Individual Performance Measurement and Recommendations for CERA

The report discusses the limitations of individual performance measurement at CERA and recommends comparative and quality approaches for performance measurement. The findings suggest that the selection of performance measurement approach is significant for the firm to reduce the unfair treatment of employees. The report also highlights the importance of effective performance appraisal for enhancing employees' loyalty and improving the quality of their performance.

Human Resources Management

Executive summary
The employees’ performance measurement helps the management to create the
effective strategies to improve the performance. Further, it helps the firm to effectively offer
the reward to employees. In this regard, the finding of current report shows that the
consideration on the selection of performance measurement approach is significant for the
firm to reduces the unfair treatment of employees in the firm. Apart from this, to enhance the
employees’ loyalty for the firm and for improving the quality of their performance the
effective performance appraisal is necessary. Owing to this, the mix of comparative approach
and quality approach is beneficial to effectively evaluate the performance and for imparting
reward.

Table of Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................1
Question 1: Limitation of CERA’s individual performance measurement................................1
1.1 CERA's organizational strategy.......................................................................................1
1.2 Recent development in HRM practices of CERA............................................................2
1.3 Limitations of individual performance measure in CERA..............................................3
Question 2: Recommendations for performance measurement approach with indicative
methods......................................................................................................................................4
2.1 Comparative approach.....................................................................................................5
2.2 Quality approach..............................................................................................................5
Conclusion..................................................................................................................................6
References..................................................................................................................................8

Introduction
Human Resources Management (HRM) is the crucial department of the business
which acquires the highly valuable assets as the personnel who contribute towards the
success of the company by implementing the set actions (Snape & Redman, 2010). However,
adequate compensation, performance measurement and motivation are essential for managing
the performance of employees (Schmelter, Mauer, Börsch & Brettel, 2010). In this context,
the present report is based on Individual Performance Measurement (IPM) of CERA;
Australian Civil Engineering and Research Associates which provides consultancy services in
the context of construction sectors. The company uses virtual technologies and highly
competent staff for delivering the high-contact services to end users or clients. The story of
CERA represents the issue related to performance measurement which might affect the
progress of the business (Civil Engineering & Research Association, 2019). Owing to this,
the report has been prepared for identifying the limitations of IPM of CERA by considering
its strategy and the recent development of the respective HR practice. In addition to this, two
measurement approaches have been recommended by recognizing the related literature.
Question 1: Limitation of CERA’s individual performance measurement
1.1 CERA's organizational strategy
The CERA’s main strategy revolves around offering the high quality and high-contact
services for clients through maximum use of virtual technology and excellent, relational,
technical and marketing personnel. The company differentiates itself in the context of
innovation and service orientation from its competitors. It enables the business to set up itself
as the strong brand and effectively grab the attention of buyers. Yet, the professional and cost
competency of the company is broadly considered the same as the competitors; still, the focus
is laid on deriving the quality outcome. The constant efforts of the business to meet the
requirement of clients make it possible to get the cost competitiveness; though, it cannot be
considered as the main strategy. In this context, the company focuses on the internal growth
strategy in light of the well-known market. The rationale behind the same is the strategy of
the business to manage its human resources and applying the proper practices. For instance,
service-minded and highly talented young staff provides the novel ideas to address the
requirement of clients and offer them quality services (Civil Engineering & Research
Association, 2019). In this context, Snape & Redman (2010) asserted that human resources
1

are the important assets which demand corporation to apply the suitable recruitment and
selection procedure to get the highly competent personnel. It helps business in accomplishing
the set objectives. Furthermore, the issues in the selection procedure tend to increase the cost
of the business as the chances of selecting the wrong employees’ increases. It indicates that
CERA has effective HRM practices in place in order to offer unique services for the end
clients.
By focusing on the vision of the business, CERA strives on effective recruitment
policies and retain strategies whereby best people are retained. It proves to be effective in
getting the competitive edge of the business. Several studies have shown that effective
recruitment strategies contribute towards the success of the business as it shed light on
selecting the best people on the basis of requirement of the business (Järvinen & Karjaluoto,
2015; Goh, 2012). It has been evidenced in case of CERA as all its HRM practices are shaped
in the direction of quality personnel who force clients to come with the extended
expectations. Also, it is the main reason that business shed light on the small number of the
workforce but highly competent who can effectively derive the correct outcome (Civil
Engineering & Research Association, 2019).
1.2 Recent development in HRM practices of CERA
As per the case study of CERA, several recent practices developed by the business
such as respecting individual differences by placing them in the right place. Also, the
personnel is involved in setting the personal goals so they can effectively contribute towards
the success of the business. In this context, Clardy (2013) asserted that the involvement of
personnel in the goal setting procedure proves to be effective in alleviating their confidence
and making them more productive. For this purpose, best people of the business are rewarded
and incentivized for their better performance. For example, the incentive policy is provided
for personnel where in case they achieve the targets then the amount of incentive is
distributed among the staff. In this context, Snape & Redman (2010) argued that individual
recognition is crucial for the growth of the human resources as it positively influences their
behavior and forces them to work in the wellbeing of the firm. At this juncture, CERA does
not focus on the quality performance due to issue related to its measurement (Civil
Engineering & Research Association, 2019). Although, the current system of measuring the
performance is applied for the sake of saving the time as well as resources where the entire
focus is laid on the quality services to the end users.
2

