Advanced Remuneration and Performance Management Systems

This report presents Diagnosis of Case Study Performance Management System. It also demonstrates the Comparison of two Performance Management Systems that could be used by O'Meara Electronics Company. It also provides the Recommendation for O'Meara Electronics Company to implement appropriate performance management system.

Running head: ADVANCED REMUNERATION AND PERFORMANCE

ADVANCED REMUNERATION AND PERFORMANCE
2
Table of Contents
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................3
Diagnosis of Case Study Performance Management System.......................................................................3
Comparison of two Performance Management Systems.............................................................................4
Conclusion...................................................................................................................................................7
Recommendation for the Case Study organization......................................................................................7
References.................................................................................................................................................10

ADVANCED REMUNERATION AND PERFORMANCE
3
Introduction
This report presents Diagnosis of Case Study Performance Management System. It also
demonstrates the Comparison of two Performance Management Systems that could be used by
O'Meara Electronics Company. It also provides the Recommendation for O'Meara Electronics
Company to implement appropriate performance management system.
Diagnosis of Case Study Performance Management System
From the case study, it is analyzed that there are different performance management system is
used by the O'Meara Electronics Company such as executive staff forum and all staff forum. A
participatory strategy to a new remuneration management system indicates that all people are
involved in the remuneration system. The company will get all staff together in the workplace
and have open discussion (Van Dooren, Bouckaert, and Halligan, 2015).
The Performance Management System - All Staff/All Day Forums
It is also identified that the procedure requires participation and assist the managers in
monitoring and controlling the performance. It is addressed that all organizational performance is
associated with the performance of the individual. Under the initial stage, the employees at the
lower level in the production will set the attainable goals with particular measures. At the second
stage, employees set the goals with their managers and supervisors. In this way, the employees
would be accountable for putting forward their individual career goals as well as performance
goals. An individual employee specifies a period in which they assess how they work to attain
their goals. The supervisor and managers give feedback to employees about the performance
appraisal (Mone, and London, 2018). The outcome of performance review becomes the basis for
changing new goals and setting the goals.
The issue in this performance system

ADVANCED REMUNERATION AND PERFORMANCE
4
There are different issues identified by the O’Meara Electronics such as lacking with regards to
processes and activities for managing performance. The staff was clarified that they will not
perform with the supervisor as it will create complexity in the performance system. The
managers are too scared of the complaint of workforces who have been with the corporation for a
long duration. O’Meara Electronics does not have a program that aids the workforces and
managers for working with regards to success. It also does not have an incentive plan that is
required for attaining the positive outcome. There is an issue for workforces to perform in every
day and not thinking regarding how well a large number of workforces does their jobs
(Buckingham, and Goodall, 2015).
Comparison of two Performance Management Systems
There is two performance management system used by an organization such as 360-degree
feedback, and clear rating scale. It is stated that 360-degree feedback is also recognized as multi-
rater feedback where feedback comes from peers, colleagues, and managers at the workplace and
self-assessment and other sources like volunteers, clients, and other stakeholders. Under this
performance management system, senior managers are accountable to assess the performance of
other workforces but often do not obtain enough feedback themselves. 360-degree feedback
permits an individual for understanding how their effectiveness as a manager, co-workers and
managers is viewed by others (Shields, et. al., 2015).
In opposed to this, the clear rating scale is used as performance management system. Under this
technique, the rating scale is used to aid guide and make simpler to the assessment procedure.
Poorly developed rating scale could be a major source of subjectivity, conflicts, and ambiguity.
These all determine the performance assessment procedure. A reliable analysis provides
consistent ratings for the same performance over time with a range of raters (Gerrish, 2016).

ADVANCED REMUNERATION AND PERFORMANCE
5
Apart from this, companies also use the 360-degree feedback performance management
procedure to assess the individual managers. This comprehensive performance management
system facilitates feedback on the performance of manager gathered through different people
with whom they interact frequently. Sources of feedback involve the direct supervisor of
managers, customers, peers, self-assessment and vendors (DeNisi, and Smith, 2014).
Benefits of implementing 360-degree feedback performance:
 An individual obtains a broad view of how they are observed by others and how they
impact on others both pessimistically and optimistically.
 It also leads the open feedback and this feedback is observed as more objective and valid.
 It also leads to acceptance of outcomes and actions required.
 This method clarifies the critical aspect of performance, reinforces expected
competencies and addresses strengths, which could be practiced for obtaining the benefits
for the company (Budworth, Latham, and Manroop, 2015).
 This technique also supports the climate of persistent enhancement and emphasizes on
agenda for development, addressing key development areas for team, individual and
organization as a whole.
 Gaps are addressed between self-perception of employees and the perception of peers,
managers and direct reports.
 When feedback generated through a number of employees in various job functions and
discrimination due to declining age, gender, and race. Furthermore, the horns and halo
effects demonstrate the rating of the supervisor on the performance and recent
interactions with the workforces (Armstrong, Landers, and Collmus, 2016).

