Hi guys,
I have this performance rating problem that giving me a headache for the last 3 months. As any other companies, mine is divided into two main functions: Core and Support. Production and Marketing is the Core while the rest such as Accounting, HR, IT, General Affair, and Purchasing is the Support.
We are going to set up a new performance appraisal system. We have set the KPIs and the next step is setting the rating system. This is when the problem started. The Core people believe that their performance cannot be rated in the same way with the Support staff. They believe as the money generator function they are entitled to have more than what the Support staff could have. They proposed a 5 scale rating (Excellent, Good, Fair, Need Development, Fail) for Core and a 3 scale rating (Good, Fair, Need Development) for the Support. This, of course, is refused by the Support functions as they believe that they work as hard as any other functions in the organizations therefore they don’t want to be differentiated. This situation has been going on for 3 months without any conclusion. As an HR officer, my Director asked me to seek for advices from outside the company.
Could anybody please assist me? Or share your experience? What is the best way to deal with Core vs Support issue?
THANK YOU.
Aris
From Indonesia, Jakarta
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
I have this performance rating problem that giving me a headache for the last 3 months. As any other companies, mine is divided into two main functions: Core and Support. Production and Marketing is the Core while the rest such as Accounting, HR, IT, General Affair, and Purchasing is the Support.
We are going to set up a new performance appraisal system. We have set the KPIs and the next step is setting the rating system. This is when the problem started. The Core people believe that their performance cannot be rated in the same way with the Support staff. They believe as the money generator function they are entitled to have more than what the Support staff could have. They proposed a 5 scale rating (Excellent, Good, Fair, Need Development, Fail) for Core and a 3 scale rating (Good, Fair, Need Development) for the Support. This, of course, is refused by the Support functions as they believe that they work as hard as any other functions in the organizations therefore they don’t want to be differentiated. This situation has been going on for 3 months without any conclusion. As an HR officer, my Director asked me to seek for advices from outside the company.
Could anybody please assist me? Or share your experience? What is the best way to deal with Core vs Support issue?
THANK YOU.
Aris
From Indonesia, Jakarta
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
ARIS,
THE PURPOSE OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
-IS NOT TO COMPARE DEPARTMENTS WITH DEPARTMENTS
-BUT FOR COMPARING DEPARTMENTS PERFORMANCE AGAINST
ITS OWN OBJECTIVES.
-REVIEW INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE AGAINST SET KEY PERFORMANCE
INDICATORS.
-CLASSIFICATION OF CORE / SUPPORT IS MEANT FOR
*SHOWING UNITS WHICH PRODUCES / MARKETS
*SHOWING UNITS WHICH PROVIDES SERVICES
-ALL ARE IMPORTANT FOR THE FUNCTIONING OF THE CO.
================================================== =========
Performance management is a principal tool in achieving corporate objectives in that it links those objectives with employee goals and achievements. It focuses on improving performance through matching outcomes against individual, team and organisational objectives, and to the training and development needs of employees at all organisational levels. Managers using performance management effectively are generally more concerned with performance planning and improvement than retrospective performance assessment.
Performance management is an accepted management practice operating within both public and private sectors because it can be a valuable process for employees and employers alike. It provides for both recognition of high performance and early detection of performance that is not meeting expectations, allowing prompt remedial action to be taken
At a macro level performance management assists organisations to match outcomes with objectives. It provides a system for improving CO. performance and outcomes, within the CO. policy framework, while maintaining good industrial relations. It generates benefits throughout organisational functions and processes.
Performance management recognises that people are the organisation’s most valuable resource, and that people are the key to an innovative, professional and service-oriented public service. Performance management emphasises the relationship between the management and development of people and an effective organisation, and provides a fair and equitable environment for improving performance.
