More and more enterprises in China have realized the importance of performance management in their internal management practice, and invested more and more funds in the establishment of performance system. Some enterprises even invite external consultants to provide performance management consulting services. However, many enterprises find that a perfect system often cannot stand the test of practice, and some enterprises have problems in the implementation of the system. Finally, the human resources department and various departments lost confidence, and the assessment became a form. Even after it was implemented within the enterprise for a short period of time, it withdrew from the stage of history and was shelved and became a dead letter. This gap between reality and expectation makes many enterprises feel confused and confused about performance appraisal.
What is the core of the establishment and implementation of performance management system? How can we ensure the effective implementation of the system? How to ensure the consistency between the assessment orientation and the company's strategic objectives? Based on this problem, this paper puts forward the construction strategies of "two cores" and "four emphases" for the reference of senior managers and HR personnel.
Core 1: the "shape" of performance management: indicators and target system
The design of index system is the content system of performance appraisal in the usual sense, that is, "what to test", and the intuitive reflection is our performance appraisal form. It is the external form of performance appraisal, which mainly includes three key points: strategic decomposition and responsibility analysis, assessment index formulation, goal setting and grading.
The purpose of strategic decomposition and responsibility analysis is to extract the key value elements to measure the performance of companies, departments and employees, mainly to extract the key performance achievements of employees and the content of job evaluation in daily work behavior. Therefore, the formulation of indicators has two important sources of information, one is the strategic planning of enterprises, and the other is the job description of employees. Both are indispensable.
Before making assessment indicators, the assessment latitude should be determined. Different types of enterprises have different assessment latitudes. But generally speaking, indicators can be divided into job performance indicators and personal characteristics indicators if they are distinguished by indicator types. Performance indicators are indicators of employees' direct or indirect performance achievements, mainly including key performance indicators and work behavior indicators, which measure employees' work results and processes in a quantitative and qualitative way, while personal characteristics indicators mainly measure employees' personal qualifications and skills.
For the formulation of assessment indicators, in addition to the commonly mentioned indicators and assessment methods such as time, cost, risk and effect, this paper focuses on the solution of internal variables and external variables in the process of indicator formulation. When assisting some enterprises to draw up indicators, the author is usually asked the following two questions: "This indicator should not only measure my department/post" and "There is a lot of work here, and not every item can be assessed. How to evaluate? " In fact, this is the problem of external variables and internal variables encountered in index formulation, and it is also the difficulty in index formulation. Indicators of external variables, such as production yield and financial budget control, indicators of internal variables, such as timely order rate under multiple purchases and maintenance response speed under multiple devices.
When external variables affect the formulation of indicators, firstly, the measurement indicators within the scope of responsibilities are defined in combination with the split responsibilities of management processes; Secondly, the operability of index definition or calculation formula should be further scrutinized, and the influence of external variables on the initial scheme should be avoided by not counting or integrating; Third, measure the performance completion by evaluating the workflow related to the indicators.
When internal variables affect the formulation of indicators, the first method is to use fuzzy evaluation method, through the number of major mistakes, average completion rate, average timely rate and other indicators to evaluate. Needless to say, the advantages and disadvantages of this method mainly focus on the applicability of indicators. The second method is to use a relatively accurate assessment method, and subdivide the indicators through one-by-one assessment or internal classification, or even weight differences. No matter what method is adopted, the purpose is to ensure the practicability of the index.
The last key content is the setting and grading of goals. There are two important points to note. The first is the rationality of goal setting. Generally speaking, the goal setting standard mainly combines three factors: historical data, business plan and organizational development needs or requirements. Goal setting should be challenging, and the degree of achievement should be set above the basic goals that employees normally achieve. The second is the way of goal grading, the core of which is to take into account the flexible space achieved by different enterprise types or different work types. Generally speaking, most indicators are mainly based on deduction, but it does not rule out that some indicators can add points upwards. In addition, there are generally three ways of goal scoring, one is linear scoring, that is, directly calculating the goal achievement rate, the other is segmented scoring, and the result score is set according to the goal achievement interval, and the third is comprehensive scoring, which is a combination of the above two ways.
