AbstractThis paper examines the issues and information available to NCEMA in making a choice of a performance management system to deploy within its organisation. Several different well-known types of performance management programs are first described, followed by an examination of how agencies similar to NCEMA approach the same task. The budgetary, organisational, and philosophical requirements of implementing a performance management system are presented, along with a sensible recommendation for NCEMA for its own program. IntroductionThe National Crisis and Emergency Management Authority (NCEMA) is the federal organisation of the United Arab Emirates responsible for co-ordinating and managing the government’s response to emergencies and disasters.
Coming under the authority of the National Security Council of the UAE, NCEMA is also charged with the development of a national policy regarding emergency response, training, and management of emergency personnel at all levels. (CEMC, 2007) Given these critical responsibilities, it is vital that NCEMA develop and implement a performance management program within its organisation, so that the leadership and people of the UAE can be assured that the agency to which they will turn in times of calamity is operating at the peak of its efficiency and effectiveness. 1.
Performance Management SystemsThe BNet Business Dictionary defines performance management as “the facilitation of high achievement by employees. ” (BNet, 2008) This definition, while rather glib, is actually very accurate. A performance management system is a system by which the performance of employees can be measured against a set of objective standards, for the purposes of identifying corrective actions – or by the same token, people or actions deserving special recognition and praise – to improve the performance of employees individually and collectively in relation to achieving the overall goals of the organisation.
Some of the different methods organisations can use to fulfill this task are summarised below. 1.1 An Overview of Performance Management SystemsBalanced Scorecard: A Balanced Scorecard is a very useful tool, because it is a way in which overall strategy can be expressed in specific, measurable terms. (Evans, EXINFM, 2002, and Kirkman, et al. , 2002) In general, the Balanced Scorecard defines objectives in terms of four indicators: Customer Perspective, Internal Processes, Learning and Growth, and Financial.
(DaPo, n.d. ) These indicators, however, can be modified to best suit the needs of the particular company to which the method is applied. Benchmarking: Benchmarking uses standard measurements within a particular industry to compare an organisation to similar ones. Benchmarking processes are commonly used in institutional settings such as schools and hospitals. Although it is usually thought of as a quality initiative best suited to judging an organisation’s overall performance, it can be modified to a degree. For example, benchmarking processes can be used to compare different departments within an organisation.
(Camp, 1995)Continuous Improvement: Combines a quality initiative with a performance management system by focusing on improving customer satisfaction through continuous evaluation and improvements to processes. Continuous improvement was popularised and used most successfully by Japanese companies, where the philosophy is known as “Kaizen”. (Kotelnikov, 2008)Total Quality Management (TQM): Total Quality Management treats every process within an organisation as one which has customer/supplier relationship with the processes before and after it. The process is a balance between continuous improvement and cost efficiency, and can be challenging to implement and use effectively.