In fact, the performance of employees is related to the whole enterprise, and performance management should be undertaken by department managers, individual employees and human resources departments. Establishing a high-performance corporate culture is an unshirkable responsibility from the top management to every employee. Without most department managers and all employees, the performance management system implemented by the human resources department alone is doomed to fail.
In performance management, the correct management mode is that the department manager is responsible for the performance results and the human resources department is responsible for the process.
The responsibility of human resources department is to establish the performance management system of the whole enterprise, including policies, processes and tools.
Managers of functional departments must be ultimately responsible for the performance of their departments and employees.
Employees should not be bystanders of performance management.
Performance management is related to the vital interests of employees, and employees should actively participate in every step of performance management.
Practice has proved that only managers, employees and human resources departments actively participate in performance management can we achieve the greatest goal and achieve a win-win situation.
Performance management should consider the characteristics of the enterprise itself.
According to the characteristics of small private enterprises, this paper focuses on ten problems that should be avoided in doing a good job in performance management of small private enterprises.
Performance management has become a hot topic in China.
Multinational companies have always attached importance to performance management, so it is needless to say.
Domestic enterprises, whether state-owned enterprises or small private enterprises, are beginning to realize the importance of performance management.
Although some enterprises are still hesitant about whether to improve their performance, many enterprises have begun to introduce the concept and practice of performance management in various ways, establish a performance management system, implement performance management and measurement, and some enterprises have achieved initial results.
Compared with state-owned enterprises, especially small private enterprises, it has its own particularity, which can be summarized as follows: key positions are familial, and decision-making power and management right are relatively concentrated; The work efficiency is low, and the initiative and enthusiasm of employees can not be fully exerted; The employment standards of enterprises often change frequently because of one thing, and enterprises lack cohesion; The comprehensive quality of middle managers is low; Employees lack a sense of security and identity with the enterprise, and both employers and employees are wary of each other.
Without paying attention to these differences of small private enterprises, it is difficult to carry out performance management and play its due role. In order to do a good job in performance management, small private enterprises should pay attention to the following issues: unify their understanding and clarify the purpose of improving performance management, which is often confused with "performance appraisal" or even equated.
When it comes to performance appraisal, I think of grading, and then rewards and punishments are clear (even only punishment is not awarded), resulting in inexplicable fear and involuntary resistance.
In fact, performance management is a management system, and performance appraisal is just the tip of the iceberg.
To make performance management truly effective, any link can not be ignored.
Generally speaking, performance management includes four links: performance plan, performance appraisal, performance feedback and performance improvement, forming a circular process, and then returning to performance plan after performance improvement, thus forming a virtuous circle of performance management.
Moreover, assessment is not the same as scoring and giving bonuses.
Of course, it is indeed an important purpose of the performance appraisal to score employees' performance through performance appraisal, and then link the performance score with wages, especially the monthly, quarterly, semi-annual or annual bonuses of employees to reward diligence and punish laziness.
However, the goal of performance appraisal is multiple. In addition to the above methods, excellent employees can also be motivated by other methods, such as public praise and promotion.
The evaluation results can be more widely used in human resource management systems such as employee recruitment, training, development and promotion.
Through performance appraisal, it is clear whether the employees recruited by the enterprise are the talents that the enterprise really needs to achieve its strategic goals; Through performance appraisal, we can find the gap between the knowledge and skills of employees and the knowledge and skills needed by enterprises to achieve strategic goals, so as to make training and development plans.
Therefore, before doing performance management, we should clarify our own understanding, eliminate the fear caused by unclear concepts and objectives, and clear the obstacles for the later work.
[! Imperial news. Page-] Doing the basic job description of performance management well is the basic point of performance management and one of the achievements of organizational design. It is an important basis for setting performance appraisal indicators. Without job descriptions, some performance management can only be empty talk, pale and powerless.
However, due to the influence of their own characteristics, small private enterprises often ignore this basic work, and the responsibilities of each post are limited to verbal agreement and habit maintenance, lacking a clear definition.
If this basic work is not done solidly, you will feel at a loss and will eventually rework it.
Therefore, it is necessary to make a scientific and serious investigation and analysis of each post before doing it, so as to obtain as quantitative scientific and reliable data as possible and form a post analysis standard.
The whole job analysis itself is a scientific system, a system, which can be used for performance management, job change, employee recruitment and training, and can also provide information related to salary management, which is an important basis for job evaluation to determine job value.
