Performance management Theory and model development

Performance management is recommended to be the HR management function through which team motivation as well as performance can be addressed effectively. Shih et al. (2009) studied and presented a conceptual scheme concerning the core constituents of high performance work systems (HPWS) and examined their effects on organizational performance. Using structural equation model techniques, the study concluded that better performing firms were found to have invested in more sophisticated HRM practices mainly including employees’ performance appraisals, which further enhanced organizational performance. The conclusion of Shih et al. (2009) reinforces the interpretation of this study that HR performance management is a significant function for organizational success. This study interprets that for a successful project outcome, the significance of HR performance management deserves a higher precedence than what the existing literature of performance management sets for it.

 

Kouhy et al. (2009) examined the relationship between HR policies, management accounting and organization performance by using a cross case analysis. Seven main HR policies were analyzed and subsequently categorized as job for life policy which included recruitment, training, performance-related bonus scheme, teamwork, organizational culture, and pensions. Important communication links between HR managers and management accountants are budgets, strategic plans, performance-related bonus scheme and decision making. Kouhy et al. (2009) found that all the selected functions had a significant impact on organizational performance. For example, if we take teamwork from recruitment considering it’s as an important thing, as well as most the organizations proving team building training for their staffs.

 

interprets that the performance-related bonus scheme is a parameter in the contribution of Kouhy et al. (2009) that requires astute performance management for its processing. Therefore, the conclusion of Kouhy et al. (2009) strengthens the perception of this study that performance management of HR affects organizational performance.

 

An effective way to control a project is to continuously measure the progress of its work and the teams working on it; comparing that progress against the plan and then adjusting the development parameters to correct any deviation from the project plan. For example in my present organization still, we are closely implementing the project with government bodies, we have an annual plan to work, to achieve the outcome and outputs on time we have a monthly work plan and weekly work plan for project officers, and it really makes our works essay, time to time we can measure where are we? And what next? This study interprets that adopting the guidelines of Wier (2001), using appropriate software for monitoring HR and work progress shall be beneficial. The project manager is the right person for this job. However, depending on the size of the team and load of monitoring work, a separate unit to monitor the progress may also be established that reports to the project manager and helps him in maintaining consistent monitoring.

 

frequent performance monitoring is the key to effective performance management of HR to ensure the desired outcome of the project. It is logical that performance monitoring gives measure of management performance of HR for the project and these terms are reportedly associated with project outcome. However, it is true that project outcome is a concept that needs a rational understanding and a specific definition. Aaron et al. (2001) declared project success achievable by declaring project management a strategic, but complex activity. Traditionally, a project is perceived successful when it meets time, budget, and performance goals. However, project success is not just meeting time and budget.

 

Without continual and effective monitoring, a control process may fall into a state of despair or not be executed altogether (Strub and Lucas, 2003). This study shows that there needs to be an effective performance monitoring system in place and, more importantly, managers need to be aware of rational monitoring techniques. The study proposes that performance monitoring is a tool that is within the hands of the project manager. The project manager should utilize this tool constructively due to its effects on the project. It can potentially make or break the project. Therefore, it is recommended that the intentions of the project managers should be to exercise constructive performance monitoring which will motivate the team towards the accomplishment of the project in a timely fashion. The latest knowledge on HR management recommends adopting the 360 degree performance management (Decenzo and Robbins, 2002).

 

 

 

Resultantly, 30% of the IT projects suffered from problems like cost overrun, time delays and customer’s dissatisfaction. The empirical findings of this study triggered the need to concentrate on the specific HRM function, that is, performance management of HR during a project life cycle to rationally identify and define its precedence among all the functions recommended for a project manager. Literature acknowledges that improving the effectiveness of HRM functions in the organizations optimizes its worth and progress (Paauwe, 2004).

 

On the other hand, behind successful IT projects, HR functions were reported to have served the primary role. This apparent conflict in the theory of project management literature and its real applications demands an empirical study to identify the significance and actual precedence of HR performance management as it reportedly affects the project outcome in real practice, while literature on project management awards it secondary ranking. Further, literature of HRM does not conform to the literature on project management in terms of setting precedence for HRM functions in actual practices. In order to gain insight into how the HRM helps organizations gain value through performance management of HR, workforce scorecards are strongly recommended to be adopted, considering this exercise essential (Becker et al., 2001; Mayo, 2001; Phillips et al., 2001; Huselid et al., 2005). The study, therefore, aims to pursue an empirical research to reveal and define the exact precedence of HR performance management during the exercises of project management such that the project managers are appropriately guided to adopt and perform this function keeping it at its due significant level.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Aaron J, Dov D, Ofer L, Alan C, Maltz J (2001), Project Success: A Multidimensional Strategic Concept. LRP J., retrieved on 4/6/2005 from http://www.lrpjournal.com, 3: 1-7.

Becker BE, Huselid MA, Ulrich D (2001). The HR Scorecard: Linking People, Strategy and Performance, Boston, MA. Harv. Bus. School, 2: 30–150.

Kouhy R, Vedd R, Yoshikawa T, Innes J (2009). ‘Human resource policies, management accounting and organisational performance’. J. Hum. Resour. Cost. Account, 13(3): 245-263.

Paauwe J (2004). HRM and Performance: Achieving Long Term Viability, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1: 80-140

Shih H, Chiang Y, Hsu C (2006). ‘Can high performance work systems really lead to better performance?’ Int. J. Manpower, 27(8): 741-763

Shih H, Chiang Y, Hsu C (2006). ‘Can high performance work systems really lead to better performance?’ Int. J. Manpower, 27(8): 741-763

Strub J, Lucas J (2003). Attributes of Sarbanes-Oxley Tool Sets Part Two: Information and Communication, Monitoring and Startup Tips, Online Journal IT Quest (The Source of IT Knowledge). Retrieved on 5/4/2006 from http://www.it-quest.bz.

Wier S (2001). Right Person in Project Team, Online Journal Earthlink, Retrieved on 4/11/2005 from http://home.earthlink.net/~swier/design3.html, pp. 2 – 3

“HR Basics: Performance Management.” YouTube, 14 Jan. 2017, www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyOZ_4rWWiY.