Behavioral factors important for the successful implementation and use of performance management systems

Abstract

The human element in performance managementPerformance can be considered an outcome of both organizational and human activities. Originally, performance measures were used as surrogates for these outcomes, and a direct link between performance management systems, human nature, and outcomes was not made. This omission was addressed by Argyris (1952) (referred to by Vagneur and Peiperl, 2000, p. 25) and later on by Simon et al. (1954). They explored the human behavioral side of performance management system use, looking specifically at the budgeting system. Both concluded that budgets and budgeting processes could be associated with important human relation problems. These included workermanagement separation, cross-boundary conflict, and job-related tension. Their conclusions were substantial departures from the mechanistic approach to

Managing through measures: a study of impact on performance

“…System maturity  More mature systems are more effective Evans, 2001;Martins, 2002 Organisational structure  Importance of aligning structure and measurement Hendricks, 1996;Bourne et al, 2002 Organisational size  Measurement is easier in larger organisations and more problematic in smaller ones Hoque and James, 2000;Hudson et al 2001aHudson et al , 2001b Organisational culture  Alignment between the cultural elements embedded in the measurement system and the users' cultural preference is beneficial De Waal, 2002;Gates, 1999;Johnston et al, 2002;Lingle and Schiemann, 1996;Lockamy and Cox, 1995;Maisel, 2001;Malina and Selto, 2002;Bititci et al, 2004Management style Gelderman, 1998Libby & Luft, 1993 Competitive strategy  Measures should be aligned to strategy Kaplan andNorton, 1996, 2001;Lockamy, 1998;Mendoza and Saulpic, 2002;McAdam and Bailie, 2002;Neely, 1998 Resources and capability  Companies need resources and capabilities to implement and refresh their measurement systems Bourne, 2004, Kennerley and Information Systems infrastructure  High data integrity and a low burden of data capture are important Bititci et al, 2002;Eccles, 1991;Lingle and Schiemann, 1996;Manoochehri, 1999 Other management practices and systems  There should be alignment between measurement and other systems (e.g. budgeting, compensation)…”

Has social care performance in England improved? An analysis of performance ratings across social services organisations

“…These behavioural factors, which may be largely responsible for improving performance, operate between the work of front-line staff (whose activity largely forms the data on which performance management is based) and the measurement and reporting of performance (de Waal, 2003;Yang and Hsieh, 2007); these factors are managerial rather than political (Behen, 2003;Melkers and Willoughby, 2005), local rather than national. To investigate these factors and their relative influence on ratings requires a study of local councils as, currently in social care, we simply do not know how managers across England make use of data locally and the extent to which their behaviours affect performance as reported4.…”

Estudo De Percepções Quanto Às Melhorias Oriundas Da Implantação E Prática Do Gerenciamento Da Rotina

“…Lipe e Saterio (2000) apud Waal (2003) identificaram que limitações cognitivas dos gestores podem levar a utilizações diferentes de um mesmo sistema de medição e controle de desempenho, fazendo com que a organização não se beneficie plenamente de sua utilização.…”