professional, you should ensure that JDs and KRAs are written properly and should look more meaningful. So, I am just taxing my brain on how to handle this issue. Any suggestions or similar experiences, please share.
With regards,
Elanco
Email: appanelanco@yahoo.com
From United States, Columbus
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello, Sir.
I am unsure of my expertise in this area since my experience is definitely expected to be lesser than yours. :)
From the post, what I did derive was "there is a misalignment in the objectives of the organization and individuals."
To make the organization successful, the top-down approach is seemingly appropriate from the point of view of defining objectives. The process could be:
1. Define the organizational objectives (profit, market share, etc.)
2. Break the strategic objectives into measurable and operational units - this is the scorecard for the Business Unit or Functional Heads.
3. Further cascade the unit/functional objectives to individual objectives.
This exercise would result in a meaningful alignment of organizational and individual objectives, and the employees feel the contribution as well.
Coming to the PMS aspect - I am not sure if the PA process followed in your organization. The most critical aspect of a PA would be defining KRAs and measurable indicators which are quantitative to the greatest extent possible.
How are the KRAs defined? Are they decided mutually between the role holder and his appraiser? Or is it a mere top-down approach whereby the sheet of paper goes into the hands of the role holder? An illustration for an HR manager is given below:
Performance Criteria
- ESS is conducted as an organization diagnosis step and results analyzed.
- Retention rate of a minimum of 80% to be achieved.
- Employee engagement to be increased by 30% more than the last year.
- Completion of 2 mandays of training for each employee.
- Compensation survey to be done to benchmark the compensation structure and relevance.
- HR cost to be maintained 5% less than the budget approved.
Measure / Formula for the corresponding KRAs
- Before Feb 25, 2005
- Attrition rate computation.
- Engagement Survey to be completed by Feb 2005.
- Employee/training matrix - calendar.
- Survey to be completed before Feb 2005.
- Cost budget comparison.
JDs and KRAs should necessarily reflect the relevance of the role and its relevance to the organization. The methodology could be:
1. Senior management meeting discussing and deciding the objectives.
2. Cascading the objectives to the next levels.
3. Goal-setting session is carried out for the managers and the next immediate levels (how to set the goals based on the organization or unit level objectives).
4. Role holder and appraiser sit together and jointly decide what is expected out of them, including competencies.
Unless the role holder agrees to achieve the objective, we can't make them accountable, to which their engagement is very essential.
This may seem more like an academic posting, but this proves to be the basis on which you can build the blocks, according to me.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
3I am unsure of my expertise in this area since my experience is definitely expected to be lesser than yours. :)
From the post, what I did derive was "there is a misalignment in the objectives of the organization and individuals."
To make the organization successful, the top-down approach is seemingly appropriate from the point of view of defining objectives. The process could be:
1. Define the organizational objectives (profit, market share, etc.)
2. Break the strategic objectives into measurable and operational units - this is the scorecard for the Business Unit or Functional Heads.
3. Further cascade the unit/functional objectives to individual objectives.
This exercise would result in a meaningful alignment of organizational and individual objectives, and the employees feel the contribution as well.
Coming to the PMS aspect - I am not sure if the PA process followed in your organization. The most critical aspect of a PA would be defining KRAs and measurable indicators which are quantitative to the greatest extent possible.
How are the KRAs defined? Are they decided mutually between the role holder and his appraiser? Or is it a mere top-down approach whereby the sheet of paper goes into the hands of the role holder? An illustration for an HR manager is given below:
Performance Criteria
- ESS is conducted as an organization diagnosis step and results analyzed.
- Retention rate of a minimum of 80% to be achieved.
- Employee engagement to be increased by 30% more than the last year.
- Completion of 2 mandays of training for each employee.
- Compensation survey to be done to benchmark the compensation structure and relevance.
- HR cost to be maintained 5% less than the budget approved.
Measure / Formula for the corresponding KRAs
- Before Feb 25, 2005
- Attrition rate computation.
- Engagement Survey to be completed by Feb 2005.
- Employee/training matrix - calendar.
- Survey to be completed before Feb 2005.
- Cost budget comparison.
JDs and KRAs should necessarily reflect the relevance of the role and its relevance to the organization. The methodology could be:
1. Senior management meeting discussing and deciding the objectives.
2. Cascading the objectives to the next levels.
3. Goal-setting session is carried out for the managers and the next immediate levels (how to set the goals based on the organization or unit level objectives).
4. Role holder and appraiser sit together and jointly decide what is expected out of them, including competencies.
Unless the role holder agrees to achieve the objective, we can't make them accountable, to which their engagement is very essential.
This may seem more like an academic posting, but this proves to be the basis on which you can build the blocks, according to me.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Rajesh,
Thank you for your response. It's true that the objectives should be well defined, and individuals' job descriptions (JD) and key result areas (KRA) must be in line with the organization's objectives. In our company, KRAs are discussed and decided upon by both the job holder and the reporting officer.
