Performance management has been one of those practices that has stood the test of time. Its principles and main focus areas have remained the same, although its practices have changed to fit itself to the changing requirements of the workplace and mainly the workforce. However some have not still parted ways from certain traditional methods that have become obsolete over the years with the changing generational workforce fluctuations. Which is why research suggest only 8% of companies think their appraisal process provides value to the organisation & employees. And why Deloitte reports of 89% changing their performance management process this year, or planning to change it within the next 18 months. To the rest who still have not thought of a change, here is a rundown of the past to the present to know why a change is really needed.
The 40s
The highly debated upon practice of annual performance reviews originated in the 1940s, where most organisations used appraisals to monitor and keep documented track of employee performance on an individual basis. The high performers were allocated rewards whereas the underperformers were penalized with transfers or terminations.
The 50s, 60s and the 70s
The main focus of the 60s came from the development of companies that encouraged many to add more depth to the entire process. Accountability and growth became areas that were focused on, although certain changes in the economic atmosphere hindered continuous growth.
This was also the time where the Theory Y approach was introduced to the world by Douglas McGregor where it encouraged goal setting as a part of the performance process. Employees and the management were assigned goals that were directly connected to the strategies of the organisation, to drive higher potential and motivate employees to achieve career objectives, and find determination in other areas apart from the materialistic rewards systems.
The 80s
The introduction of forced ranking came into the picture in this period, when Jack Welch of General Electric had mastered it in the civilian workplaces. This took the spotlight back from development to the accountability as a performance management focus.
Forced ranking was introduced initially during World Ward II, where employees were categorized into best and worst performer. Person to person comparisons began in the hopes of refining the workforce collectively. This became a practice that raised competition among employees instead of collective collaboration. Although this has both negative and positive attributes and are still in use within organisations as a performance mechanism.
The 90s
Here begins the talent war, where organisations started to believe that some employees were more talented than others. Those identified were rewarded and encouraged to continue increasing the efforts. Employee engagement also came into the picture during this period and had a strong hold all the way in to the 2000s. Performance reviews were a part of the practice, concerning accountability and rewards. Although over time these practices were changed to adapt to the shifting needs of the growing workforce requirements.
Present Day
Today, things have evolved, changed to accommodate generational gaps, workforce requirements and other changing variables of business productivity. Most of the processes of the past had a large paper trail and an even bigger amount of time and effort spent on an annual performance review. Although with the introduction of technology, specifically HRIS, things have changed for the better. New practices have greater room to grow with very little energy consumption from the employees of the HR department. Old ghosts may never leave but they linger on with the living and growing changes that make the process more efficient and effective. The PeoplesHR Performance Management feature can help with the old and the new. Better yet, it paces in to the future with its unique characteristics that are developed to grow with the organisation.
