Performance Management

The position of a manager or a consultant in an organisation entails many things. One of the roles is to evaluate and scrutinise employees` ability to deliver to the set standards at work. Secondly, the feedback is documented, and finally, the information is used to highlight to the specific workers on how to improve their areas of weakness. The performance appraisal (PA) is an indispensable tool in carrying out these functions, and it helps stakeholders know whom to fire, demote, retain, or promote among their employees (Sudarsan 2009, p. 48). There are many types of performance appraisal. The article “Performance Management. You Say You Want a Revolution” describes the use of ratings as a way of measuring performance (Johnson 2017, p. 15). The author argues that its use makes it easier for the manager to gauge the ability of the workers to deliver as anticipated, whether a success or a failure. The subject is relevant in the rapidly advancing workplace environment so that the manager needs to be innovative at all time for success. Consequently, the performance framework does not only create a suitable environment for staffs and managers to work together, review and monitor employee`s delivery in the growth of the organisation, but it is also significant for effective performance management (PM). The working paper will focus on the author’s viewpoints and compare the arguments to the experience at Starbucks Coffee Company to outline the appropriateness of ratings as a strategy for measuring performance (Starbucks Coffee Company 2017, p. 3).

Reflective Critical Analysis

The Author is Justified in Arguing that Performance Ratings Should not be Eliminated

Performance ratings should not be scrapped entirely because every single employee has a role to play that contributes to the growth of the company. By following set goals in an organisation, both workers and employers can evaluate and analyse the employee`s work as a team, hence the essence of performance management. Indeed the PA is a continuous process, done annually (Chong et al. 2011, p. 505). Along the trajectory of employee evaluation, managers get to know the strengths and weakness of specific staff, where training is needed, rewards and compliments are vital. It is essential to consider that employees, the core utilizers of the organisation's PA system, recognise its credibility. Workers are the primary subjects to the guidelines of the human resource department even though they play a significant role in the realisation of the overall organisational goals. It is thus necessary to involve them closely in key decision-making processes as the decision-making process relies solely on their activity (Prowse & Prowse 2010, p. 200). Creating hopes and believes in employees about the integrity, honesty, and reliability of the competence of the PA rating and awarding system is indispensable.

Other than the aspect of time, establishing reliable PM systems is critical in engaging all the relevant parties like the executive, management, and support boards in an organisation. The process can become more efficient if a special committee including the employees is composed so that maximum support can be marshalled. The management team should also enhance a follow-up process for the success of the PM. In case of failure, lack of understanding or inaccessibility information the then the staff should be trained over the same (Chong et al. 2011, p. 506). Exchange of duties and rewarding can be valuable at this level. Indeed, reviewing the PM system is imperative. The author notes that “The elements constitute what is valued by the employer and is integrated into day-to-day life in the workplace - these should not be 'add-ons” (Johnson 2017, p. 12). It thus follows that rather than sidelining or eliminating them, the evaluation points play a crucial role in enabling the understanding of the daily operations in the firm. However, it should be noted that in all instances, all the changes made should be known to the employees for positive feedback because they are the ones who are directly involved in the implementation of the organisational objectives.

It is also critical to note that the basis for the author’s argument being justified is from the understanding that with the PM and appraisal system in place is likely to improve its external brand. An organisation that employs all the original concepts on the system has the potential of emerging as the preferred firm that will attract more potential employees. The role of the PM intuitive to enable the achievement of personal goals based on an objective criterion. The author notes “One study estimated that only 25 per cent of a performance rating could be attributed to objective performance, with the rest influenced by subjective factors and error" (Johnson 2017, p. 10). As well as meeting the employer`s objectives, which makes staff yearn to be associated with the entity (Prowse & Prowse 2010, p. 199). If the public as of outstanding quality recognises the brand, products, and services of an organisation, then it is a good measure of and brand. Employees should feel recognised, rewarded and appreciated for their hard work. By so doing, they become motivated and capable of effortlessly seeking to meet the standard threshold of performance in their specific areas of responsibility within an Institute (Sudarsan 2009, p. 47). Other than helping workers access essential information in their occupation, it should be pertinent to the urge of making its workers meet their objectives in their career.