A performance management system links achievements at all levels of the organisation with corporate, business and DEPARTMENT objectives. It provides the framework for:
· clarifying expectations, roles, responsibilities and resources required to achieve goals;
· improving communication and understanding between managers and employees in terms of work requirements, expectations, performance criteria and achievements;
· linking individual, team or unit performance with quality assurance, continuous improvement and evaluation processes of the organisation;
· facilitating, encouraging and assessing performance;
· encouraging structured feedback from employees and supervisors on performance and career planning and from the community on organisational performance;
· introducing an outcomes focused culture and increasing motivation;
· collecting data and information needed for management decision making or external review (eg by auditors);
· increasing the organisation’s capability to meet future requirements and to improve outcomes for the community;
· identifying performance which requires improvement; and
· recognising and acknowledging performance.
. The objectives of the PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL System are to:
Provide employees with a sense of their work accomplishments relative to expectations and predefined performance indicators.
Support employee development through discussion of assigned opportunities and training.
Emphasize the CO's commitment to continuous improvement and learning.
Encourage an appropriate relationship between pay levels and work performance.
Avoid surprises; keep lines of communication open.
Provide the option to document performance in a narrative format relative to specific accomplishments during the review period.
SO STICK TO 5 POINT SCALES FOR ALL DEPARTMENTS.
REGARDS
LEO LINGHAM
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
270THE PURPOSE OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
-IS NOT TO COMPARE DEPARTMENTS WITH DEPARTMENTS
-BUT FOR COMPARING DEPARTMENTS PERFORMANCE AGAINST
ITS OWN OBJECTIVES.
-REVIEW INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE AGAINST SET KEY PERFORMANCE
INDICATORS.
-CLASSIFICATION OF CORE / SUPPORT IS MEANT FOR
*SHOWING UNITS WHICH PRODUCES / MARKETS
*SHOWING UNITS WHICH PROVIDES SERVICES
-ALL ARE IMPORTANT FOR THE FUNCTIONING OF THE CO.
================================================== =========
Performance management is a principal tool in achieving corporate objectives in that it links those objectives with employee goals and achievements. It focuses on improving performance through matching outcomes against individual, team and organisational objectives, and to the training and development needs of employees at all organisational levels. Managers using performance management effectively are generally more concerned with performance planning and improvement than retrospective performance assessment.
Performance management is an accepted management practice operating within both public and private sectors because it can be a valuable process for employees and employers alike. It provides for both recognition of high performance and early detection of performance that is not meeting expectations, allowing prompt remedial action to be taken
At a macro level performance management assists organisations to match outcomes with objectives. It provides a system for improving CO. performance and outcomes, within the CO. policy framework, while maintaining good industrial relations. It generates benefits throughout organisational functions and processes.
Performance management recognises that people are the organisation’s most valuable resource, and that people are the key to an innovative, professional and service-oriented public service. Performance management emphasises the relationship between the management and development of people and an effective organisation, and provides a fair and equitable environment for improving performance.
A performance management system links achievements at all levels of the organisation with corporate, business and DEPARTMENT objectives. It provides the framework for:
· clarifying expectations, roles, responsibilities and resources required to achieve goals;
· improving communication and understanding between managers and employees in terms of work requirements, expectations, performance criteria and achievements;
· linking individual, team or unit performance with quality assurance, continuous improvement and evaluation processes of the organisation;
· facilitating, encouraging and assessing performance;
· encouraging structured feedback from employees and supervisors on performance and career planning and from the community on organisational performance;
· introducing an outcomes focused culture and increasing motivation;
· collecting data and information needed for management decision making or external review (eg by auditors);
· increasing the organisation’s capability to meet future requirements and to improve outcomes for the community;
· identifying performance which requires improvement; and
· recognising and acknowledging performance.
. The objectives of the PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL System are to:
Provide employees with a sense of their work accomplishments relative to expectations and predefined performance indicators.
Support employee development through discussion of assigned opportunities and training.
Emphasize the CO's commitment to continuous improvement and learning.
Encourage an appropriate relationship between pay levels and work performance.
Avoid surprises; keep lines of communication open.
Provide the option to document performance in a narrative format relative to specific accomplishments during the review period.
SO STICK TO 5 POINT SCALES FOR ALL DEPARTMENTS.
REGARDS
LEO LINGHAM
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You may use the following example to explain the same.
