It is quite essential to state that the paper "Performance Management System Outcomes and Links to Other Management Functions" is an outstanding example of management coursework. A competitive business needs to be able to ensure the attraction, development and retention of productive employees (Dowling & Welch, 2008). Performance management involves the setting of joint goals, continuous review of progress, communication, coaching and feedback aimed at improved performance and employee development. A Performance Management System (PMS) consists of employee development and performance appraisal where there is the creation of job descriptions, performance indicators and standards, identification of training and development needs, evaluation of employees and establishment of effective reward systems (Mitchell, 2007).
This report explains the various issues and options regarding the adoption of a PMS. PMS Outcomes and Links to other Management Functions A PMS leads to the clarification of the expectations and responsibilities of everyone in the organization. In addition, it will enhance productivity at the individual and group levels. It will ensure the maximum development of employees through facilitating effective coaching and feedback measures. The PMS will provide a basis upon which effective decisions relating to human capital for instance pay structures can be made (Seiden & Sowa, 2011). For the PMS to be effective, all line managers need to have the skills, tools and understanding to manage their employees’ performance effectively.
According to Mitchell (2007), this is because it is no longer simply a tool for determining pay objectives, but rather extends to organizational issues such as management style, talent management and facilitation of change. A PMS, therefore, requires the cooperation of managers in all departments as they are in charge of the activities within their areas.
In case they consider performance management to be valuable in ensuring better management of their staff and achievement of objectives and targets, there is a greater likelihood of them being positive. There is currently a movement away from past performance management in which development-led structures were totally distinct from pay-led ones. There is also a blurring of the differences between usual HR functions such as training and development, rewards, recruitment and selection and performance management, and line managers recognize the need for an integrated way of handling performance.
The crafters of PMSs are also increasingly aware of its role, leading to its alignment with the strategic goals of non-Human Resource departments such as sales and marketing, finance, administration and operations management (Foot & Hook, 2008). Approaches to Performance Appraisal Rating Scales Here, the management will come up with a performance grading system. Its scale is applied in the evaluation of the employee’ s performance within various aspects, for instance, technical skills, communication and teamwork. There is the setting of a minimum score which employees have to meet if the appraisal is to be said to be successful.
Whoever does not attain the score will be referred to as a Performance Improvement Plan (Paladino, 2006). According to Armstrong & Baron (2005), rating scales are advantageous as they are standardized and structured. Ratings can, therefore, be compared and contrasted easily even across the entire organization. Every employee also undergoes the same rating and appraisal criteria and the same range of respondent feedback being provided. This leads to the enhancement of equal treatment among all the appraises, while also imposing standard measures that can be applied across the organization.
Lastly, the basic idea behind a rating scale is obviously sensible, as both the managers and employees for instance intuitively appreciate the efficient and simple logic behind a bipolar scale. Because of this, there is the likelihood of widespread popularity and acceptance hence effectiveness. The approach, however, has disadvantages, one of which relates to trait relevance. Paladino (2006) explains that within a fixed and standardized system, some traits will tend to be more relevant for some jobs as compared to others and it might, therefore, appear that a person lacks a certain trait while in the reality his job offers fewer opportunities for displaying the traits.
Rating scales also tend to have a systemic disadvantage as they try to cover all employee performance aspects. It is assumed that all the true performance indicators are included, yet this assumption is not provable as an individual’ s performance might rely on factors beyond them. A subject might, therefore, end up having a rating which is not a true reflection of his value.