Current Performance Culture of the Organization

Visions and Values Driven

Starbucks Coffee Company PM system is understandable and tends to be defined by an idea that is convenient for the employees. The values are explicitly determined and outline the criteria used for evaluation, monitoring and rating of workers as these should be known to everyone beforehand. The managers at Starbucks Coffee Company consider that a visionless and one that lacks value might discourage and deter workers from recognising its effectiveness (Ikramullah & Cascio 1982, p. 369). Thus, the firm insists that employees should be guided by a performance evaluation that is driven by a vision and they should know the consequences of poor performance and the objectives of the set PA system.

Clear Performance Expectations

It is essential to consider that Starbucks Coffee Company employees, the core utilizers of the organisation's PM system, recognise its credibility. Workers in the organisation are the primary subjects of the guidelines of the human resource department (Starbucks Coffee Company 2017, p. 56). It is thus necessary to involve them closely in key decision-making processes especially those concerning their performance. Creating hopes and believes in employees about the integrity, honesty, and reliability of the competence of the PM rating and awarding system is indispensable. Overall, the PM should warrant that there is a clear way of evaluating the performance level by the different employees.

Development and Improvement Focused

The primary role of the Starbucks Coffee Company PA system is on setting evaluation objectives and working on them one at a time while ensuring that adjustments are always made to better the system. The organisation, with the due involvement of its employees, comes up with standards that should be met in the course of work delivery (Starbucks Coffee Company 2017, p. 15). Since workers are party to the setting of objectives, they get motivated to achieve the targeted results. Furthermore, attainment of goals one at a given period boosts the morale of both the managers and the employees (Chong et al. 2011, p. 506). The environment of self-driven staffs, all focused on particular objectives, encourages and builds goal-oriented people. Therefore, the system should be very reliable in delivering the expected results in an organisation by improving outcomes in various capacities.

Performance Distinctions

The performance system of Starbucks Coffee Company is very reliable to the organisation as it is designed to scale heights of excellence. The justification is because the necessity of confirming objectives is emphasised and the suggestion of new ways of improvement is accessible at all managerial platforms (Starbucks Coffee Company 2017, p. 33). The standards set for quality service delivery are made known and convenient to all stakeholders in the company. The employees have priority of their welfare over any operations in the interest of the organisation, hence their motivation for working harder (Kondrasuk 2012, p. 118). Increased participation of employees and managers creates psych for more significant achievements. Therefore, the organisation's system is relevant because it makes all people responsible for staying aware of the short and long-term objectives of the organisation.

Feedback Environment

Due to the diversity in the jurisdiction of a country based legal systems, the PA regulations cannot be universal; however, there are basic guidelines that cut across all appraisal frameworks. Managers in Starbucks Coffee Company are rational and consider the need for not engaging employees in punishment or retaliation based on the feedback that they obtain (Starbucks Coffee Company 2017, p. 45). The response often varies depending on human social variations like religion, political inclinations, race, age, and disability and they are never the determinants in discriminating against workers because of appraisal. Fair, impartial, and evidence-based feedback in performance appraisal is desirable (Ikramullah & Cascio 1982, p. 369). Therefore, such a system creates a healthy working environment whereby employees can seek clarification from their superiors if they are discontent with their results.

Current Performance Culture of the Organization

Greater Focus on Development

According to Starbucks Coffee Company's model of assessment, it is structured so that workers become psyched up and motivated to aim at achieving specific set goals on advancing the existing systems (Thompson 1981, p. 55). The firm asserts that hard objectives eventually result in a better outcome, as the affectivity of workers is always thorough when the goals for development are outlined. By clearly highlighting and explaining significant responsibilities, employees understand their organisation better, hence a concerted effort toward desirable achievements. Research shows that if employees are party to the goal setting, then managers have little to do regarding evaluation and monitoring for good results. Therefore, this theory if the best frameworks for making employees work expeditiously.

Introduced Strength Based Focus

Starbucks Coffee Company has also set its working environments to promote strengths-based attention. The management of the firm explains how good results motivate the employees. With set objectives in an organisation, results are expected from respective employees based on the ability of each member. Indeed, when the managers get desirable outcomes, and the separate workers learn they met the required standards, their morale is boosted and their energy to work if further raised significantly (Sudarsan 2009, p. 53). Consequently, the association leads to a more considerable effort to achieving even better, if rewards, promotion, and appreciation are pertinent to the appraisal scheme.