In the design of index and target system, strategic decomposition and responsibility analysis, assessment index formulation, target setting and grading are mutually progressive, and * * * together constitute the content system of performance appraisal, which is the "form" of performance management.
Core 2: the "soul" of performance management: evaluation procedure system
Whether the performance goal and system promotion can be realized depends not only on the content system of performance management, but also on the procedure system of performance management, that is, the way and process of performance management, which is the foothold and practical significance of performance management and the "God" of performance management.
The procedure system of performance management includes performance management process, implementation method, use of assessment results, linking performance with salary, performance improvement action plan, etc. Whether the performance management system can be implemented smoothly has a vital relationship with whether the procedural system is reasonable and perfect. Conventional contents and methods have been mentioned in many books and articles about performance management, so I won't repeat them here. Here I only elaborate from two important aspects: assessment scoring and result evaluation mechanism, assessment and salary system:
The first is about the assessment scoring and result evaluation mechanism. When it comes to the design and promotion of performance management system, the completion process of performance management system is generally from training, repeated communication and discussion, system design, trial operation, repeated revision to the implementation of third-party consulting companies or human resources departments. In this process, first, the basic work or basic management system of performance scoring should be able to keep up with the requirements of performance management, such as establishing relevant information files, regular inspection and feedback mechanisms. Second, we should fully publicize the concept of scoring and avoid subjective factors occupying a dominant position in evaluation. Thirdly, for the grading of assessment score results, there are generally ways such as direct sorting, forced distribution and moderate forced distribution by companies or departments. It is necessary to formulate the distribution scheme of assessment results according to the characteristics of the company's personnel, and leave an interface for the design of bonus scheme.
After the grading of assessment results is completed, the use of performance assessment results mainly involves employee salary, training development, position promotion and so on. Here only from the perspective of performance and salary. The link between performance appraisal results and employees' direct income is mainly reflected in two aspects, one is the salary adjustment result, and the other is the bonus payment. For salary adjustment, the standard of salary adjustment range or method can be formulated by establishing performance salary adjustment matrix. There are four kinds of bonuses: jump, straight, ladder and "S" type. According to the nature of the post and the incentive method, the corresponding bonus method is adopted. Leaping means that the bonus is paid in full or not according to whether the goal is completed or not. The linear model takes the proportion of the actual completion degree to the target as the coefficient, and combines the bonus base to calculate the total bonus. Ladder type is to combine the scoring standard of completion, set the corresponding bonus coefficient for the corresponding grade, and calculate the total bonus based on the bonus base. "S" type refers to the method of accelerating the growth of bonus coefficient and setting the final capping coefficient in different intervals of target achievement degree.
The design of evaluation procedure system pays attention to the combination of company culture, evaluation basis and post characteristics, and designs evaluation procedures that conform to the actual situation of the company, so as to ensure employees' acceptance and recognition of the content system and give play to the practical significance of the strategic-oriented performance management system.
Undoubtedly, the performance management system is a very effective management tool to improve the business performance of enterprises. However, in some enterprises, there is a phenomenon that performance appraisal is divorced from system and implementation. To sum up, the main reason is that there are many misunderstandings in the design and implementation of the performance appraisal system, so we should pay attention to prevention and avoidance.
First, the positioning of the performance management system should adapt to the business development stage of the enterprise.
The orientation of performance management is the key to reasonable system design and effective implementation. In the early stage of system design, enterprises often have high expectations and the system design is as perfect as possible, but it is too complicated in actual implementation, which leads to the increase of assessment cost and the actual assessment effect is not high.
Generally speaking, enterprises have different positioning of performance management in different cultural backgrounds and different stages of development. When the enterprise is in the initial stage and the company is small, the assessment method should be as simple and easy to operate as possible, and only some core positions can be directly evaluated or evaluated. In the development stage, the focus of enterprise internal performance management lies in the assessment of key performance results and working process, and the assessment objects are gradually oriented to all employees; For mature enterprises, performance management emphasizes the systematic and strategic guiding role of the assessment system itself.
