Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
A critical evaluation of performance management and development processes within Otis PLC
they completed their objectives. This contrasts with their achievement of their financial objective, i.e. cost management of their function, which is always assessed.
Turning now to field employees, the performance of each field employee is measured throughout the year. This is unsurprising, as the activity of field employees is a primary influence on the financial performance of the business. However, although standards of performance for exist for field employees and performance against the standard is monitored, no individual performance plans are established. The reasons for this are considered in the section on performance review.
Performance Review cycle
The IDS study (1997) found that in best practice organisations there were regular reviews of performance during the year leading up to a formal annual review. In Otis this is not the case for staff or field employees. In reviewing practice within Otis in detail it is necessary to distinguish between review of inputs and outputs and also the practice in respect of staff and field employees.
Looking first at output measures, for staff employees with specific output targets (usually line managers and sales staff) performance against target is reviewed on an ongoing basis. These reviews are informal and unstructured and typically focus on remedial actions to achieve target. For these staff and also for those without specific output targets, review of input measures is an annual event conducted through a traditional appraisal scheme. Performance is reviewed both against objectives and also in terms of a series of behavioural competencies. A copy of the rating form is attached as Appendix 3. As can be seen these competencies are generic in nature and there is no behaviourally anchored rating scale to ensure consistency in ratings. In the original design of the appraisal scheme access to training and development was obtained by completing a training need form attached to the appraisal document. The experience of most employees was that training needs identified through this means were often not met and consequently the process lost credibility. Anecdotal evidence suggests that many staff employees, perhaps a majority, now do not have an annual appraisal and have no form of performance feedback during the year.
There is one exception to this pattern; sales managers in new equipment sales follow a structured review process with their staff. Reviews are held on one day each month. Progress against target and remedial actions are discussed during the morning. During the afternoon the sales manager and sales person undertake a joint customer visit after which the sales managers coaches the sales person on ways to improve his / her effectiveness. The sales managers have also developed measurement of competence, i.e. inputs, for their staff and routinely suggest development activities for them. The final piece in this approach is that the sales managers train their staff in professional sales practices. This model has produced significant improvements in measured sales performance in this area.
In the case of field employees, there is a mechanism for [next page]