Introduced Future-focus

One of the significant hypotheses advanced by Starbucks Coffee Company is that about having an expectancy theory modelled for the future. The company’s management performance framework outlines that employees ought to work with their personality, behaviour, and motivation focused on the end goal (Sudarsan 2009, p. 54). Consequently, if a known performance attracts personal reward the realisation of a future focus has been achieved. Finally, workers at Starbucks Coffee Company are committed to following the working formula, so they are party to the gratifying outcome in the end. Effort, performance, and personal goal are three items whose relationships define the core of the Starbucks Coffee Company. The overall impression is that when these three factors are involved in the appraisal plan, the effect is that all the workers will be motivated to the future objectives as they will be inspired by the confident expectation.

Alignment Strategic Business Objectives and Individual Goals

The strategy of Starbucks Coffee Company as an organisation tends to rhyme in meaning with the PM system according to the institution of the performance policies criterion. Furthermore, the specific objectives of the employers should be compatible with the PA. Aligning plans by balancing the individual and organisational goals finally lead to a unified effort of meeting common timelines (Ikramullah & Cascio 1982, p. 368). Employee training, rewarding, and appreciation is thus critical in the apprehension of the stated objectives because when a worker is modelled based on the needs of the firm, they will replicate by demonstrating better performance overall.

Linked Performance Ratings with Pay

The goals of an organisation should be particular in reason to align the performance of the employees to the compensation that they receive. The ratings thus remove the doubt among the staff, as they know specific responsibilities to perform and the expected income they will get. Deadline is also essential in this case because it is a crucial indicator of performance. The tasks allotted to staff should be time bound, so expected income is delivered in a given period. The relevance of the objectives to the mission and vision of the organisation makes them attainable (Ikramullah & Cascio 1982, p. 369). Hence, the profound need for the analysis as a tool for performance assessment system designing is that it ensures that the outcome by a given employee translates to their income.

Conclusion

In summary, the performance evaluation process is a critical measure in any company as it forms the basis for the management to determine how the workers are faring. In the course of establishing the appropriate system in the institution, the top management should witness and agree to the values the framework will advocate for in the long-term. Hence, just as the case with Starbucks Coffee Company, the priorities should mirror the company`s culture. The mission and vision statements of the PA system consequently should make the goals corresponding to the values set. The mission statement should consider the role of the managers, benefits to the public, the implementation and the assessment processes in the organisation`s objectives to make the system more effective. Annual scrutiny of the set goals is prudent in a firm as big as Starbucks Coffee Company. Therefore, the performance systems should be primarily founded on the principles of fairness, confidentiality, reciprocity, and transparency.

References

Chong, S., Gottfredson & Aguinis, 2011. A Motivational Approach to Reconstructing Performance Management Systems. Why we hate performance management-And why we should love it. , pp.503–507.

Ikramullah, M. & Cascio, 1982. Fairness Perceptions of Performance Appraisal System : Scientific, legal, and operational imperatives of workable performance appraisal systems. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(21), pp.367–346.

Johnson, G., 2017. Performance management :You say you want a revolution? Performance management.

Kondrasuk, J.N., 2012. The ideal performance appraisal is a format, not a form. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 11(1), pp.115–130.

Prowse, P. & Prowse, J., 2010. The dilemma of performance appraisal. In Business Performance Measurement and Management: New Contexts, Themes and Challenges. pp. 195–206.

Starbucks Coffee Company, 2017. Starbucks Coffee Company. Starbucks Coffee Company. Available at: ftp://66.190.60.65/shares/USB_Storage/Tyler/Documents/MKTG335/STARBUCKS.docx.

Sudarsan, A., 2009. Employee Performance Appraisal: The (Un) Suitability of Management by Objectives and Key Result Areas. CURIE Journal, 2(2), pp.47–54.

Thompson, K.R., 1981. The Effects of MBO on Performance and Satisfaction in a Public Sector Organization. Journal of Management, 7(1), pp.53–68.