Enterprises should adopt different evaluation strategies at different stages of development. For example, the evaluation of start-up enterprises should be based on the principle of simplicity, and the evaluation indicators can be mainly efficiency indicators, and the evaluation objects can also focus on positions directly related to enterprise benefits such as market and production; Enterprises in the development period need to consider establishing a relatively perfect assessment system. The assessment indicators are mainly benefit indicators and key management indicators, and the assessment objects can be market, production and some key management positions; Mature enterprises can pursue the systematicness and perfection of the assessment system, and the assessment indicators can give consideration to both benefit indicators and management indicators, and implement a performance management system covering every management and operation link. Therefore, in general, when establishing the performance management system, we should fully consider our own development stage and comprehensively weigh the assessment income and management cost, so that the performance management system can be implemented smoothly.
Second, avoid blindly relying on performance appraisal tools.
In recent years, the theoretical system of performance management system design has developed rapidly, and many new tools have appeared, such as KPI, BSC, EVA and so on. Each tool will bring some new ideas and management orientation to the enterprise, but it should also be pointed out that the tool itself represents the assessment methods and methods, and the purpose of performance management has not changed substantially. The content of performance appraisal is still the above-mentioned work performance and personal characteristics. The evaluation process is the same. It can be said that the performance management system is a part of the company's overall management system. If the management foundation of an enterprise is very weak and it is unable to do a good job in the statistics of basic information, then a tool like BSC, which requires high internal basic information or trace management, will only become a dead letter.
Therefore, when designing the performance appraisal system, enterprises should flexibly select specific appraisal tools and methods in full consideration of the characteristics of enterprises, fully analyze the applicable conditions of different tools, and do not blindly copy the system design methodology popular in other enterprises or outside.
Thirdly, the application of multi-dimensional performance appraisal results is the key to the sustainable and healthy implementation of performance management.
Generally speaking, performance appraisal results are mainly used for salary adjustment and bonus, position promotion, training development, improvement plan and other links. Among them, enterprises and employees mainly pay attention to salary adjustment and bonus distribution, that is, the way directly linked to the actual income of employees. Of course, this is related to the weak foundation of human resource management in many enterprises in China, but this method will also cause excessive sensitivity between the appraisers and the appraisees and misunderstanding of performance management itself. Thereby affecting internal culture and employee relations. Because the fundamental purpose of performance appraisal is not simply to adjust salary or pay bonuses, but to promote the realization of the overall goal of the enterprise through the improvement of employees' personal performance, and linking with salary is only an incentive means to ensure the realization of this goal.
Senior managers and employees of enterprises should re-recognize the purpose and significance of using performance appraisal results, and comprehensively use performance appraisal results in terms of job promotion, training development, performance interview and action improvement. Only in this way can we ensure the correctness of performance management orientation and achieve the actual implementation effect.
Fourthly, the design and implementation of performance management system is an integral and continuous movement within the enterprise.
At present, in the process of designing and implementing the performance management system, most enterprises have generally experienced the psychological acceptance process of never understanding, passive acceptance, gradual recognition and active improvement. The matching degree of performance management also has a gradual process. In the initial stage of system design, some business departments generally rely on consulting companies or human resources departments to implement system design, and even have unrelated thoughts or emotions. However, when the performance management system was put into trial operation or implementation, they began to complain that the system design was unreasonable and unrealistic. This is a common phenomenon in many enterprises.
We propose that in the process of designing and implementing the performance management system, all employees should participate and continue to advance like the 5S movement of manufacturing enterprises. There are two important aspects that need attention, emphasis and even publicity to inform all businesses and relevant departments of the company: First, full participation, full mobilization and mutual communication. Only in this way can the performance appraisal indicators finally be unanimously recognized; Second, the setting of performance appraisal indicators and targets is a process of continuous improvement. After the assessment content is initially set, new problems should be constantly discovered and put forward during the trial operation and implementation, and the performance assessment indicators and targets should be revised and improved at the beginning of the next performance assessment.
To sum up, enterprises should combine the design of "two cores" of performance management content system and procedure system, and at the same time combine the "four attentions" of system design and implementation concepts and methods to clarify the focus and core of assessment, correct the wrong assessment concepts and methods, and ensure the successful construction and effective implementation of strategic performance management system.