Building Performance Management through Employee Participation Essay

Building Performance circumspection through Employee Participation - Essay ExampleEmployee liaison is a significant component of motivating them which is a standardized necessary for both their growth and that of the organization. By virtue of their positions, employees have unique and relevant military operation knowledge that may not be obvious to those conducting the performance management carry out (Mayer & Gavin 44). As evidenced by the JMI case, most employees feel unsatisfied with feedback and goal setting performancees used by the management. They tend to view it like a procedure manufactured elsewhere and imposed on them. Contrarily, their active participation in the carry out provides them with a voice in the system, developing a sense of belonging and ownership everyplace the process (Mayer & Gavin 46). Greater employee participation will create an environment of employee support and cooperation. This will encourage developing of counselor-at-law and coaching rel ationships, reducing defensive tendencies and tension and making the results more acceptable to the employees (Mayer & Gavin 46). Employees provide input on the required standards on which their performance will be based (Cardy & Dobbins 12). It is, therefore, vital to formulate standards that evaluate substantive responsibilities and duties by balancing the process, individual and group participation and the outcome. Employees can have a say by contributing their suggestions on the types of rating systems that give an actual representation of their responsibilities and duties (Cardy & Dobbins 12). Studies have indicated that self military rating increases the participation of employees while enhancing overall satisfaction when used for the purposes of development (Cardy & Dobbins 19). Employees can carry out their own evaluation by completing their own performance evaluation forms prior to the official evaluation interview (Cardy & Dobbins 12). Although it is patent that manager ial and employee ratings may not always be in agreement, it is essential for both groups to remember that the process does not seek absolute agreement. Rather, it should be viewed as a process aimed at obtaining consensus from the two teams over time (Mayer & Gavin 54). As with the JMI case, the consultant interviewed the management and used the employee participation technique to solicit feedback from the organization. With this feedback, they were able to hear the problems the employees had with the performance manage system in use. They generated the employees support through their participation to formulate a sensitive and acceptable system. Basing on the JMI example, performance management systems can be improved by making them more sensitive to the employees issues. This can be achieved through increased privacy and confidentiality according employees the managements exclusive attention and setting time to discuss issues. Those charged with carrying out the process need to b e nimble prior to the exercise (Muchinsky 21). An emphasis is also placed on performance counseling. Team leaders atomic number 18 encouraged to give individual employees feedback in confidence on their job performance. This may give stand to various potential benefits such as motivating them to be more productive (Muchinsky 34). Those given performance evaluation results that may be below their expectations will also accept them since