Dr Lee Performance Maintenance

8/2/2019 Dr Lee Performance Maintenance

1/12

Performance maintenanceAligning Perormance, Recognition & Discipline

by

chsph D. L, Ph.D., SPHr


2/12

Performance maintenance

Aligning Perormance, Recognition & Discipline

Christopher D. Lee, Ph.D., SPHR

Perormance maintenance is a three-part process that involves perormance management, recognition, and discipline.When utilized as part o a model ramework, it incorporates the ull spectrum o perormance dimensions and ensures

that managers have all the tools necessary to create good perormance and sustain it over the long term. Perormance

maintenance acknowledges a Bell Curve-like range o perormance where there is always a group o exceptional employees

in the top 10 - 20% o their peers who do better than expected, and a bottom 10 - 20% who do not perorm as expected.

The larger group in the middle is where supervision has its biggest impact, managing good perormance day-to-day. This

range provides a compelling argument that managers need dierent tools to work with high, low and average perormers.

The diagram below illustrates this dynamic.

99.7%

34.1%

13.6%

2.1% 2.1%

13.6%

34.1%

PercentageofGroup

DISCIPLINE RECOGNITION

PERFORMANCE MAINTENANCE

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

Perormance maintenance can be a general term that describes the ull range o activities that keeps perormance

going along steadily and that involves three parallel systems: perormance management, recognition, and discipline.


3/12




Performance manaGement anD DaY-to-DaY manaGement

Good perormance management and day-to-day management are two sides o the same coin. You cannot have astrong perormance management system i a manager does not provide good ongoing supervision throughout the year.

A perormance management system is a part o a continuum o ongoing inormation and eedback about the character

and quality o work provided over time. As it is oten said, there should be no surprises at the end o the yearly

perormance cycle because the inormation shared is consistent with that which was provided earlier. Perormance

management then is a process, not an event.

All perormance management systems have three elements in common, 1) a process, 2) a tool (instrument), and 3) an

end-o-year perormance review or discussion session. There are a variety o systems (processes) used: the traditional ratings

approach, narratives, sel evaluations, the 360 Feedback Process, a development-based model, Goals/MBO (management

by objectives), the Perormance Conversations approach, the critical incident method, behaviorally anchored ratings scales

and many others. Each o these processes highlight dierent elements o the perormance dynamic, but all share the goal ohelping supervisors track, regulate, manage and document perormance. The process used says a lot about the goals that an

organization is attempting to reach by implementing a perormance management system. The assumptions in designing a

process also place some parameters around the kind o tool that is developed to put the process into action.

The tools used vary rom a paragraph-style, open-ended narrative, rating sheets/scales, goals, action plans, journals/logs,

job-description-rating templates, or any other variety or combination o instruments. Each o these tools attempts to documen

the perormance that has been or is occurring. Documentation is an attempt to hold all parties accountable or the outcomes

that are sought. While important, the ocus should not be on the tool or instrument itsel, but on the process. The tool is just

the paper trail, not the purpose.

In act, a better way o concentrating on perormance is by automating the process. Automation makes it easy to ocuson the content, not on completing the orm. Automation also promotes accountability and transparency by making it easier

to track, manage and report on perormance outcomesall important elements or Enterprise 2.0 organizations. An

eective tool should acilitate the process the company wishes to use. For good perormance management to occur, the

emphasis is on the process o management and providing ongoing inormation, eedback, direction and support. Some

call this process coaching.

At the end o the perormance cycle, there is always a time set aside or the manager and employee to discuss perormance

holistically and review the instrument, journals, evidence, or other documentation about perormance that has occurred over

the year. At its best, the perormance discussion seeks agreement about what has happened. It also orecasts plans or the

new year. When perormed poorly, the perormance discussion can be preceded by time lled with ear, anxiety, and angst

because the only goal is to notiy the employee o their yearly rating. Managers must not orget that the ocus should be on

the perormance that produced the yearly rating, not on the rating itsel. When the manager has given eedback throughout

the year, then there should be no surprises and thereore less anxiety about the meeting and the rating the employee has

earned. The two can then ocus on the inormation in the messages delivered by the supervisor, rather than deal with a

potentially negative reaction to the rating. Hence the emphasis on the notion that perormance management is a process,

and management and perormance management are two parts o a whole.


