Performance Management System (PMS) entails an approach employed in measuring employees’ performance within an organization by aligning goals and objectives with the available resources. A useful PMS should focus not only on the past but also on the prospects of an organization (mmm). The given system comprises of employees in a call center whose functionality depends significantly on productivity. This paper will elucidate the expected reaction by the employees to the electronic monitoring, discuss alternative performance measures, and shed light on the applicable data gathering methods on these measures.
Employees’ Reaction to the Electronic Monitoring
Monitoring is arguably a sensitive concern to the management, especially in call centers. It is vital to understand how the organization monitors its employees to comprehend the results of such an implementation fully. Fundamentally, electronic monitoring (EM) is a task executed by supervisors who can review call recordings or listen to them as they occur. There exist several approaches to understanding the impacts of this performance measure, most of which revolve around the perspectives offered in psychology. Bhave (2014) argues that electronic monitoring can be likened to the physical presence of a superior officer at the workplace. While the prevalence of the approach leads to a considerable rise in job performance, its excessive application may raise fairness and autonomy concerns, thereby hindering employees’ motivation.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Further, privacy concerns exist, which may be detrimental to the ultimate productivity of workers (Moussa, 2015). As mentioned above, electronic monitoring aims at achieving maximum productivity; thus, employees are denied any access to social media or distractions such as personal phone calls. Some EM systems may also be able to track the inline activities of employees, which can be construed as an infringement to privacy. Nonetheless, one can argue that the management’s need to monitor the operations within an organization takes precedence of workers’ entitlement to privacy. Thus, what could be considered illegal and unethical is tracking employees without their knowledge and consent.
Other Effective Performance Measures
Notwithstanding the benefits of electronic monitoring as a performance measure in the call center, the model has some negative implications on the motivation of workers; hence, the necessity to seek alternatives. Other tests that the organization could employ include (but are not limited to) setting tasks with deadlines, regular view of team/individual activities and initiating end of day report summaries.
Setting tasks with deadlines is not only an effective alternative to EM but also a countermeasure to a lax attitude that is apparent in most organizations. The approach involves assigning projects to teams and giving them due dates and regular reminders. Keeping track of the progress of such assignments motivates employees to complete their duties on time. Also, the HR department may introduce business to those who meet deadlines.
Subsequently, initiating a regular view of a team or individual activities is another way of measuring performance. The method involves having a clear layout of all tasks to ensure efficient progress checkups. A supervisor may employ software technology to view jobs remotely.
Lastly, initiating the end of day report summaries is also an effective alternative which allows employees to comment on the various task assigned to them during the day. The measure also enables employees to note down completed and incomplete assignments such as the number of successful calls with customers.
Gathering Information About the Alternative Approaches
The usability of any given performance technique relies mostly on its measurability (Sharma, Sharma & Agarwal, 2016). Thus, gathering data is critical since such information will be vital in elucidating the differences among various measures.
First, gathering information about the tasks assigned with deadlines involves communicating such deadlines promptly and recording the time taken to complete tasks. The HR department can employ various technologies such as the ActiveCollab tool to set time due for assignments and reminders. Such software communicates the deadlines to employees and automatically records the submission time immediately after they occur. In the context of the call center, the supervisors should first agree with the call attendants on a reasonable time it should take to solve the customer’s issue. Afterward, a record should be made detailing the time average taken by each employee on a call and compare it with the set target.
Second, the organization can view activities, either physical or using available technology tools. Such information should then be cataloged for future reference and possibly to enable the management to assess the progress statistics of the call center.
Finally, end of day reports should be compiled by employees and reviewed by their seniors frequently, preferably daily. These reports should show the number of tasks completed on a particular day, as well as the successful and failed calls. Also, there exist tools that may help compile such summaries and reduce the task load implicated on employees and supervisors.
Conclusion
In essence, the Performance Management System (PMS) is essential in establishing a smooth flow of activities and proper human resource management. Electronic monitoring (EM), which is principal among the systems employed to measure performance at the workplace, has proved to be effective in the given working environment. However, some concerns exist on its applicability, particularly those pertaining to the employees. Fundamentally, employees may have privacy issues on EM, which may, in turn, hinder their motivation. Alternative approaches tend to solve the limitations that come with the EM technique. Such alternatives include setting tasks with deadlines, regular view of a team or individual progress, and initialing end of day reports.
References
Bhave, D. P. (2014). The invisible eye? Electronic performance monitoring and employee job performance. Personnel psychology , 67 (3), 605-635. DOI: 10.1111/peps.12046
Moussa, M. (2015). Monitoring employee behavior through the use of technology and issues of employee privacy in America. Sage Open , 5 (2), 2158244015580168.
Sharma, N. P., Sharma, T., & Agarwal, M. N. (2016). Measuring employee perception of performance management system effectiveness: Conceptualization and scale development. Employee Relations , 38 (2), 224-247.
