Since I provide consulting services on Performance Management System (PMS), I read the article avidly. My observations are as below:
a) In the above post, you have written that Annual appraisals have failed to deliver the desired outcomes and companies no more find them effective.
Comments: - This is a sweeping statement. Success or failure of appraisals depends on the faulty process or organisation's maturity. PMS is a too serious business and it will obviously weigh down on the immature organisations.
b) In the main article it is written that The main purpose of a performance review is to motivate employees to effectively contribute towards company’s goals.
Comments: - I strongly disagree with the statement. What is the use of that motivation if organisation does not perform? There are good number of examples wherein employees are motivated and that is why they stick to the organisation also but organisation languishes. Going further, how to measure motivation of the employee? Without measurement, perception will play huge role in assessing the motivation of the employee. Therefore, should we move to a process that is motivation based?
c) The second paragraph reads Amidst all this chaos, only one thing that is giving a ray of hope – the redesign of the performance management process! Re-engineering performance management is like putting all pieces of the employee development puzzle in a way that makes it complete, removing all inefficiencies and shortcomings.
Comments: - On what basis author of the article has reached the conclusion that there is chaos? Management science has been developing for the last 100+ years. Does the author mean to say that notwithstanding research by the management thinkers, all that we could get was "chaos"? Are we still there where we were 100 years before? The author could have been little thoughtful while choosing his/her words!
d) Heading of the penultimate paragraph is What Changes Do We Perceive?. In this paragraph, seven points are given on which changes are expected in 2017.
Comments: - All these points were applicable in 2016 or even previous years. Who has done research to prove that all of a sudden these points have acquired importance?
Final comments: - My objective was not to dissect the article. However, it merited critical review, hence my above views.
From India, Bangalore