Performance management is considered an “Achilles Heel” of a company’s success. The process ensures maintenance of production for the company through the Human Resources (HR). According to beliefs by most company employees, company performance helps in improving employee performance. Through an analysis of employee performance, a ranking system is created upon which different developments programs can be based upon. The existence of contemporary challenges has forced different employees to refocus their attention on the management of performance coupled with the exploration of an analysis of satisfaction that keeps the employees alert to ensure they fulfill their roles. Employees are the soul of any business and understanding how they perform is the best way for analysts to determine how well a particular company or system is performing.
The business environment is unlike what it was like in the past. Contemporarily, businesses have been forced to shift their focus back to performance management, a factor that has led to an extension of policies, practices, and design features embedded in an organization. Notably, performance analysis is not grounded on analyzing and discovering the employee mistakes alone. Indeed, it is also focused on fostering the engagement by employees in increasing performance for the company. In meeting this objective, this paper presents an approach that is conceptually grounded on employee development and engagement. The paper also presents an engagement management model that focuses on prior existing work of management of performance.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Broad Conceptualization of Performance Management
Even though the evaluation of performance is core to the management of performance, the process is not limited since it extends to all policies, practices, and design features of an organization, which is responsible for interacting with the employee. The approach, which is integrative, is a representation of a configurational approach aimed at using human management systems that are strategic. Strategic human resource management adheres to the norm that the human resource patterns are better than a single entity, especially for organizations that aim to achieve their set objectives. Through performance integration, an opportunity is created upon which different HR strategies can be implemented. Instead of singling out a particular process, the plan calls for bundling together of HR practices with the aim of having them compliment and strengthen each other, an essential element that works to ensure the HR architecture is built to foster performance and growth. The secret to a good performance system lies in the alignment of complimenting and strengthening elements. To this end, as long as the process creates reinforcing strategies, company objectives can be met.
Different perspectives by scholars advance the assertion that increased performance is ultimately the objective that firms endeavor to achieve. However, one could always consider it as a distal process outcome. Conative, cognitive and affective outcomes also arise from the goal as other elements in the performance change. Different findings demonstrate that intrinsic motivation was the determining point in situations that called for an analysis of development goal setting on one side and self-reported performance on the other side. The response by employees and feedback were a result of cognitive variables in the prediction of performance, which also found that cognitive variables influence the performance of the employees into being more loyal to the organization. Effective commitment thus comes out as a partial variable influencing the direction in which employees would take to develop and advance the company’s agenda. Intermediary outcomes come before the enhanced performance. Therefore, for effective performance management to be realized, the achievement of intermediary outcomes is a priority. Performance management is a composition of creating motivation and a commitment by both the management and employees to ensure achievement of set company objectives and goals. The production of the above proximal results determines whether the performance management will be successful or will fail.
Employee engagement is one of the variables that has received a lot of attention over the years. Indeed, by designing the performance management system to echo and promote employee position in the company, there will be increased productivity. Therefore, enhancing employee engagement is fundamental to achieving proximal, conative, affective, and cognitive performance in the workplace.
Employee engagement is a term that is alien to most practitioners. In this regard, factors that are essential to engagement may differ from those that resulted in traditional satisfaction and commitment to the organization by the employees. As a result, promoting and advocating for employee engagement comes out as a relative term, which is significant, yet untested. As such, the probability of things going sideways is dependent on those responsible for the engagement process. Positive psychology among the employees acts as a platform upon which the performance engagement can be based on, an element that promotes and serves to create a positive approach. As such, employee engagement serves to contribute to the existing environment concerning different perspectives of the society as per existing trends in the business world, especially organizational sciences.
Convention focus aimed at improving the productivity pales in comparison to what can be achieved by focusing on employee engagement, which impacts directly on the performance itself. Different writings support the thought that the performance of the traditional approach was efficient due to the procedural systems of operations, which were often easy to observe. However, the less static nature of contemporary jobs makes it impossible to effect change based on traditional approaches. Management and scholars have to note the increased and evolved dynamic nature of the performance process, especially concerning elements such as intelligence and the ability to distinguish between task and context of operation or performance. The theme of adaptability is also another factor essential to the current definition of performance, which also coincides with the scientific definition of firm management.