4/12




Coaching and Feedback

Feedback is the primary means or recognizing good perormance and or redirecting

behavior that needs to be improved. Feedback helps individuals to keep their behavior on

target and achieve their goals.1

Not only is management (or supervision) an indispensible part o good perormance management, it is actually a prerequisite

to it. Supervision is a process o ensuring that expected outcomes actually take place. It is setting standards and expectations,

directing eorts, and making the adjustments necessary to ensure optimal results. Some call this process coaching. The most

important element o coaching is providing eedback.

Feedback is the process o giving and receiving inormation that is pertinent to the work being perormed in real-time.Feedback is inormation exchange. The goal o this exchange is to ensure that there is a common agreement o what good

perormance looks like. It provides inormation about the quantity, quality, and characteristics o work, and attempts to steer

perormance in the right direction. When done well and in a timely ashion, eedback is news one can use.

Coaching uses the eedback process to direct and redirect work eorts and behaviors. Coaching provides this direction in

the context o a relationship wherein the manager attempts to help the employee be the very best perormer he or she can

be. The traditional boss and employee relationship is an outdated metaphor when compared to the model o a coach and

perormer. Coaches instruct, train, develop, assist, and support perormance. Feedback and coaching tell the employee what

is good/bad, why it is good/bad, and what weare going to do about it, along with the and spp to change it.

Good perormance management and day-to-day management are designed to create and replicate good perormance. Whenperormance exceeds expectations, recognition is appropriate. When perormance does not meet expectations, correction is

due. Thereore, any good perormance management system must provide trigger mechanisms to call attention to the good

and intervene when outcomes are poor. All three perormance management, recognition and discipline work together to

keep good perormance on track.

1 Costello, p. 50, 1994


5/12




recoGnition

Recognition is an investment in uture perormance. Recognition is reinorcement. It communicates the simple message,that was good, do it again. Recognition comes in two orms, inormal and ormal. Recognition is a required part o good

supervision; it is neither optional nor additiveit is an indispensible ingredient.

An oversimplied, but useul way o thinking o recognition is that inormal recognition is done by the supervisor. Call it

recognition with a small r. Formal recognition is or perormance so noteworthy that it deserves attention by the organization

as a whole through a more structured recognition policy or program. Call this recognition with a capital R. While it would

appear that more ormal recognition with rewards such as pay, promotions, plaques and gits would be the most important,

evidence speaks to the contrary.

While money is important to employees, what tends to motivate them to perormandto perorm at higher levelsis thoughtul, personal kind o recognition that signies true

appreciation or a job well done. Numerous studies have conrmed this.2

Great perormance deserves attention, the kind that employees get immediately rom their supervisor. While there may

be limits to how many ormal recognition awards can be given, there will never be a limit on the number o thank yous

a supervisor can give. Give generously recognition is a orm o eedback.

An eective recognition program takes advantage o both ormal and inormal methods. Supervisors can praise perormance

inormally on numerous occasions and can document these occasions in perormance logs, on certicates, on perormance

review instruments, or in personnel les. There is also a place or ormal recognition and reward programs. Formal recognition

most oten provides rewards and awards. It is hard to go wrong with providing rewards and awards; however here are a ew

words o advice and a ew cautions.