However, it is felt that the system is not transparent and does not result in a "visible" reward or award. Additionally, there is a lack of periodic communication. The concepts of JDs and KRAs are not very clear, leading to confusion among people. These issues are some of the root causes of the current state of affairs.
Thank you once again for your time and interest in responding to my post. Keep sharing.
With regards,
Elanco
From United States, Columbus
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you for your response. It's true that the objectives should be well defined, and individuals' job descriptions (JD) and key result areas (KRA) must be in line with the organization's objectives. In our company, KRAs are discussed and decided upon by both the job holder and the reporting officer.
However, it is felt that the system is not transparent and does not result in a "visible" reward or award. Additionally, there is a lack of periodic communication. The concepts of JDs and KRAs are not very clear, leading to confusion among people. These issues are some of the root causes of the current state of affairs.
Thank you once again for your time and interest in responding to my post. Keep sharing.
With regards,
Elanco
From United States, Columbus
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
Elanco, I think the problem you face in your organization is quite rampant. I believe that communication is the key in such situations. Although I have very less experience compared to yours, I think the problem arises when an employee speaks of appraisals only during March and there is no follow-up for the rest of the year. Hence, a bi-annual appraisal system is better.
Also, there needs to be feedback on performance at more frequent intervals. Also, training top executives/managers to understand the PA system is a must since the confusion begins from there and is passed along.
That's a broad feedback. Hope it helps you in some manner though.
Regards,
Shefali
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Elanco, I think the problem you face in your organization is quite rampant. I believe that communication is the key in such situations. Although I have very less experience compared to yours, I think the problem arises when an employee speaks of appraisals only during March and there is no follow-up for the rest of the year. Hence, a bi-annual appraisal system is better.
Also, there needs to be feedback on performance at more frequent intervals. Also, training top executives/managers to understand the PA system is a must since the confusion begins from there and is passed along.
That's a broad feedback. Hope it helps you in some manner though.
Regards,
Shefali
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Elanco,
It appears to me that in order to educate and break down the resistance to this HR process, your organization may indeed be looking at a change management model (process) to affect a change in attitude/behavior. This is assuming your job description (JD) and Key Result Areas (KRAs) processes are solid.
See www.jemmconsultants.com
Director,
JeMM Consultants
From Canada, Ottawa
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It appears to me that in order to educate and break down the resistance to this HR process, your organization may indeed be looking at a change management model (process) to affect a change in attitude/behavior. This is assuming your job description (JD) and Key Result Areas (KRAs) processes are solid.
See www.jemmconsultants.com
Director,
JeMM Consultants
From Canada, Ottawa
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi there,
I saw your email and am going through a similar situation here, but do not overtax your brain too much. There is a simple way of doing this. I have also faced similar comments from overworked, disgruntled employees, albeit not directly (I learned about it indirectly from a third person). Anyway, that is secondary.
a. Design a simple job description (JD) in a format easily understood by the respective employee.
b. After doing this, sit with the respective department head and explain to him the importance of the exercise and its significance. Don't rush him, but set a deadline by a particular date.
c. You might encounter comments like, "Oh, this looks like the job format of another department." Immediately inform him that if that is the case, he can make the necessary changes to suit his department. For example, I work for a shipping company with various departments like Shipping, Cargo, Liner, Finance, Insurance, Warehousing, etc. I resolved this issue when faced with a similar problem.
d. Once you have set the ball rolling, as soon as the job descriptions start coming in (they should only reach you after the respective department head approves and signs them), you can keep one copy in the personal file and another copy in a file organized by department for easy reference.
I may not have as much experience as you do, sir, but please do revert if you find my suggestions worthwhile.
Thank you.
Regards,
Sadashiv Rao :)
From Kuwait, Kuwait
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I saw your email and am going through a similar situation here, but do not overtax your brain too much. There is a simple way of doing this. I have also faced similar comments from overworked, disgruntled employees, albeit not directly (I learned about it indirectly from a third person). Anyway, that is secondary.
a. Design a simple job description (JD) in a format easily understood by the respective employee.
b. After doing this, sit with the respective department head and explain to him the importance of the exercise and its significance. Don't rush him, but set a deadline by a particular date.
c. You might encounter comments like, "Oh, this looks like the job format of another department." Immediately inform him that if that is the case, he can make the necessary changes to suit his department. For example, I work for a shipping company with various departments like Shipping, Cargo, Liner, Finance, Insurance, Warehousing, etc. I resolved this issue when faced with a similar problem.
d. Once you have set the ball rolling, as soon as the job descriptions start coming in (they should only reach you after the respective department head approves and signs them), you can keep one copy in the personal file and another copy in a file organized by department for easy reference.
I may not have as much experience as you do, sir, but please do revert if you find my suggestions worthwhile.
Thank you.
Regards,
Sadashiv Rao :)
From Kuwait, Kuwait
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Join Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
Performance Management System.doc