Mayfield & Mayfield (2012) critical evaluated that measurement of performance
should be done in such a way that aligns with the organizational strategy, acceptable,
reasonable and specific. In this context, the recent development related to bonus policy as a
motivating tool for personnel does not measure the performance in the right manner. Also, it
may not be considered as the reasonable approach which goes in the line of the strategy of the
CERA (Civil Engineering & Research Association, 2019). It is because the business targets
clients to extend their expectations from quality services offered. Yet, the ineffective
measurement criteria for the performance of the workforce might negatively influence the
organizational success in the long term.
1.3 Limitations of individual performance measure in CERA
According to Torre, Pelagatti & Solari (2015), the performance measurement is the
critical aspect behind the growth and continuous development of the employees. They
believed that employees with the perceived internal and external inequalities tend to face
behavioral related issues. This is the issue with the CERA because workforce adjusted their
performance on the basis of their reward or performance measurement related criteria.
However, Lamberti & Noci (2010) argued that the performance of all workforce might not be
measured on the basis of the same criteria because some actually put extensive efforts
whereas others may not. This scenario was revealed in the case of CERA as poor performers
were being paid higher attention in comparison to the talented one. Also, it has been found
that the level of enthusiasm is not relatively higher as the workforce go through the motions
with the performance (Civil Engineering & Research Association, 2019). This scenario may
dissatisfy personnel with an extensive level of talents because their behavior gets changed
due to the feeling of being ignored despite putting the extensive efforts.
Another critical issue with the current performance measurement of CERA is related
to the poor connection of performance and reward at the broader level. Although, business
considers to offer financial benefits, encourage personnel to perform the challenging tasks
and provide the informal recognition (Civil Engineering & Research Association, 2019). Yet,
human resources require to be recognized in the appropriate manner for creating their
goodwill and showing their uniqueness at the workplace. It differentiates them from those
with poor performance and facilitates to change the current work environment (Artz,
Homburg & Rajab, 2012). This potential issue of misalignment between the reward structure
and quality performance increases the tension of personnel at the workplace. In this context,
3

Grabner (2014) asserted that effective link between performance and reward or pay leads to
increase the satisfaction of staff and make them more productive.
The current scenario of CERA reveals that management is less concerned about the
measurement of personnel and accordingly the performance and reward structure is not
linked. Although, the bonus scheme is applied on the basis of current performance
management system; Performance Planning and Review (PPR) but it requires effective
implementation which distinguishes the excellent performer rather treating them as the school
children (Civil Engineering & Research Association, 2019). This is because the incentive
plan does not provide a useful measure of performance instead it just provide equal treatment
for all personnel (Grabner, 2014). It reflects that despite showing the effective paper policy as
PPR, CERA requires to change its measurement criteria whereby the performance can
adequately be assessed and personnel can be offered the pay as per their efforts.
Question 2: Recommendations for performance measurement approach with indicative
methods
As per the identified limitations, the improvement in the current performance measurement
system is imperative to achieve the business goal and to deliver high quality, structural and
effective civil engineering assistance at the right time to the clients. It can be achieved by
enhancing the job satisfaction in the employees. In this context, Palaiologos, Papazekos &
Panayotopoulou (2011) asserted that job satisfaction is enhanced with the help of effective
performance measurement and appraisal practices. For example, Netflix is radical in
performance management and uses the 360-degree performance measurement system. The
employees of Netflix impart the feedback for the coworkers’ performance and increase their
awareness for the lacking issues. It shows that for measuring the performance of employees,
Netflix uses themselves (ETS, 2019). Apart from this, the Netflix use mixed strategies for
performance management instead of single strategy and increase the firm's productivity
(Mizne, 2017). In this regard, Gruman & Saks (2011) mentioned that effective performance
measurement and appraisal techniques build the trust in the employees and motivate them to
perform their task with full efforts. However, in the case of CERA, these practices are not
effectively aligned and do not offer the appropriate reward to their employees. It negatively
affects the performance of the employees. Thus, the following performance measurement
approach can be beneficial for the CERA
4