As a result of the dynamism and multifaceted nature associated with modern jobs, the contemporary work environment is less of management and more of facilitation. In other words, management works to have in place a conducive working environment. Performance improvement comes down to controlling the management of performance systems thus gaining the ability for firms to follow set goals and visions set by the company. However, supervisors have less control over the desired output in the modern economy, which is knowledge-based. Notably, the workplace no longer holds the same structure as it was in the past. Rather, decentralization spans of control that are large, and the absence of direct experience limits the control accorded by the supervisors. Hence, most staff members are left to deal with what they consider right or wrong. In this regard, managing employees in a knowledge-based and service industry is difficult due to the varied and subtle characteristics of the work. Contemporary performance management thus has to adapt and focus on creating conditions that engage the knowledge workers. Through such processes, it becomes possible to promote development in all spheres of the company. Modern management negates managing people to provide results; it entails managing the environment to ensure the staff has a good working system that both develops and motivates them. In particular, work is completed by people in a given environment, hence by focusing on this aspect, those in the environment adapt to increase existing benefits.
Another reason why it is important to focus on facilitation instead of management involves the development process in the management system. The present world recognizes results above everything else. Hence, it does not matter whether one’s performance, behavior or competencies improve as, without results, firms cannot progress. The concept of equifinality offers different models in which results can be achieved. Ultimately, the model that enhances performance while increasing employee engagement is the best way for organizations to advance their goals.
Employee Engagement
The last ten years have experienced increased attention on employee engagement among the press and firms. Often, employee engagement is the key to performance and growth of firms in any industry due to its ability to foster and promote competitiveness and success. Indeed, engaging employees is fundamental considering the existing dilemma as a result of many challenges faced. Numerous writers hold onto the thought that most of an organization’s issues would be resolved if employee engagement becomes mandatory in the concerned firm. Through the process, behavior, attitude, productivity, and performance is set to increase including shareholder’s return. According to Macey et al. (2009), research involving sixty-five firms identified that 25% of the firms’ realized increased profitability and return on assets, which were superior to those that did not invoke employee engagement as a priority. However, different reports have emerged noting the decline of employee engagement with most firms getting disengaged from their employees (Bates 2004; Johnson, 2004; Richman, 2006). The engagement gap is thus a scenario where employees no longer have a commitment to the company leaving them to move and make decisions depending on personal convictions.
Different views exist concerning engagement with diverse groups holding on the view that the process is controversial. The definition of employee engagement is thus involvement and satisfaction of an individual in the operations of a given firm (Harter, Schmidt & Hayes 2002). On the other hand, Maslach, Schaufeli & Leiter (2001) contend that engagement is the opposite of burnout. Although all of the above authors agree on the desirability of engagement including having the interests of the organization as a priority and promoting energy, enthusiasm, and effort that is focused, they differ in the definition. Schaufeli, Salanova, Gonzalez-Roma, and Bakker (2002) also present a different definition. Although they agree that engagement is the opposite of burnout, they contend that variable constructs are both dissimilar and independent and should be measured using different tools. Indeed, engagement is not confined to work since it includes situations that are not work-related. It aims to ensure that employees stand out regardless of where they are, whether inside or outside work.
Effective and energetic connection to work is a characteristic of engaged employees, which could occur in cases where employees invest in themselves to further their work. Engagement of oneself to work involves harnessing organizational resources to better oneself in the different roles assigned to them. On the other hand, disengagement involves members extricating themselves from the roles allocated to them. Withdrawal gives people the perception of defending and protecting themselves against the company on both emotional and cognitive grounds. Personal engagement is a simultaneous aspect by the employee of investing in the individual they prefer most for efficiency in the workplace. To this end, the interconnection lays the groundwork upon which different aspects and developments are based upon. The process works to ensure the presence and growth of the employee in all aspects including, cognition, emotional and physical.
Regardless of what may exist, engagement is draining since the process requires high energy and one’s commitment to their work. As such, it surpasses burnout that requires low levels of the above elements. Physical involvement leads to cognitive alertness and ardent connection with other people in the company, which also serves to expose the person’s individuality to the rest of the staff. Role requirement hinges on presentation of preferred self to the role at hand. Hence, engagement gives one a reason to expose the self that is concerned about the welfare of their work. Generally, engagement calls for psychological presence with characteristics such as being attentive, connected and integrated being prioritized. The self-in-role is different for each and getting them to abide and promote development as per their self comes as an advantage and reason for growth.
Like any other topic, employee engagement as a concept and the research involving the topic have been criticized. There is the presence of substantial overlap and redundancy occurring between engagement and related constructs depending on the organization. However, organizational sciences are riddled with many constructs, and one cannot be overly sure of the outcome. The existing gaps leave room for the existence of differential relationships. Nonetheless, such outcomes serve to increase knowledge concerning role performance and organizational phenomena. A common consensus is a warranty accorded to the differential outcomes and antecedents that result from the new constructs.