Formal recognition should not be diluted by being given to everyone all the time. Formal recognition should be special, and

by its nature it should be limited in number. A reasonable target or the number o recipients or ormal recognition programs

is up to 20%. On-the-spot awards are the best type o ormal recognition because they combine the very best parts o

recognition programs: that they are immediate, they are provided by the supervisor, and they involve both recognition and

reward in the orm o a git or money. When giving ormal awards, it is a good practice to make a big deal out o even the

smallest good deed. Taking the time to call a quick sta meeting where everyone gathers around a recipients cubicle has just

as much impact as a ormal dinner program. Such treatment would make an on-the-spot award special.

2Nelson, p. xv, 1994


6/12




The process or receiving ormal recognition should be simple, clear, and easily administered. Sometimes the rules areso elaborate they send mixed signals to employees who may not get an award or which they thought they were eligible

because o the ne print. Another counterproductive recognition model is one that has an approval mechanism by which a

managers nomination can be overruled by HR or the CFO. It refects poorly on an organization when a manager practices

good supervision by giving an employee eedback and coaching them to success, only to be told that the act is not worthy

o a particular reward. This is demoralizing to both the employee and supervisor. The employee should always get the award

i their supervisor deems it appropriate. However, i the supervisor nominates employees or awards that are not up to the

organizations standard, the supervisor should be dealt with by his leaders. His or her subordinates should not be penalized.

As a caution to ensure that rewards do not become entitlements, it is important that this process be separate rom, but

parallel to the normal perormance management process. Since many perormance management ratings are infated,

providing recognition inside o perormance management can contribute to a dilution o reward. Many eective perormancemanagement systems ask the manager to indicate that a noteworthy activity has taken place on the actual instrument, but

requires them to document the action in detail as a part o a separate process. This extra step gives the noteworthy activity

appropriate attention and a chance to be held up and highlighted while lowering the risk o a pro-orma award.

Another best practice perormance management process is to require that at least one noteworthy write-up be on le during

the perormance cycle in order or an employee to be eligible or the highest rating, such as exceeds expectations. This is a

good example wherein recognition and perormance programs are separate, parallel, and yet mutually reinorcing. Whatever

this extra step is, it is recommended to be simple and easy to administer. For most occasions a simple write-up is enough.

It can be limited to a paragraph or a page, enough to document what the supervisor deems to be good perormance. A

supervisor who has to take the extra step and sign their name certiying what they deem to be exemplary work communicates

a lot about the employees perormance and the managers standard. This testimonial is then available or external scrutiny.

When something notable happens, managers should ensure they stop and take time to commend employees. This occasion

creates a trigger to document the good outcomes identied. This trigger also can be evidence used to help characterize

perormance at the end o the perormance cycle. Such recognition is also good eedback and that undoubtedly encourages

retention. Recognition makes people eel valued, so more emphasis should be placed upon the unlimited supply o

recognition opportunities, instead o the limited number o nancial or other rewards.


7/12




DiSciPLine anD reDirection

It is always necessary or managers to have tips and tools to manage perormance and behavior. Some experts say that thereis always a bottom 10% o employee perormance that will demand much o supervisory attention. Other experts describe

the 80/20 rule that claims that managers spend 80% o their time dealing with the bottom 20% o employees due to their

lackluster perormance. Either way, there is seldom ever a time when 100% o employees are perorming optimally; it simply

goes against the law o averages. Notwithstanding the realities that there will always be some substandard perormers, this is

precisely when and where supervisors earn their stripes. This is the yeomans work o supervisors.

While the term may sound o-putting, discipline can be termed more positively as redirection. The goal o most

disciplinary processes is not punishment, but redirection. But rst, eective discipline requires the correct diagnosis. The

initial step is to ask i the issue at hand is a result o poor behavior, perormance or conormance, in order to determine

the appropriate intervention. While perormance is sel-explanatory, behavior can be viewed as conduct, action or reaction.

Conormance is the act o either ollowing or ailing to ollow prescribed rules, policies, procedures regulations or laws.