2.1 Comparative approach
On the basis of poor alignment of reward and quality performance in CERA, it is
recommended to use the comparative performance measurement approach and evaluate the
performance of employees by comparing with others. For this purpose, CERA can use force
distribution method for performance measurement and identify the position of individuals in
the departments. By following this approach, the management of CERA can easily identify
the difference between the individual performances and give the reward accordingly. It
increases the awareness of management for employees' competencies and identifies their
lacking areas (Aswathappa, 2013). It will further improve the performance of a highly
competent workforce. Therefore, the comparative approach can be effective for CERA and
enhance the firm's productivity and competitive edge in the industry.
According to Kramer et al. (2014) for imparting the reward in the employees, there
are several methods such as merit pay, gain sharing, incentive pay, profit- sharing, ownership
and skill based. In this context, Grabner (2014) asserted that the incentives motivate the
workforce to compile the wishes of management and work according to the business goals.
However, currently firm uses the incentive pay schemes, but it is not useful because of its
inability to rewarding highly competent and semi-competent employees. For this purpose, the
comparative approach for performance measurement will help the management to resolve the
issue related to the poor distribution of rewards by ensuring the reward for the top performer
(Armstrong & Taylor, 2014). It also motivates the employees to perform their task with full
efficiency. In this regard, Mayfield & Mayfield (2011) asserted that employee motivation
enhances their involvement with the firm which further promotes the innovation in the firm.
Thus, it helps the firm to offer quality and innovative services to the clients.
According to Nudurupati, Bititci, Kumar & Chan (2011), the comparative approach is
suitable for small firms because it is difficult to manage in large firms which have the high
amount of workforce with different job profiles. At this juncture, the CERA have approx.
Forty-five employees in various departments. Thus, it is more suitable to evaluate the
performance in effectively. However, the forced distribution has a high chance of prejudice
because it is based on subjective judgment (Taylor, Doherty & McGraw, 2015).
2.2 Quality approach
According to Nudurupati et al. (2011), high quality of products and services is
significant for the growth of the business because the poor quality forces them to find an
5

alternative solution. It degrades the competitive edge of the firm in the market place as well
as adversely influence the revenue. However, in the case of CERA, the weak measurement
practices increase the dissatisfaction in the employees and negatively affects their quality of
performance. Owing to this, the implementation of the quality approach can be beneficial by
considering the quality of the outcome. Due to quality approach, the CERA can render the
quality consultancy services to clients and increase their satisfaction. However, it is difficult
for the management to measure the performance of individual because in this approach
several sources such as technical source and consumer satisfaction from the quality are used
for making a practical judgment (Sadikoglu & Zehir, 2010). Thus, for measuring the quality
of the individual performance, the CERA can appoint the department head in each
department who monitor and communicate the feedback. Apart from this, the department
head can also consider the competencies of an individual for working with technology and
measure how they effectively complete their assigning task in minimum time. This approach
involves both internal and external factor for measuring the quality of performance thus; the
outcome of performance measurement will have a high standard (Armstrong & Taylor,
2014).
The quality approach for performance measurement will help the firm enhance the
consumer satisfaction through offering quality services (Nudurupati et al. 2011). In the case
of CERA, the quality of consultancy services is imperative for business success because it is
the foundation of growth. For this purpose, the management of CERA will measure the
quality of employees' task output with the organizational quality standards and will give the
feedback accordingly. This feedback will increase the employees learning and helps to
consider their shortcomings which can improve accordingly. In this context, Mayfield &
Mayfield (2011) proposed that the feedback on the performance enhance the organizational
learning which increases the contingency of employees' development. The management of
CERA can provide feedback on group meetings or personal meetings. Even can also provide
the suggestion to improve the quality. It helps the individual to improve the quality of
performance. Therefore, by using the quality approach for performance measurement, the
management of CERA can enhance the competency of the current workforce along with high
clients' satisfaction.
Conclusion
The report concludes that CERA's individual performance measurement is not appropriate
which may affect the highly talented personnel. The goal of the business is the deliver the
6