We can't cover everything, but we must grasp the key performance indicators. Compared with state-owned enterprises and small private enterprises, we do not have the advantages of talents and management, and the basic management of enterprises is not solid. Therefore, we must be very careful when choosing performance appraisal indicators.
There are many indicators that can be used for assessment. Enterprises should find performance goals that can drive value creation and judge their impact on enterprises.
A comprehensive and detailed measurement index will not only increase the management cost and distract the attention of managers and employees, but also confuse the use of employees because of its complexity.
This is another place that small private enterprises need to pay attention to.
When there is no assessment, the enterprise is in a state of no indicators. When it comes to assessment, unfortunately, all aspects that can be thought of cannot be taken into account. Otherwise, I am afraid it will not be "comprehensive".
KPI is a key performance indicator to measure the implementation effect of enterprise strategy, and its purpose is to establish a mechanism to transform enterprise strategy into internal processes and activities, so as to continuously enhance the core competitiveness of enterprises and achieve high efficiency.
KPI effectively transforms the enterprise strategy into an assessable standard and performance system, and draws and pushes employees through the performance system, closely combining employees' behavior with the enterprise strategy.
Pay attention to the relevance and consistency of indicators. Whether it is a small private enterprise or a state-owned enterprise, when formulating assessment indicators, each position is often considered separately, and the overall balance is not made after completion. As a result, when the assessment indicators and standards are implemented, it is found that they are not uniform or even contradictory, and it is impossible to do so at all.
In fact, the assessment indicators of different positions will also show strong relevance because of their relevance in the organizational structure. If the direction is inconsistent, there will be opposition and contradiction between indicators.
For example, in the assessment of trainers, the actual performance of enterprise students will become one of the assessment indicators of trainers, because the performance of students can reflect the performance of trainers. Therefore, the assessment indicators of enterprise trainees and trainers should have the same direction, so that they will have the same benefits because of the correlation of indicators.
One-sided pursuit of index quantification There is a general trend in performance appraisal: blindly pursuing index quantification, thinking that only quantification can guarantee fairness and avoid the deviation caused by subjective assumptions.
In fact, not all performance measures need to be quantified, and it is impossible to quantify them all.
Management is both science and art, and the idea that everything should be quantified is unrealistic at best.
According to different positions and positions, we should choose the indicators that can best reflect the work performance, and it is best to turn energy into energy. If it is not suitable for quantification, there is no need for hard quantification. For example, work attitude is difficult to quantify, but it is essential in employee appraisal, and it cannot be rejected because it cannot be quantified.
We can measure it in a multi-angle way, through the assessment of superiors, colleagues and subordinates who have work contact with it.
Fully communicate and avoid rigid decentralization of indicators. The setting of performance indicators is decomposed from top to bottom, from the overall goal of the company to the goal of the division, and then to the departments and posts.
In the top-down decomposition process, managers at each level need to "communicate" the indicators and targets to the next level.
The assessed party needs to put forward opinions and suggestions according to the decomposed indicators and objectives and the actual situation.
These opinions and suggestions sometimes raise objections to the indicators and objectives, and sometimes support and demand the resources needed to complete the decomposition of indicators.
The "communication" in the process of setting performance indicators is simple and clear, but 80% companies can't really communicate with the assessed party, exchange information and solve problems, but turn this process into a rigid decentralization indicator, and the assessed party has no right to speak, even if it has doubts about the indicators, it still has to bear it.
Indicators that fail to reach * * * knowledge are not motivating, and the operability will be greatly reduced without the active support of the assessed.
In small private enterprises, due to the low sense of identity of employees, "communication" in the process of setting performance indicators is particularly important.
The most fundamental purpose of attaching importance to performance feedback analysis and improving performance management is to continuously improve the performance of employees and enterprises and establish a lasting competitive advantage in an increasingly fierce competitive environment.
Only do the assessment without feedback results, it is not clear where the assessment is good and how to continue to improve it; The poor evaluation is even more puzzling, and I don't know where the difference is.
In this way, the assessment loses its important functions of encouragement, reward and punishment and training.
This is a place that many enterprises easily overlook.
The way of feedback is mainly performance interview.
For employees with poor performance, it is very sensitive, because the conversation is crucial and related to the follow-up reward and punishment measures.
Therefore, the performance interview should focus on the performance results, do not blame and investigate the responsibilities and faults of employees, and try not to be threatening.
Secondly, be specific, don't make a general and abstract evaluation, but come up with concrete results to support the conclusion, quote data and list examples.
Finally, through two-way communication, find out the reasons for poor performance and make corresponding improvement plans.
