A performance management system would allow for the business and strategic goals of the organization to be cascaded across the entire organization. The employees of a company should have a clear connection with the organization’s strategy, vision, goals, and what is expected of them. This ought to be mirrored in the performance management system of each employee, as well as in the competencies necessary for achievement. This paper evaluates the performance management system at QHPT, applying the Aguinis 6-step process, strategic alignment, purpose, and the concept of reliability, validity, and fairness.
Evaluation of the Performance Management System at QHPT
Aguinis 6 Step Process
To assess the QHPT performance appraisal system, the performance management system developed by the Aguinis consisting of the following six steps is applied: prerequisites, planning, execution, assessment, review, renewal, and re-contracting.
Aguinis (2013) stated that for a performance appraisal system to be implemented, it must first satisfy two primary conditions. The first is familiarity with the organization’s purpose and strategic objectives. The other is familiarity with the position that is being assessed. Understanding the QHPT’s purpose and strategic objectives does not trickle down to the employee’s point. It is not translated to the level of the individual employee.
According to Aguinis (2013), the commencement of every performance cycle must start with the employer and employee meeting, talking, and settling upon what duties must be performed and how they will be accomplished for the coming year. At QHPT, there is no evidence of investment in this process. There is no clear communication and no definition of results and behavior.
Aguinis (2013) lists the five components of effective performance execution: dedication to goal attainment, continual performance, continuous feedback, dialogue with supervisor, collection and exchange of performance information, and preparation for performance reports (Aguinis, 2013). The evidence at QHPT shows no commitment from either employees or management to make performance execution work.
The performance evaluation is when the management and the worker analyze the employee’s previous performance. This involves the employee doing a self-evaluation and the management completing an assessment of the individual’s past performance and future development plan. There is no evidence that self-review is carried out at QHPT.
The performance evaluation is when management and worker come together to analyze the performance evaluation. The performance review often emphasizes what employees have accomplished throughout the most recent performance cycle (Ishaq Bhatti et al., 2013). Aguinis observes that formative performance assessments concentrate on the past and the present reality. At QHPT, performance reviews occur only annually. There is no objective evidence or commitment to carry out the exercise until the next annual review date.
There is no evidence that both the employee and the management at QHPT complete a section of the performance assessment that compares the employee’s performance from the previous year to their performance from the current year. According to Aguinis (2013), the objectives will be evaluated during this step, and any necessary adjustments will be made.
Strategic Alignment, Purpose, and EVP
Senior executives at QHPT has a performance-based assessment strategy in place. This includes planning, organizing, monitoring, and controlling activities and providing leadership to achieve strategic goals and satisfy the requirements of relevant parties (Brown et al., 2018). However, there is no evidence of support mechanisms available for creating, executing, and evaluating initiatives, performance measurements, and personnel evaluations within QHPT. This makes it difficult to maintain a link between HR practices to wider organizational strategy.
The fundamental components of an organization’s strategic goals are its vision, purpose, goals, and strategic plan for accomplishing them. A company’s strategy may be seen as the organization’s chosen path for the long run. The QHPT worker handbook provides unmistakable evidence of this fact. On the other hand, it would seem that each worker’s goals and skills to make the organization’s strategies easier to execute successfully are not sufficiently defined. QHPT does not seem to involve key stakeholder groups, such as its clients and regulatory agencies, in developing its strategic plan. This is done to understand key performance metrics, which can then be fed into the organization’s KPI to facilitate the goals that have been established.
Validity, Reliability, Cost-effectiveness, and Fairness
Establishing key performance indicators (KPIs) ensures that all employees have the same validity, reliability, dependability, and fairness standards. The guidelines will establish aims and goals for the staff, and they will endeavor to reach those goals and objectives (Jahangirian et al., 2017). This fosters a competitive environment inside the organization’s workforce, which leads to more successful outcomes for the firm. It has been determined that the most significant flaw in QHPT is how incentives are doled out, which does not reflect fairness. The workers of QHPT appreciate the rewards offered to them, yet they cannot identify a direct connection between their commitment, productivity, and the compensation they get. QHPT has embraced this strategy; nevertheless, the existing incentive system is not strategically oriented and suffers from a lack of strength due to the absence of reward and recognition for individual achievement.
Because QHPTs did not establish suitable KPIs, it is impossible to assess the individual performance of employees and suitably compensate them for their efforts. There are no performance-related contingencies at all. The workers’ reliability suffers when they are placed in such a predicament. For instance, QHPT may choose to add the measure for providing exceptional customer service. A key performance indicator (KPI) founded on such a statistic can inform the number of consumers unhappy with the solutions they got when they visited the establishment (Osmani & Ramolli, 2012). The supervisor will determine the total number of satisfied consumers for the given period. This will assist in improving the workers’ dependability, and they will be able to provide better services, which will, in effect, guarantee there are a large number of satisfied consumers.
Validity and Fairness
At QHPT, incentives are awarded based on length of service, level of employment rather than performance is the primary factor in determining basic salary, and incentive raises do not adequately distinguish performance levels. One of the most critical aspects of an organization’s strategy is a central performance indicator. It begins at the most fundamental level and evaluates a staff’s performance from the perspective of their group, department, and company. In addition to that, the organization’s mission, targets, and goals are all included in this instrument. It guarantees that the objective of each worker is to strive toward achieving the set goals. The accomplishments of the organization as a whole will benefit from this. For QHPT managers to make a more informed choice regarding a KPI parameter that will serve as a new performance appraisal system, they first have to inquire themselves which division within the company needs to be regulated and enhanced and the reason for doing so.
Within the performance prerequisite phase, the goal of QHPT must highlight its aim, which is to give the highest possible value to its clients. An organization’s mission is intimately intertwined with its fundamental beliefs. A job study must be conducted on every role before it is filled. Each year, the essential skills, insight, and competencies are evaluated and reevaluated in the performance evaluation process. This is designed to ensure that the position is ideal for the staff and the enterprise.
Performance planning should be accomplished before the performance cycle even begins. The QHPT needs to round up these steps numerous times yearly by utilizing quarterly OKRs (Objectives and Key Results) for workers to define their targets and how they will accomplish these objectives for the financial quarter. Continuous feedback must be an integral aspect of QHPT. Supervisors should provide regular feedback to their employees with biweekly or weekly consultations with direct reports.
The manager and employees should both take some time to read through the evaluations on their own before coming together to complete the official review. Throughout this period, they talk about the previous year, if the employee successfully achieved the objectives set in the year, what areas of improvement the manager believes the worker needs, and progress for the following year.
Brown, T. C., Mazumdar, B., & McCracken, M. (2018). Performance Management: A Scoping Review of the Literature and an Agenda for Future Research. Human Resource Development Review, 18(1), 47–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484318798533
Ishaq Bhatti, M., Awan, H. M., & Razaq, Z. (2013). The key performance indicators (KPIs) impact overall organizational performance. Quality & Quantity, 48(6), 3127–3143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-013-9945-y
Jahangirian, M., Young, T., & Robinson, S. (2017). Key performance indicators for successful simulation projects. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 68(7), 747–765. https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.2016.1
Osmani, F., & Ramolli, G. M. (2012). Performance Management, Its Assessment, and Importance. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 41, 434–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.04.052