More Performance Leadership – Less Performance Management
Traditional methods of managing performance are being refined in modern companies all over the world. So that the concept of ‘performance management could be replaced by a new word.
The majority of new strategies aren’t as much about managing performance but rather ‘leading’ and motivating it. The expression systems require management, and people require leadership’ is very appropriate in this context since if you don’t get the ‘people’ aspect right, most projects are bound to be a failure…
Traditional performance management
Many organizations are still using performance-based systems that trace their roots back to 50 years. They were developed for a different time and for a different world. Nowadays, more people work in service or knowledge-based work than in factories or manufacturing, back when the system was developed.
While financial systems, sales systems, reports systems, and other systems have been improved, however, we continue to employ a lot of the same tools for our most valuable asset: our employees.
It’s not a surprise then that change initiatives and other measures designed to increase efficiency levels are often unsuccessful; the strategy is not working from the beginning.
Evaluation and measurements of skill by presenting end-of-year ratings and meetings for compliance is a flawed approach that is based on the Newtonian conception of the world. This is the place where each employee is considered to be an integral part of a machine that contributes to the operation of the entire. Individuals are seen as logical and rational elements of the overall.
As long as the cogs are tuned and oiled periodically and tuned, the machine will continue to run. This is the standard management philosophy, but it’s not working. A recent Deloitte survey found that more than 50 percent of executives believe their management system isn’t achieving the desired impact.
Making people the central point of the system
The fact that humans do not have the same rational and logical creatures that are in the Newtonian world suggests that it’s no longer a surprise that systems for managing performance are disintegrating.
The annual performance review can produce negative results, with employees experiencing different reactions to the one they expected. This is usually caused by cognitive biases on every side.
The employee and the manager have different expectations; Both have requirements that haven’t been addressed. Additionally, there could be deeply embedded biases that result in a positive outcome from the review very unlikely.
Apart from the low chance of success and the low success rate, traditional performance management systems can be time-consuming and costly.
How is neuroscience helping
The rapidly growing neuroscience field offers a wealth of knowledge regarding leadership and HR.
“Performance leadership” is focused on ensuring the best performance of employees and employees making the most of their time within the workplace.
Instead of relying on outdated measures and highlighting the weaknesses of a person, it examines what drives and motivates individuals to perform better. A lot of the answers can be discovered in the shared social and cognitive requirements of individuals – and the neuroscience field has identified six primary requirements that are shared by everyone in various quantities.
These cognitive needs form an essential foundation that makes effective development and communication possible, allowing the management team and their staff to work more effectively together; there are other articles here that discuss these needs more in-depth.
Organizations should eliminate the annual performance assessment in favor of more regular informal discussions on the spot about actual performance. This gives continuous and valuable feedback and coaching that increases engagement and performance right now.