Say a European company wants to import watermelons or chikoos due to budget constraints. They sent their specifications for watermelons as well as chikoos. Watermelons should have this weight, this surface shine, this shade of green, etc. Chikoos should be soft, grown organically only, and have a radius/diameter between these values.
India sent our best samples of both. It was found that chikoos matched 98% of the criteria and watermelons 95%. Naturally, they decided to import chikoos. Did they compare chikoos with watermelons? No! They compared them against the targets for chikoos and targets for watermelons.
In all my experience, this tends to stem all further argument, discussion, or disagreement. Hope that helps. A
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Say a European company wants to import watermelons or chikoos due to budget constraints. They sent their specifications for watermelons as well as chikoos. Watermelons should have this weight, this surface shine, this shade of green, etc. Chikoos should be soft, grown organically only, and have a radius/diameter between these values.
India sent our best samples of both. It was found that chikoos matched 98% of the criteria and watermelons 95%. Naturally, they decided to import chikoos. Did they compare chikoos with watermelons? No! They compared them against the targets for chikoos and targets for watermelons.
In all my experience, this tends to stem all further argument, discussion, or disagreement. Hope that helps. A
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
Your technical people have confused two things. When you say rating the people performance, in this rating system is used to rate the performance of a person against the set KPI's. So support function will have their own KPI and core function will have their own KPI. At the end of the day, it is about checking whether KPIs are achieved or not.
Certain companies, after this performance evaluation, do additional ranking or grouping to bring some rationale for the systems linked with the PMS system like incentives, promotions, etc. The top-level performer is identified, and the remaining people are ranked from the top performer by a percentile system, where the top performer may receive more incentives compared to the next one.
Your core team may be pointing out that they want more incentives or different criteria for incentives compared to the support function, or the problem here may be the importance and incentives.
It would be beneficial to establish a standard system for all and present to convince employees to ensure successful implementation.
From India, Vadodara
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Your technical people have confused two things. When you say rating the people performance, in this rating system is used to rate the performance of a person against the set KPI's. So support function will have their own KPI and core function will have their own KPI. At the end of the day, it is about checking whether KPIs are achieved or not.
Certain companies, after this performance evaluation, do additional ranking or grouping to bring some rationale for the systems linked with the PMS system like incentives, promotions, etc. The top-level performer is identified, and the remaining people are ranked from the top performer by a percentile system, where the top performer may receive more incentives compared to the next one.
Your core team may be pointing out that they want more incentives or different criteria for incentives compared to the support function, or the problem here may be the importance and incentives.
It would be beneficial to establish a standard system for all and present to convince employees to ensure successful implementation.
From India, Vadodara
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
My view on your query is that you should have two different band structures and compensation structures, but the Performance Review form should remain the same. In an organization, it is not advisable to have different forms for different functions.
The rating criteria should be the same for core and support functions. For core teams, they have specific targets directly reflecting the organization's business, resulting in high pressure and corresponding high compensation (basic salary + incentives).
However, for support functions, core teams are the clients. Support teams facilitate core teams by ensuring smooth processes, timely rewards and recognitions, and conducting reviews promptly, among other tasks.
It is understandable that the support team may not receive the same compensation package as the core team.
You should emphasize that the support team plays an equal role in facilitating the core team's performance.
I hope you have understood the message I conveyed.
Regards,
Nishi
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
My view on your query is that you should have two different band structures and compensation structures, but the Performance Review form should remain the same. In an organization, it is not advisable to have different forms for different functions.
The rating criteria should be the same for core and support functions. For core teams, they have specific targets directly reflecting the organization's business, resulting in high pressure and corresponding high compensation (basic salary + incentives).
However, for support functions, core teams are the clients. Support teams facilitate core teams by ensuring smooth processes, timely rewards and recognitions, and conducting reviews promptly, among other tasks.
It is understandable that the support team may not receive the same compensation package as the core team.
You should emphasize that the support team plays an equal role in facilitating the core team's performance.
I hope you have understood the message I conveyed.
Regards,
Nishi
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Gathering data for an AI comment.... Sending emails to relevant members...
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 Appraisal Form for Staff.doc