ADVANCED REMUNERATION AND PERFORMANCE
6
In opposed to this, rating scale demonstrates the performance level and attainment of team
members. They are moderately easy to maintain, administer and set up. Scales could be
alphabetic or numeric and narrative and most of have more than three response options. A
graphic rating scale could be used as a behavioral technique that usually more than three choices.
But, the company can add more section in questionnaires such as customer services, financial
services and accountability of an organization (Sutheewasinnon, Hoque, and Nyamori, 2016).
On the other hand, the 360-degree feedback performance management system gathers the data
through a large number of people with whom the workforces have frequent get in touch. The
evaluation shows each respondent question regarding the behavior of employee’s across a wide
range of job associated competencies. Its wider perspective and confidential nature make this
performance management system more credible to different workforces as compared to
traditional appraisal system (Jain, and Moreno, 2015).
In contrast to this, Clear rating scales technique is easy to apply and set up. It permits the
company to mark a point on a line for demonstrating the rating. A numeric rating scale and letter
scale of the rating are executed in an effort for producing an outcome. They can be generated
without explaining the detail of each rating points. This rating scale could be implemented where
each rating level is illustrated in detail and not always allocated a point value (Khamooshi, and
Golafshani, 2014).
The 360-degree performance management system is used to analyze the behavior, skills, and
understanding of the workforces by a supervisor. The survey questions are implemented to
evaluate how well the workforces know his job, the industry, and company. The skill component
assesses the time management of workforces and organizational competencies, particular job
competencies, customer satisfaction and communication competencies. The behavior question

ADVANCED REMUNERATION AND PERFORMANCE
7
aids to assess how well a workforce can handle the issue among many people. Thus, it is stated
that workforces should deal with the course of business (Bititci, Cocca, and Ates, 2016).
On the other hand, the rating scale is a prompt manner to review the set of workforces who have
homogenous job tasks. Under the rating scale, there could be one to five alternatives where one
alternative could be most terrible and five alternatives could be superior. The scale involves the
rating of unsatisfactory, satisfactory and exceptional. Managers who perform with a large
number of people can complete a lot of tasks on the same day. They can easily go through the
type of evaluation, which would save the money as well as costs (Kroll, and Moynihan, 2015).
Conclusion
From the above interpretation, it can be concluded that different performance management
system is practiced by the O'Meara Electronics Company such as executive staff forum and all
staff forum. It can be also summarised that certain issues were faced by O’Meara Electronics
during the implementation of performance management system like the inadequate efficient
process for managing performance. It can be also evaluated that two performance management
systems could be used by O'Meara Electronics Company like 360-degree feedback, and clear
rating scale. Both performance management systems are different from each other. It can be also
concluded that 360-degree feedback performance management should be used by the O'Meara
Electronics Company as compared to the rating scale performance management system due to
different benefits.
Recommendation for the Case Study organization
It can be recommended that 360-degree feedback should be used by the O'Meara Electronics
Company in performance management system as compared to the rating scale performance
management system. It will allow workforces for increasing comprehension about the impact of