Integration of Performance Management and Employee Engagement
Performance Agreement
Employee engagement first stage focuses on agreement on the performance. In the stage, different activities take place including;
Goal Setting; Goals are core in the initiation of the process of employee engagement as they serve to help the employee be energized and focused. Purpose and specific objectives form a base upon which engagement occur. Additionally, the presence of an objective and purpose have to be aligned with both organizational and employee goals. The alignment assures a strategic focus due to the presentation of knowledge and motivation for employees to engage in practices that foster the welfare of the firm. As such, this stage calls for employees to be made aware of the different responsibilities accorded to them and the broader vision set by the firm. The firm’s vision also sets a context in which the employee derives their goals.
The literature on performance management describes performance agreement to involve goal negotiation to be achieved by the employees (Pulakos 2009). The employee is part and parcel of the organizational goals and visions, and as such, his/her development should also be among the consideration of the achievement of the set goal. The needs and desires that fuel the employee should also be included in ensuring the set vision comes to fruition. Therefore, formulating the bigger picture for the company is mandatory. However, having employees formulate their visions and goals based on the bigger picture will guarantee unsupervised, dedicated workflow from the employees. Xanthopoulou et al., (2008) concede that firms that recognized and appreciated employee development had higher chances of succeeding in the employee engagement than those that did not. The integration of goals and employees towards engagement worked to ensure “hitting two birds with one stone.” In other words, in the process of the employee achieving their goals, they also foster the development of the firm’s goals and vice versa.
Self-involvement in goal attainment is a result of incorporation of personal goals into the firm goals. Psychological meaningfulness arises from the self-concordant thus including the employee affects their psychological selves positively resulting in increased productivity. In cases where personal values and beliefs are not brought to considerations, supervisors should ensure the characteristics of an employee affects the assigned roles. As such, those who are good in a given field should be assigned roles that involve the particular field. According to Schaufeli and Salanova (2007), the best way for employers to align their values to the employees starts by inquiry into the values that employees ascribe to followed by drafting an Employee Development Agreement (EDA) where the suggested goals are incorporated before finalizing with monitoring the EDA based on the achievement and adjustment of set goals.
Psychological Contracts; Entry into contracts by most people depend on the meaningfulness, safety, and honor in resources. Each employee has different thoughts concerning their expectations of the firm. Some expectations can form a base for psychological contracts that benefit both the employee and the employer. Fulfillment of such agreements is present in both tasks and non-task related aspects. To this end, it is up to the involved parties to recognize the differences.
According to the Social Exchange Theory (SET), reciprocal interdependence among involved parties gives rise to obligations. Relationships are often evolving, from stranger to friend to beloved. The same case occurs with regards to the feelings such that people start trusting before being loyal and finalizing with a mutual commitment to benefiting both parties as per SET. Exchange often comes down to reciprocity and repayments where one party’s action leads to another action by the other party. Repaying good with bad or repaying good with good is a consequence of each party’s actions. According to Cropanzano and Mitchell (2005), employees gain the obligation to give back to their companies whenever they receive benefits in the form of resources, equipment, expertise, and many others, which often comes to increased productivity through engagement.
The processes involved in performance management are crucial to psychological contracts developments as argued by Suazo, Martinez & Sandova (2009). For example, freedom allows employees to hold the perception of the organization giving them implicit and explicit rights towards the achievement of set company rights. Such notions will motivate employees to push past their limits in the hope that the organization will keep its end of the deal. Expectations by the employees have to be met by the organization as pointed out by Parzefall and Hakanen (2010). Such elements will promote fulfillment of the set goals.
Engagement Facilitation
The engagement facilitation stage focuses on the identification and provision of essential resources for the engagement process. As per the above indications, the resources are those that will promote meaningfulness and safety to the employees. Job design is the central theme during this stage.
Job Design; Employees ought to perform based on their jobs. Measures should thus be taken to avoid deviation of any sort. Performance management recognizes the presence of jobs alteration depending on the outcome. In such incidences, therefore, improvisation by both the supervisor and the employee is welcomed. Goal cascading requires coordinated activities, but one should not miss the fact that the majority of the cascaded goals require coordination that is hierarchical. For effective performance management, allowing employees to have a voice concerning the process will ensure everyone gets on board for what has to be accomplished. As such, effective engagement also requires that employees have a say in the matter concerning the design of their work. The process will promote psychological mindfulness, which in turn will influence employee engagement that allows employees to give their best in fulfilling their responsibilities to the firm. According to different scholars, employees are partial architectures of the jobs, and neglecting their opinions will result in negative performance (Buchner, 2007).
