Hi Readers,
In my opinion, HR's role towards PMS is facilitative only. HRs can design and structure the process, oversee the execution of the process by managers, assist managers with the conducting of appraisals, and arrange the paperwork thus generated to summarize the reports.
The best way in which HR can contribute towards effective PMS is when JDs are made clear, KRAs well defined, PMS system simplified by MCQs, standardizing responses and feedback from managers, strong coordination between managers, employees, and HR personnel involved in PMS for timely completion.
HRs have no involvement in the actual appraising of employees; this is best done by the line manager, supervisor, or colleague directly involved with the employee. Strengths and weaknesses related to work performance are best judged by those directly involved in the work. Training requirements, promotion suggestions are best decided by the line manager or team leaders depending on the confidence and capability assessed from work performance.
What HRs must do to make the PMS process effective and transparent is to make the forms and questionnaires objective to work performance, KRAs, or KPIs. For this to happen, HRs must know the processes of the business to a good extent. HRs must review the forms and questionnaires every year to update as per current scenarios.
HRs cannot object to the feedback of appraisers unless found to be extremely unreasonable; neither can HR influence or watch over every appraisal conducted. What HRs can ensure is timely completion of the appraisal process.
PMS is a broader concept that includes annual appraisal. HRs have to take care of summarizing and overseeing the implementation of appraisal results. That is:
- Revising salary increments as advised matching with budget,
- Revise organizational structure due to promotion and transfers,
- Revise Manpower plan and recruitment mandates due to the movement of employees,
- Arrange Training Programs as advised or recommended during appraisals,
- Miscellaneous paperwork related to this process.
Grievances or dissatisfaction of employees or managers over appraisals shall be handled by HRs by ensuring a transparent approach towards the complaints. In this situation, HRs can merely act as mediators or neutral party to both sides of complaints and record the outcomes objectively.
There has to be constant and non-intrusive exchange of information between all parties involved (Managers, employees, and management). HRs form the bridge between these parties. But in a real situation, HRs are seen as more biased towards management or managerial sides, whereas employees feel neglected and thus consider HRs as useless.
Employee satisfaction survey (ESS) once a year is a good way to get the feel of employees' mindset. However, this kind of surveys shall be done away from appraisal periods to avoid influenced responses. Also, conducting ESS once a year away from appraisal keeps the employees involved, motivated, as there is a feeling of care and being heard, and responses can be accurate without influence or fear of appraisals. Moreover, certain complaints can be resolved before appraisals are conducted, so several tools such as town hall meetings, ESS, complaint & suggestion box, etc.
If readers are wondering how this connects to PMS, my opinion is that PMS is all about managing performance; physically, mentally, and emotionally. Management takes various measures to drive performance in the company by facilities & resources, training & development, compensation & benefits, performance reviews, etc. This takes care of physical and mental abilities, but to drive performance to make emotionally satisfied employees, they need to be heard seriously.
Hope I have contributed positively to the discussion.