ADVANCED REMUNERATION AND PERFORMANCE
8
communication on people in every day. But, it could be disadvantageous in a certain manner
such as, an employee tends to judge others as per their expectation and own experience that
could create biases in outcomes. As well as, managers may perceive workforces as per the output
whereas co-workers perceive others as per their agreeable nature. Moreover, subordinates
perceive supervisor as per their fairness. Thus, O'Meara Electronics Company can integrate the
observation with the point of view of these workforces to make a complete assessment. Different
perceptive can lend the reliability in the outcome of 360-degree feedback. O'Meara Electronics
Company can also obtain appraisal outcome more meaningful by evaluating the individual
(Ljungholm, 2015). It could provide the chances for making the authentic behavioral
modification.
In contrast to this, the rating scale performance management system can damage the relationship
between supervisor and subordinates by a number of components such as supervisor can give the
rating on personal judgment basis. Unlike the rating scale performance management system,
360-degree feedback can foster the atmosphere of trust as well as teamwork. Employees work
together to commit themselves for total honesty and supporting each other to increase the
understanding about their actions and performance. This experience could be gained when the
outcome of appraisal are favorable. O'Meara Electronics Company should develop the trust
between workforces for enhancing the high-performance teams within an organization (Kroll,
and Moynihan, 2015).
It can be also suggested that 360-degree feedback is vital for conducting the assessment of top
level managers. Managers can face the complexities in terms of getting the authentic feedback on
their performance. It can be also recommended that the success or failure of O'Meara Electronics
Company is a reliable indicator of personal effectiveness. It can be increased by permitting the

ADVANCED REMUNERATION AND PERFORMANCE
9
lower level supervisors and workforces for offering the feedback without the fear of justice.
Thus, reviews could be gathered openly through team members (Khamooshi, and Golafshani,
2014).
Survey questions should be practiced through skills, behavior, and knowledge of managers. The
assessment of knowledge can assess how well the manager understands the O'Meara Electronics
Company, industry and job as a whole. Under the skill assessment procedure, evaluators rate
how effectively the supervisor accomplishes the tasks and improves the effectiveness and quality
of outcomes. The behavior evaluation entails the communication effectiveness, interpersonal
skills, time management skills, and attitude towards others and organization. It also assesses how
well manager deals with the dynamic work atmospheres, attitude management and behavior
patterns (Kroll, and Moynihan, 2015).

ADVANCED REMUNERATION AND PERFORMANCE
10
References
Armstrong, M. B., Landers, R. N., & Collmus, A. B. (2016). Gamifying recruitment, selection,
training, and performance management: Game-thinking in human resource management.
In Emerging research and trends in gamification (pp. 140-165). UK: IGI Global.
Bititci, U., Cocca, P., & Ates, A. (2016). Impact of visual performance management systems on
the performance management practices of organizations. International Journal of
Production Research, 54(6), 1571-1593.
Buckingham, M., & Goodall, A. (2015). Reinventing performance management. Harvard
Business Review, 93(4), 40-50.
Budworth, M. H., Latham, G. P., & Manroop, L. (2015). Looking forward to performance
improvement: A field test of the feedforward interview for performance management.
Human Resource Management, 54(1), 45-54.
DeNisi, A., & Smith, C. E. (2014). Performance appraisal, performance management, and firm-
level performance: A review, a proposed model, and new directions for future research.
The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 127-179.
Gerrish, E. (2016). The Impact of Performance Management on Performance in Public
Organizations: A Meta‐Analysis. Public Administration Review, 76(1), 48-66.
Jain, A. K., & Moreno, A. (2015). Organizational learning, knowledge management practices
and firm’s performance: an empirical study of a heavy engineering firm in India. The
Learning Organization, 22(1), 14-39.
Khamooshi, H., & Golafshani, H. (2014). EDM: Earned Duration Management, a new approach
to schedule performance management and measurement. International Journal of Project
Management, 32(6), 1019-1041.

ADVANCED REMUNERATION AND PERFORMANCE
11
Kroll, A., & Moynihan, D. P. (2015). Does training matter? Evidence from performance
management reforms. Public Administration Review, 75(3), 411-420.
Ljungholm, D. P. (2015). The Practice of Performance Management in Public Sector
Organizations. Geopolitics, History and International Relations, 7(2), 190.
Mone, E. M., & London, M. (2018). Employee engagement through effective performance
management: A practical guide for managers. UK: Routledge.
Shields, J., Brown, M., Kaine, S., Dolle-Samuel, C., North-Samardzic, A., McLean, P., ... &
Plimmer, G. (2015). Managing Employee Performance & Reward: Concepts, Practices,
Strategies. USA: Cambridge University.
Sutheewasinnon, P., Hoque, Z., & Nyamori, R. O. (2016). Development of a performance
management system in the Thailand public sector: Isomorphism and the role and
strategies of institutional entrepreneurs. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 40, 26-44.
Van Dooren, W., Bouckaert, G., & Halligan, J. (2015). Performance management in the public
sector.UK: Routledge.