high contact services which require extensive efforts of skilled and competent staff. This
demands corporation to revise its performance measurement policy through which individual
can manage performance and accordingly ensure the growth at the workplace. On the basis of
the suggested approach, it can be concluded that the comparative approach helps the
management of the firm to evaluate the performance of individuals effectively. Apart from
this, it also helps the fair distribution of rewards which is necessary to maintain the ethical
standard of the firm. On the other hand, the quality approach enhances the organizational
learning of the employees by receiving valuable feedback on the quality of performance. It
reduces the error occurring contingency and improves the quality of the firm's services.
7

References
Armstrong, M., & Taylor, S. (2014). Armstrong's handbook of human resource management
practice. Kogan Page Publishers.
Artz, M., Homburg, C., & Rajab, T. (2012). Performance-measurement system design and
functional strategic decision influence: The role of performance-measure
properties. Accounting, organizations and society, 37(7), 445-460.
Aswathappa, K. E. M. A. L. (2013). Human resource management: Text and cases. Tata
McGraw-Hill Education.
Civil Engineering (2019). Strategy. [online]. Available at: <
https://doms.csu.edu.au/csu/file/677decc2-6646-404b-8e59-8920a739d262/1/CERA
%20.zip/CERA%20/strategy.html>. [Accessed on 18 January 2019].
Clardy, A. (2013). A General Framework for Performance Management Systems: Structure,
Design, and Analysis. Performance Improvement, 52(2), 5-15.
ETS, (2019). Netflix and Accenture have reappraised performance appraisals; have you?
[Online]. Available at:< https://www.etsplc.com/blog/netflix-and-accenture-have-
reappraised-performance-appraisals-have-you/>. [Accessed on 18 January 2019].
Goh, S. C. (2012). Making performance measurement systems more effective in public sector
organizations. Measuring business excellence, 16(1), 31-42.
Grabner, I. (2014). Incentive System Design in Creativity-Dependent Firms. Accounting
Review, 89(5), 1729-1750.
Gruman, J. A., & Saks, A. M. (2011). Performance management and employee
engagement. Human Resource Management Review, 21(2), 123-136.
Järvinen, J., & Karjaluoto, H. (2015). The use of Web analytics for digital marketing
performance measurement. Industrial Marketing Management, 50, 117-127.
Lamberti, L., & Noci, G. (2010). Marketing strategy and marketing performance
measurement system: Exploring the relationship. European Management
Journal, 28(2), 139-152.
8

Mayfield, M., & Mayfield, J. (2011). Effective performance feedback for learning in
organizations and organizational learning. Development and Learning in
Organizations: An International Journal, 26(1), 15-18.
Mizne, D. (2017). 7 Unexpected Employee Performance Management Trends To Watch For
In 2018. [Online]. Available at:< https://www.15five.com/blog/employee-performance-
management-trends-2018/>. [Accessed on 18 January 2019].
Nudurupati, S. S., Bititci, U. S., Kumar, V., & Chan, F. T. (2011). State of the art literature
review on performance measurement. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 60(2), 279-
290.
Palaiologos, A., Papazekos, P., & Panayotopoulou, L. (2011). Organizational justice and
employee satisfaction in performance appraisal. Journal of European Industrial
Training, 35(8), 826-840.
Sadikoglu, E., & Zehir, C. (2010). Investigating the effects of innovation and employee
performance on the relationship between total quality management practices and firm
performance: An empirical study of Turkish firms. International journal of production
economics, 127(1), 13-26.
Schmelter, R., Mauer, R., Börsch, C., & Brettel, M. (2010). Boosting corporate
entrepreneurship through HRM practices: Evidence from German SMEs. Human
Resource Management, 49(4), 715-741.
Snape, E., & Redman, T. (2010). HRM practices, organizational citizenship behaviour, and
performance: A multi‐level analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 47(7), 1219-
1247.
Taylor, T., Doherty, A., & McGraw, P. (2015). Managing people in sport organizations: A
strategic human resource management perspective. Routledge.
Torre, E., Pelagatti., M., & Solari, L. (2015). Internal and external equity in compensation
systems, organizational absenteeism and the role of explained inequalities. human
relations, 68(3), 409-440.
9