I perormance is the reason or discipline, it is most oten a time to discuss training, retraining, or gaining a greater degree o

the commitment, engagement or attention rom the employee to their work activities. I the problem is related to behavioral

matters, some sort o reprimand is appropriate i the bad behavior is intentional. I the behavior is unintentional, such as lack

o ability or poor work ethic, retraining is probably the correct intervention. Nonetheless, proper diagnosis o the problem is

the rst step toward building uture success.

The goal o discipline is to call attention to poor situations as an interim step in correcting them. The process most oten used

or such purposes is based on the doctrine o Progressive Discipline. The disciplinary process runs parallel to perormance

management and recognition, and it is put into action i there is a perormance aberration that cannot be dealt with

suitably inside o the perormance management process. Some might argue that discipline can be completed inside o theperormance management process, but the circumstances and acts o perormance management and discipline are dieren

enough to warrant an entirely dierent process.

The situation that warrants discipline oten happens in a dierent time and space rom normal perormance management

activities. Indeed, an event might present itsel, be dealt with, and go away between ormal perormance management cycles.

Events might be too specic or unique. Still there is likely not a scale, description, or procedure tting the actual problem

listed on the typical perormance management instrument. With discipline one must be specic about what is wrong, why

it is wrong, and what to do about it. The space and specicity are not possible on an instrument designed to summarize a

years worth o eort. Certainly progressive discipline is the proper tool to address such matters. The best way o executing

this task is usually writing a letter to the individual as a means o documenting the problem and establishing a perormance

improvement plan.


8/12




Perormance Improvement Plan

When perormance goes awry, managers must intervene to get it back on track. The best practice methodology is to work withthe employee to create a plan to establish clear expectations and a process to ollow-up on what has been agreed upon. Most

oten the plan is provided in a written letter to the employee in question, with dened elements and dened check-in points to

ollow-up on the matter.

According to Paul Falcone, author o 101 Sample Write-Ups for Documenting Employee Performance Problemsand other

experts, a model letter has the ollowing elements:

Description o the issue(s) How it impacts others in the company

Why the issue(s) is/are bad/undesirable Note who does what, by when to make corrections

Impact o the bad actions on perormance ime rame to ollow up

Such letters provide a roadmap to get employees back on track to good perormance, and set uture expectations.

Here is a brie, rudimentary example:

Bob:

We have had several conversations about you not ollowing the proper procedures or processing new requisitions. When you

do not ollow proper procedures, it creates the potential or errors in the system and it can and does cause the late shipment o

orders. When you take a day o vacation, others cover your station, yet no one knows what has been done because we do not

know which procedures you have ollowed and which you have skipped. As you know, repeat customers are very important to

our business, so getting orders right the rst time is imperative. Our system works best when everyone ollows procedures.

For the next ninety days, I will ask that you pay special attention to each and every transaction you complete, and make an extra

copy o orders or me to review. I will, in turn, spot check your records and audit your work at the end o this period. In the

meantime, I will ask that you pull out and re-read our procedures manual rom cover to cover. We will also schedule you or

some reresher training with our training department by the end o the rst month.

Our goal is to get you back to perorming at the same level as your peers. Your good perormance will make a diference to

our customers and your coworkers. I look orward to having a brie check-in talk with you at the 30 and 60 day mark and

concluding this review period with a positive endorsement o your progress. I you have any questions, please eel ree to call

upon me or questions or assistance at anytime.

Sincerely,

Julie Supervisor


9/12




The perormance improvement plan puts progressive discipline into action as well as gives the employee direction andsupport. It ensures a proper amount o attention is ocused on the issues at hand and what to do about them. It is about

adjustment and correction, making things right. It ocuses on rehabilitation, not merely punishment. Just as it is more cost

eective to keep a customer than to look or a new one, the same holds or an employee. So the perormance improvement

plan helps retention and protects the investment you have already made in developing an employee.