Putting the assessment results into the reward, for various reasons, although the "vigorous" performance appraisal is over, it is often not fulfilled or fully realized in the reward, and many enterprises have such problems.
In doing so, let alone performance management, even the level of performance appraisal.
However, this is far from enough to cash in the rewards. A considerable number of managers will think that I have paid the bonus and employees should know how to do it, but in fact, the changes they expect to see in the actual work performance of employees in the next assessment period will not appear automatically.
Therefore, cash reward can play a dual role, one is to affirm employees' past performance and stimulate their sense of accomplishment, the other is to clarify the direction and focus of performance improvement in the next assessment period and give suggestions.
When it comes to the generalization of performance management, people often think that this is the work of human resources departments and should play a leading role. In fact, the performance of employees is related to the whole enterprise, and performance management should be undertaken by department managers, individual employees and human resources departments. Establishing a high-performance corporate culture is an unshirkable responsibility from the top management to every employee. Without most department managers and all employees, the performance management system implemented by the human resources department alone is doomed to fail.
In performance management, the correct management mode is that the department manager is responsible for the performance results and the human resources department is responsible for the process.
The responsibility of the human resources department is to establish the performance management system of the whole enterprise, including policies, processes and tools.
Managers of functional departments must be ultimately responsible for the performance of their departments and employees.
Employees should not be bystanders of performance management.
Performance management is related to the vital interests of employees, and employees should actively participate in every step of performance management.
Practice has proved that only managers, employees and human resources departments actively participate in performance management can we achieve the greatest goal and achieve a win-win situation.
Proper adjustment of organizational structure and optimization of management process must be recognized by managers and employees. After the introduction of a performance management scheme, the scheme can not be well implemented, or even failed, because some knowledge and guarantee things in the enterprise have not been established, such as unreasonable post setting and unclear process.
These positions that have not been streamlined and cumbersome processes will all create obstacles to the realization of performance goals.
Sometimes, even if a performance appraisal system is established, it is impossible to establish an appraisal system because of unreasonable organizational structure and unsmooth management process. At this time, we must first do a good job of adjustment and optimization to further clear the obstacles.
Finally, I think the effect of performance management implementation reflects the spirit of an enterprise.
"Management depends on planning and management depends on assessment". There are only two words in management: rewards and punishments. The effect of rewards and punishments depends on the management skills and leadership of front-line managers.
As a lecturer who focuses on the training of middle-level management cadres, Chang Song Consulting found that enterprises are prone to some problems in middle-level training: First, they pay more attention to courses than systems.
In China, few enterprises have established a complete training system for middle-level cadres.
On the surface, some enterprises have established a training system for junior, middle and senior managers, but a closer look at their curriculum system is basically a bunch of courses in the market: those who have money invite Central Europe and cheung kong graduate school of business, those who have no money invite Peking University and Tsinghua, and those who pay attention to efficiency invite teachers in the industry.
In the whole training plan, we can't see the characteristics of the company. This training plan can be applied to other companies in the industry.
The second is to emphasize skills over strategies.
In the process of training, the author found that the training for middle-level enterprises is basically centralized and closed, which will last for about 5 days. Generally, there are several teachers in class, but unfortunately there are basically no teachers in the enterprise to teach, and even if there are, they just tell the middle-level about the company's corporate culture.
This brings two results: first, with the increase of training, there are more and more management concepts of middle managers, but these concepts may not be systematic.
And before the first concept was digested in my mind, the latter concept came again. In the end, the middle level only mastered the accumulation of concepts, but did not know how to use them in the work.
Another result is: in the training process, there is a lack of high-level investment in enterprise strategy, and the middle-level only learns management skills, so it is impossible to systematically think about problems and carry out technological innovation and management innovation from the strategic objectives of enterprises.
In this way, the training only improves the management ability and skills of middle managers, but does not help them to closely integrate with the company's strategy, and the overall view and overall awareness are greatly reduced.
The third is to emphasize training and ignore elimination.
There are few internal mobility mechanisms and elimination mechanisms. Generally speaking, the management positions of enterprises are impeccable, and cadres can be promoted or mixed, but they cannot be removed from office. The middle management positions are used smoothly, and there is no relevant demotion and elimination mechanism.
In this way, the people who attend the middle-level training every year are basically those people, and there are always a few problems. Of course, there will be no new changes in the training courses. Middle managers have no passion for training, and they don't see the possibility of stepping down. The study pressure is naturally less, and the training effect can be imagined.
This is also an important reason why middle-level training is difficult to do.