Employee Well-Being: Can Performance Management Systems Help? Yes, But They Sure Can Hurt Too!

2012 ◽  
pp. 133-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul E. Levy ◽  
Kelsey Herb ◽  
Noelle Frantz ◽  
Alison Carr
Keyword(s):  
Performance Management ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Performance Management Systems

scholarly journals Prestatiemanagement in het Hoger Onderwijs:

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 39-60
Author(s):  
Robin Bauwens
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Performance Management ◽  
Higher Education Institutions ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Unintended Effects ◽  
Academic Leaders ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Performance Management Systems

SUMMARY This paper deals with the question of how we can improve performance management systems in higher education institutions. Performance management systems are defined as configurations of complementary human resource management (HRM) practices that enable organizations to set goals, give feedback and evaluate the efforts of their employees. Higher education institutions have adopted performance management systems to manage their staff more efficiently and effectively against the backdrop of challenges like democratization, marketization and public accountability. However, in higher education institutions, such systems often result in unintended effects on academic employees’ well-being and performances. Like burnout, reduced innovation and lower team performances. This particularly applies to non-professorial higher education staff. In response, scholars have started to inquire into the ‘success conditions’, particular conditions under which the unintended effects of performance management systems can be avoided or reversed. Drawing on four empirical studies, this paper examined how and when performance management systems yield positive outcomes for the well-being and performance of academic employees in higher education institutions. The findings show that performance management systems have positive synergies with both employees’ well-being and performances (mutual gains). In addition, leaders are observed to be key supporters of performance management systems. However, they should not be regarded as a panacea, as our findings also seem to suggest a more complex interplay. Such findings contrast with the dysfunctional effects of performance management systems as described in higher education literature. However, it is important to remain critical. The main message is that academic employees’ personal perceptions of performance management implementation are a force to be reckoned with in striving for healthy and performant academic employees. Therefore, the subsequent challenge moves to managing those perceptions and building academic leaders.

Performance management in public universities: overcoming bureaucracy

2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (4) ◽  
pp. 736-753 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nunzio Angiola ◽  
Piervito Bianchi ◽  
Letizia Damato
Keyword(s):  
Performance Management ◽  
Public Universities ◽  
Organizational Factors ◽  
Public University ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Management Tools ◽  
Performance Levels ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Performance Management Systems ◽  
Adoption And Implementation

Purpose Considering a micro performance perspective, the purpose of this paper is to analyze whether and to what extent the adoption of better performance management systems could improve the performance levels of a public university. Design/methodology/approach With reference to a period of four years (2011-2014), the quality of performance management systems of 29 Italian universities (response rate: 48 percent) was examined and the possible effects on performance levels of these institutions were analyzed by means of statistical methodologies (multiple regression analysis). Outcome indicators were considered. Findings The findings indicate the need to go further “measurement,” and to take care of performance “management,” especially in complex organizations as universities, where academicians identify themselves more with their professions than with the organization and where technicians and administrative employees might look at the performance-based reform with “bureaucratic eyes.” A fruitful cooperation between the professional soul and the bureaucratic one is paramount. Originality/value Studies which analyze organizational factors that could affect the adoption and implementation of performance management systems are rare, and use in prevalence qualitative methods or refer to machine bureaucracies, not many to professional ones as public universities. Moreover, the performance management literature in a public university context deepens the topic of the selection of KPIs and the focus is mainly on macro performance or on management tools for gathering and analyzing performance measures.

scholarly journals Organisational readiness for introducing a performance management system

2012 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Ochurub ◽  
Mark Bussin ◽  
Xenia Goosen
Keyword(s):  
Performance Management ◽  
Management System ◽  
Change Readiness ◽  
Readiness For Change ◽  
The Body ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Performance Management System ◽  
Performance Management Systems ◽  
Managerial Implications ◽  
A Performance

Orientation: The successful introduction of performance management systems to the public service requires careful measurement of readiness for change. Research purpose: This study investigated the extent to which employees were ready for change as an indication of whether their organisation was ready to introduce a performance management system (PMS).Motivation for the study: Introducing system changes in organisations depends on positive employee preconditions. There is some debate over whether organisations can facilitate these preconditions. This research investigates change readiness linked to the introduction of a PMS in a public sector organisation. The results add to the growing literature on levels of change readiness.Research design, approach and method: The researchers used a quantitative, questionnairebased design. Because the organisation was large, the researchers used stratified sampling to select a sample from each population stratum. The sample size was 460, which constituted 26% of the total population. They used a South African change readiness questionnaire to elicit employee perceptions and opinions.Main findings: The researchers found that the organisation was not ready to introduce a PMS. The study identified various challenges and key factors that were negatively affecting the introduction of a PMS.Practical/managerial implications: The intention to develop and introduce performance management systems is generally to change the attitudes, values and approaches of managers and employees to the new strategies, processes and plans to improve productivity and performance. However, pre-existing conditions and attitudes could have an effect. It is essential to ensure that organisations are ready to introduce performance management systems and to provide sound change leadership to drive the process effectively. This study contributes to the body of knowledge about the challenges and factors organisations should consider when they introduce performance management systems.Contribution/value-add: This research adds to the knowledge about aspects of change readiness, change management and introducing change initiatives.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document