Discipline Without Punishment

The book Discipline Without Punishment(1995) is an HR classic worthy o mention. The technique o leaving out the

punishment and ocusing attention on the behavior is analogous to not giving a rating, in order to ensure the employee

ocuses on the message, not the end number or letter. The book has a rehabilitative orientation and provides as an example,

a day o reckoning o with pay, instead o a day o suspension. On this day, the employee is told to go home and think

about what it is like not working at an organization, and return only i they agree to recommit to ollowing the organizations

policies and procedures. The employee is ree then to think about what they did and what they will do when they return,

instead o thinking about how they might make ends meet due to the loss o pay with a suspension. The ocus here is on

getting perormance back on track.


10/12



10 Christopher D. Lee, Ph.D., SPHR

SummarY

Perormance maintenance is a dynamic process with three partsperormance management, recognition, and disciplinethat gives managers a ull-spectrum o tools to manage the activities o others. The goal o each tool is productivity. These

Tools can be used or high, low, and average perormers. Perormance maintenance makes the assumption that most

employees perorm well most o the time and good supervision keeps them on track. However, or the 10-20% whose

perormance is noteworthy, or the 10-20% whose perormance is o-track, managers must diagnose the situations and

take action. On these occasions, managers take the extra step o recognizing and celebrating exceptional perormance,

or directing changes through perormance improvement plans.

When aligned, integrated and working together, the three separate tools produce quality outcomes consistently over time.

Coaching and eedback support perormance management. Recognition is an investment in uture outcomes by encouraging

excellent perormance to be repeated. Discipline is the opportunity to redirect poor perormance by calling attention to dicult

situations and providing plans or corrective actions, along with the support necessary to make changes. In all circumstances,each perormance maintenance tool works together to create and replicate solid perormance and productivity.

referenceS

Costello, S. J. (1994). Efective Perormance Management, McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., Columbus, Ohio

Falcone, P. (2001). 101 Sample Write-ups For Documenting Employee Perormance Problems, AMACON Books, New York.

Grote, R. C. (1995). Discipline Without Punishment: Te proven strategy that turns problem employees into superior perormers,

AMACOM Books, New York.

Lee, C. D. (2006). Perormance Conversations: An Alternative o Appraisals, Fenestra, uscon, Arizona

Nelson, Bob. (1994). 1001 Ways to Reward Employees, Workman Publishing Company, New York.

HaLoGen aPPraiSaL

Halogen Sotware oers a powerul, simple and aordable automated employee perormance management tool that

ully supports the advanced practices presented by Dr. Lee and other experts in this area. Halogen eAppraisal makes

it easy or managers to support and direct their employees perormance with ongoing, even day-to-day eedback. It

helps everyone ocus on the eedback or content o a review rather than the orm, and encourages goal alignment,

employee development, and detailed recording o accomplishments, successes and challenges.

Visit hp://www.hlgsw. or more inormation.

You can also take a Pd t or sign up or a f tl today.


11/12



Christopher D. Lee, Ph.D., SPHR 11

cHriStoPHer D. Lee, PH.D., SPHr

BIOGRAPHY

Chris Lee is a human resources practitioner, lecturer, researcher, and author. His background includes having served

as the chie human resources ocer or three dierent colleges or universities and a state college system.

Formerly a question writer and member o the Exam Review Panel or the PHR and SPHR examinations administered by

the Human Resources Certication Institute (HRCI), he is now a member o its board o directors. His areas o expertise

are employment, training, and perormance managementor, in his words, nding, developing, and managing talent

in organizations. He is the author o numerous human resources related articles and two books. Most recently he has

published Perormance Conversations: An Alternative to Appraisals and is developing a sotware program based upon the

perormance conversations approach.

He has presented at conerences in the US, Canada and Australia on HR related topics. He holds a masters degree in

HR Management, a doctor o philosophy degree in HR Development, and he is also certied as a Senior Proessional in

Human Resources.


12/12

Dr Lee Performance Maintenance

Documents