An easy change scenario-
The organization will at some point move a performance system from paper based to online access (say into an SAP module). The money and energy is not there for the technical transfer (and the change that goes with it). There is the ability to address the system itself. There are grumblings from stakeholders about the ties between measures, performance and rating (especially against others in similar but different functions). The icing on the cake is a sudden realization from executives that there is both room and need for “enhancement” (yesterdays blog word for change http://horizontalchange.com/2010/08/the-adult-bad-word/).
The approach is straight forward. The components-
- An understanding of the framework for the future software
- An explanation of what the performance system is for and what it should accomplish
- A deep and broad swath of data, perspective (good and not so) and idea gathering
- Potentially benchmarking of other companies
- A clear end state description of the system in action from the stakeholders perspective
To be able to run through these components well ahead of the software implementation is a dream come true for a change agent. It gives a very real chance to construct (or tweak or reconstruct) a system that feeds the objectives of the business, supports core values and makes it clear what works to be rewarded and what does not. With the right kind of feedback from stakeholders the solution can be the best of the current turned into an efficient and fair system and process.
You, no doubt, see many ways this will not be easy…
Odds are good that functions have fertilized the daisies (http://tinyurl.com/2cgbkpz for my organic change blog post) to the point where cross functional comparisons are apples to oranges. They are most likely attached to their way.
An inherent difficulty with performance rewards is the fact that one pool is divided in some way. Across the board pay raises are not common. In short not everyone can get an “A” no matter how hard they try. In every rating meeting I have attended there is also the edge from one level to the next, say high potential to not. Each of the leaders want their people to make the cut above the edge. In their justifications they often stray from fair comparisons (which can be remedied in the re-tweak of the process and measures).
They key for this type of “easy” change is to understand how the current system is viewed, and reacted to, by the stakeholders and then fashion a structure and process that has measures that will be acceptable. If there is also clarity about the reason for the performance system in the first place (that’s not flippant, it is amazing how much time is spent in this area with negligible effect).