Coaching and Support; Engagement is a result of the continuous coaching process. As suggested by Schaufelli and Salanova, (2007) coaching helps employees to become good planners who also work to highlight potential huddles giving room for early preparation and resolution formulation. Before a “can-do” mentality is created in the employees, they have to be efficient, which is the responsibility of the coaching process, hence the term psychological capital. On top of self-efficacy, hope, resilience, and optimism are elements of psychological capital, which are factors that help employees discover and promote development as per their beliefs and aspirations. Through the establishment of a good relationship between the psychological capital and employee engagement, positive results are guaranteed as illustrated by Sweetman and Luthans (2010). Through the coaching process, the employee acquires new techniques, knowledge and a different perspective on how they can develop themselves. Besides, the coaching process focuses on how they can be engaged in operations that promote productivity in the firm as well as highlighting the job design.
Leadership; Organizations, teams, and societies operate because leaders are in charge. The performance of an employee is related to the type of leader they follow. Therefore, good leaders inspire better engagement while bad leaders inspire disengagement (Elicker, Levy & Hall, 2006). Task and support behavior are responsibilities accorded to leaders alone. As such, having transformational leaders who are aware of where the team is bound to go works to ensure increased productivity and growth. Those following a leader create meaning in their work resulting in improved production. Management that is supportive, clarifying and resilient inspires employees to follow in the same space. Ultimately, any job design has to consider the role played by the leader in the organization.
Training; Murphy and DeNisi (2008) claim that the majority of the performance interventions measures focus on motivating the employees. However, sometimes it is not about training, but the ability to perform. In cases where strength is the issue, the introduction of a training program will work to ensure everyone levels up. What people do not know can be taught through training. Self-efficacy, resilience, and optimism work to promote and advocate the view that employees can always learn new elements. The present society has the internet as a significant source of information; thus, a two-hour session daily could influence the productivity and performance of the employee. The essence is to allocate time for the employees to advance their skills and process such that they move towards self-development in the confines of the set goals.
Performance and Engagement Appraisal
Having an engagement program without appraising its productivity results in unknown variables affecting the development phases. Trust and justice are essential for firms that endeavor to promote fairness. The firm thus has the responsibility of evaluating the fairness accorded by employees before molding them to improve and promote company goals. Giving the best of their abilities requires that employees perceive the operations to be fair. As such, any form of discrimination, whether race, gender or political affiliation will tilt the scale against the company. In essence, being specific from the start on what will be considered as core during the appraisal period will work to either put the employees towards the company’s side, or they will resort to opposing the company themes. Either way, having the employees acknowledge their role and the consequences of their failure will form a base for the firm to inflict punishment and rewards based on the performances.
Conclusion
Different authors argue that the development of contemporary economics has resulted in organizations focusing on performance management as a way to foster and develop themselves. However, as outlined in the paper, focusing on employee engagement leads to a better outcome. Through effective formulation and design of performance management, a conducive environment is created that fosters development and growth for both the company and the employees. As discussed above, employees are not part of the company but are the company. To this end, mobilizing and aligning their goals to that of the company results in better production and profitability for the company.
References
Bates, S. (2004, February). Getting engaged. HR Magazine , 49(2), 44−51
Buchner, T. W. (2007). Performance management theory: A look from the performer's perspective with implications for HRD. Human Resource Development International , 10, 59−73
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management , 31, 874−900.
Elicker, J. D., Levy, P. E., & Hall, R. J. (2006). The role of leader–member exchange in the performance appraisal process. Journal of Management , 32, 531−551
Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology , 87, 268−279
Johnson, G. (2004). Otherwise engaged. Training, 41(10), 4.
Macey, W. H., Schneider, B., Barbera, K. M., & Young, S. A. (2009). Employee engagement: Tools for analysis, practice, and competitive advantage . Malden, WA: WileyBlackwell
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397−422.
Murphy, K. R., & DeNisi, A. (2008). A model of the appraisal process. In A. Varma, P. S. Budhwar, & A. DeNisi (Eds.), Performance management systems : A global perspective (pp. 131−146). New York: Routledge.
Parzefall, M. -R., & Hakanen, J. (2010). Psychological contract and its motivational and health-enhancing properties. Journal of Managerial Psychology , 25, 4−21.
Richman, A. (2006). Everyone wants an engaged workforce how can you create it? Work span, 49, 36−39
Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies , 3, 71−92.
Suazo, M. M., Martinez, P. G., & Sandoval, R. (2009). Creating psychological and legal contracts through human resource practices: A signaling theory perspective. Human Resource Management Review, 19, 154−166
Sweetman, D., & Luthans, F. (2010). The power of positive psychology: Psychological capital and work engagement. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 54−68). Hove, East Sussex: Psychology Press
