Performance Management Framework: A Comprehensive Analysis

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of the performance management framework, exploring key components such as Management by Objectives (MBO), review and agree processes, and 360-degree feedback. It delves into the strengths and weaknesses of cohesive versus non-cohesive tea...Read More

Running head: PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Topic 13: Performance Management General Framework
Name of the University:
Name of the Student:
Authors Note:

1PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Executive Summary
Performance management concept will be better analysed through explaining the positives and
negatives in the performance management approaches. The report will also consider explaining
performance management approach from a control theory perspective along with evaluating the
relevance of balance scorecard approach in ensuing better performance management in
organisations. The report revealed that is a common characteristic that is observed in the high-
performance teams is cohesiveness as it serves as a measure of interaction of the group to its
members. Balanced scorecard approach is one of the top ten widely employed management tools
all over the world, a list which encompass closely-related strategic planning at top priority.
Control theory appears to be quite mechanical with respect to human behaviour and
performance. This theory can work efficiently in a strict organisational framework in which
employee actions that are regularly monitored as well as controlled. The Balanced Scorecard
approach has several important perspectives that facilitate in better performance management of
the organisations:

2PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Table of Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................4
MBO, Review and Agree, 360-degree Feedback............................................................................4
Management by Objectives (MBO).............................................................................................5
Review and Agree........................................................................................................................6
360 Degree Feedback..................................................................................................................7
Comparing Strengths and Weaknesses of Cohesive Versus Non-Cohesive Teams and
the Application to High Performance Organisations.......................................................................8
Strengths and Weakness of Team cohesiveness and Application in High Performance
Organisation.................................................................................................................................8
Strengths and Weakness of Non-Cohesive Teams and Application in High Performance
Organisation...............................................................................................................................10
Performance Management from a Control Theory Perspective....................................................11
Overview of Control Theory.....................................................................................................11
Managing Performance by Means of Control Process in the System.......................................12
Application of Control Theory within Workplace.....................................................................13
Strengths and Weakness of Control Theory..............................................................................14
The Balanced Scorecard Approach...............................................................................................15
Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................18
References......................................................................................................................................19

3PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Appendices....................................................................................................................................22
Appendix 1.................................................................................................................................22
Appendix 2.................................................................................................................................22
Appendix 3.................................................................................................................................23
Appendix 4.................................................................................................................................31
Appendix 5.................................................................................................................................33

4PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Introduction
Performance management acts as set of activities which makes sure that the
organisational goals are attained in an effective manner. This process focuses on understanding
the manner in which employees contribute to attain organisational goal. An efficient
performance management along with appraisal process centres on aligning workforce,
developing competencies, enhancing employee career development and performance along with
attaining better business results (Akkermans & Van Oorschot, 2018). The performance
management framework generally focuses on measuring performance of a business, department,
employee or the processes implemented in managing specific tasks. The objective of the paper is
to analyse the concept of performance management in the context of management theory.
Performance management concept will be better analysed through explaining the positives and
negatives in the performance management approaches. In evaluating the general framework of
performance management certain individual components such as MBO, review and agree along
with 360 degree feedback will be analysed. Along with that analysing the strengths and
weaknesses of cohesive verses non-cohesive teams along with their application within the high
performance organisations will also be analysed. The report will also consider explaining
performance management approach from a control theory perspective along with evaluating the
relevance of balance scorecard approach in ensuing better performance management in
organisations.
MBO, Review and Agree, 360-degree Feedback
Alexander, Kumar & Walker, (2018) explained that performance appraisal to be a
process of performance review, performance evaluation and career development discussion

5PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
through which job performance of employee can be analysed and documented. Management by
Objectives (MBO), 360 degree feedback appraisal and Review and Agree serves as future
oriented performance management methods that are employed by organisation.
Management by Objectives (MBO)
MBO is also known as management by results (MBR) that serves as process of
elaborating objectives in company so that the employees as well as the management agree to
such objectives and realise the aspect they need to achieve in order to attain the organisational
goal (Cooper & Ezzamel, 2016). This performance appraisal technique focuses on measuring
performance of employees through analysing the extent to which predetermined work objectives
are attained. Generally the subordinates and the supervisors establish such objectives jointly. The
figure below signified the MBO process cycle.
Figure 1: MBO Process Cycle
(Source: Gregory, Robbins, Schwaitzberg & Harmon, 2017)

6PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Certain advantages and disadvantages related with MBO performance measurement
process are indicated below:
Advantages
 This method has the ability to deal with the issue of assuming traits of employees that is
required for ensuring job success
 Employees are judged based on real outcomes and not on their potential to attain success
 This method also realises the fact that it is complex to aspects that impacts employee
performance (Grossman, Rosch, Mazer & Salas, 2015)
Disadvantages
 This performance appraisal method can result in unrealistic expectations that might not
be reasonably attained
 Subordinates and supervisors must maintain better reality checking skills to employ
MBO appraisal techniques
Review and Agree
Hansen & Schaltegger, (2016) defined review and agree as an employee performance
measurement process that is also at times referred as annual review. This offers an opportunity
for a manager along with direct report to review employees’ performance against the pre-agreed
expectations along with recognising the reason where improvements can be made. Performance
review and agree process focuses on offering fair as well as proper feedback to employees
regarding their current performance. It also focuses on recognising the weaknesses and strengths
of individual employees along with whole teams. Performance review and agree has also faced

7PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
certain criticisms such as it is carried out on a frequent basic and allows issues to take place in
between reviews.
360 Degree Feedback
Herbst, (2017) defined 360 degree feedback approach as a system or process in which
employees attain confidential as well as anonymous feedback from people that work around
them that can be from employees’ peers, managers and direct reports. Such feedback is basically
offered on a form of indicating job skills, capabilities along with attitudinal and behavioural
criteria. This performance measurement process also includes a type of scoring or value
judgement process by appraises peers, subordinate employees, up-line managers, employees,
consumers, suppliers and team members of employees (Kakar, 2018). This performance
measurement process also takes into account that appraise must also evaluate themselves
employing sale feedback form. The results attained from 360 degree feedback are collectively
evaluated for representing the overall situation of the company. Certain advantages and
disadvantages related with this employee performance management process are indicated below:
Advantages
 This performance management process has advantages of decreasing the single rather
biases
 Peer along with the subordinate review might be advantageous for development purpose
 This feedback process is deemed to be fair and transparent which can encourage
development of an open culture which values attained feedbacks (Karkoulian, Assaker &
Hallak, 2016)
Disadvantages

8PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
 360 degree appraisal system might jeopardise the co-worker relationship
 Absence of professional maturity in dealing with certain inevitable negative comments
 Managers challenging the status quo along with favouring subordinates empowerment are
generally rated higher by the subordinates and rated lower by the supervisors (Marcus,
2018).
Comparing Strengths and Weaknesses of Cohesive Versus Non-Cohesive Teams and
the Application to High Performance Organisations
Strengths and Weakness of Team cohesiveness and Application in High Performance
Organisation
Team cohesiveness is the extent to which team members remain united together in
attainment of a common goal. A team is stated to be in the cohesion state when its members
maintain bonds that link them to each other and the team as a whole. Common characteristics
that are observed in the high-performance teams is cohesiveness s it serves as a measure of
interactions of the group to its members (Markham, Markham & Smith, 2015). Among these
teams the trust factor is high that makes communication instant, easy and effective. For this
reason it is gathered that in case teams attain cohesiveness they will shift from norming to
performing and then highly performing. The figure below indicates the manner in which high
cohesive teams are committed to organisational goals attainment and their self-esteem in
attaining high performance.

9PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Figure 2: Team Cohesiveness in Developing High Performance Organisation
(Source: Martin-Rios, 2016)
There are several advantages and disadvantages related with developing team
cohesiveness in an attempt if developing high performance organisations that are indicated
below:
Advantages
 Productivity advantages can be attained as a cohesive team can contribute to increased
productivity as they tend to experience lower stress level, have decreased absenteeism
rate and experience high job satisfaction (Mehralian, Nazari, Nooriparto & Rasekh,
2017).
 Team cohesiveness in managing business management trends: Team cohesiveness
can increase management recognition that can support organisational innovation.

10PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
 Developing a matrix structure: Team cohesiveness can facilitate in developing a matrix
structure organisation that can facilitate in maintaining performance reporting
relationship with division manager. This can further facilitate in developing sense of
individuality among employees (Nurudeen et al., 2015).
Disadvantages
Certain unsatisfactory outcomes might take place from team cohesiveness that can be in the
form of:
 Team allegiance to unsatisfactory leaders
 Inadequate or unrealistic goals
 Alienation from other individuals or teams
 Increased competitiveness with others that can take place outside the team (Okwir,
Nudurupati, Ginieis & Angelis, 2018)
 Critical judgements attenuation within the group that is important for source correction
Strengths and Weakness of Non-Cohesive Teams and Application in High Performance
Organisation
Non-cohesive teams in an organisation can be defined as a team that do not practice
maintaining unity among each other in attaining a common goal. The teams lack trust with one
another and are engaged in developing workplace conflict as they feel less commitment towards
their job. Non-cohesive teams are not motivated in attaining collective results through team work
that opposes the behaviour indicated by a cohesive team in the workplace (Otley, 2016). Non-
cohesive team do not contribute to attain a high performing organisation as unite the cohesive
teams they tend to deal with increased workplace anxiety and tensions. Moreover, these teams

11PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
tend to have behaviours related with high absenteeism and decreased productivity in the
workplace in comparison to the cohesive teams (Park & Shin, 2015).
There are no strengths prevalent within a non-cohesive group in the organisation as such
teams’ impact organisational performance negatively in comparison to the cohesive teams.
Certain weaknesses related with non-cohesive teams are indicated below:
Weaknesses
 Non-cohesive team members are not that involved in communicating with each other like
the cohesive teams. This is for the reason that these members do not share common
ideologues, backgrounds, attitudes and goals that can increase their communicativeness.
 Members of a cohesive team are likely to be more satisfied in comparison to non-
cohesive teams. These teams do not experience high satisfaction level in the workplace
that makes them leave the team and join some other team (Putra et al., 2019).
Performance Management from a Control Theory Perspective
Overview of Control Theory
Performance management system is an important aspect of Human Resource
Management that aligns and optimises individual performance with the overall organisational
performance. From the control theory perspective, Shen, Chen & Wang, (2016) defined
performance management as a continuous process of recognising, measuring along with
developing organisational performance. It can also be attained through associating each
employee’s performance and objectives with an organisation’s overall goals and missions. There
are several effective strategies and approaches related with performance management and control

12PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
theory is one such approach. Control theory facilitates in sustaining on organisation’s
performance management system by means of elaborating the control forms between the
organisation and the systems prevailing within them. Yongming & Yini, (2017) elucidated that
the control theory of performance management ensures that the actions of all systems must be in
synchronisation with overall goals and objected of the business.
Managing Performance by Means of Control Process in the System
As indicated in the control theory framework in the figure below it is evident that it focus
on control mechanism which must be imposed at all organisational level (Park & Shin, 2015).
There are different control forms that can be employed by a company in order to attain desired
results indicated under:
 Organisational structure
 Mechanisms of performance measurement
 Behavioural controls such as policies and norms of organisations

13PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Figure 3: Control Process System
(Source: Markham, Markham & Smith, 2015)
Control theory has three types of control systems indicated below:
 Behaviour Control: In this control process employer monitor and analyse the actions of
its workforce on a constant basis based on organisational standards and them rewarding
them accordingly (Park & Shin, 2015).
 Output Control: In this control process, employee performance is controlled with
sanctions or rewards after analysing it on the organisational standard basis.
 Input Control: This control system intends to control employee control and selection
process. Conversely, it is also vital to ensure accessibility of necessary competencies
within employees as desired by the companies for maintaining continuous development
and growth.
Among these three control systems of performance management, organisations can select any
of them or a combination of them (Park & Shin, 2015). Selection of control depends on the
organisational norms, structures, policies as well as administrative information.
Application of Control Theory within Workplace
There are several implementations of control theory within workplace and in order to
enhance employee performance, managers must focus on allocating challenging goals to
employees that can develop their performance level (Markham, Markham & Smith, 2015).
Regular supervision in the subordinates within the workplace will be possible through control
system implementation. Managers can employ control theory within the management program in
supporting continuous feedback flow between employees and managers in facilitating tracking

14PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
and achievement evaluation as a team. Considering same, organisations can employ control
system in areas where there exists performance evaluation. Check-ins and team meetings are
necessary in maintaining better human resource management process all the types of control
system such as behaviour, output and input control can be employed for evaluating employee
performance and behaviour.
Strengths and Weakness of Control Theory
It is evidenced by Markham, Markham & Smith, (2015) that employees focus on
addressing their basic needs through working within the organisation and once their needs align
with the standards and demands of the organisation, the desired behaviour can be attained. Such
needs make control theory highly applicable as it serves as a controller in aligning employee
behaviour with standards of organisational behaviour. Such needs make control; theory highly
applicable as it serves as controller in aligning employee behaviour with behaviour standards of
the company. This will further result in attaining desired performance.
Control theory appears to be quite mechanical with respect to human behaviour and
performance. This theory can work efficiently in a strict organisational framework in which
employee actions that are regularly monitored as well as controlled (Markham, Markham &
Smith, 2015). However, in the recent years the work environment has turned out to be highly
dynamic, challenging as well as competitive. If the control theory of performance management is
applied in the performance management process of the organisations employees must focus on
undergoing all the type of skills up gradation and skills training in order to survive.

15PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
The Balanced Scorecard Approach
Shen, Chen & Wang, (2016) explained balanced scorecard approach as a strategic
performance management tool that can be employed by the managers to maintain a track of
activities implemented by the employees in the organisation to successfully monitor the
consequences taking place from such actions. This performance management approach is
employed by the organisations to communicate the aspects that the company intends to achieve
and it can also facilitate in aligning the everyday work with the company’s strategies (Cooper &
Ezzamel, 2016). Balanced Scorecard Approach facilitates the organisation in prioterisng
projects, products as well as services and can also facilitate in measuring as well as monitoring
progress towards such strategic targets. Balanced Scorecard Approach is extensively employed
by busineses and industries, government along with non-profit organisations all over the world.
A recent international study carried out by Shen, Chen & Wang, (2016) elucidated that balanced
scorecard approach is one of the top ten widely employed management tools all over the world, a
list which encompass closely-related strategic planning at top priority. The Balanced Scorecard
approach has several important perspectives that facilitate in better performance management of
the organisations:

16PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Figure 4: Balanced Scorecard Approach
(Source: Cooper & Ezzamel, 2016)
The Balanced Scorecard Approach employed in the company facilitates in developing
effective strategic objectives, key performance indicators and strategies associated with attaining
organisational goals from four perspectives indicated under:
 Financial Perspectives: This perspective is also termed as stewardship in the public
sector and such perspective views organisational financial performance along with use of
financial resources (Cooper & Ezzamel, 2016). This perspective of measuring
organisational performance through balanced scorecard approach includes analysis of
financial data such as expenses; sales and income are employed to understand the
financial performance. Such financial metrics might also encompass dollar amounts,
variances in budget, and income targets along with the financial ratios.
 Consumers and Stakeholders Perspective: This perspective views organisational
performance from the point of view of the consumers along with other stakeholders that

17PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
the company is designed to serve. Perspectives of consumers are also collected in
measuring consumer satisfaction in terms of price, quality along with availability of
services and products. Consumers also offer feedback regarding their satisfaction with the
current produces offered by the company (Cooper & Ezzamel, 2016).
 Internal Process Perspective: This perspective views organisational performance from
the perspective of quality long with efficiency associated with the company’s products
and services along with other business processes. In this perspective the performance of
the business processes are analysed in recognising the effective ways in which predicts
are being manufactured. Operational management is also evaluated in tracking any gaps,
shortages, bottlenecks, delays or waste from the business processes (Cooper & Ezzamel,
2016).
 Organisational Capacity (Learning and Growth) Perspective: This perspective views
organisational performance through focussing on developing human capital, technology,
infrastructure, culture along with other capacities that serves as a key to attain high
performance in the organisation. This perspective is analysed by means of investigating
the training along with knowledge resources (Cooper & Ezzamel, 2016). The first aspect
deals with the manner in which information is gathered and the effective ways in which
employees use such information in transforming it to a competitive advantage over the
industry.
Along with the Balanced Scorecard Perspectives, strategy mapping within this approach also
facilitates in maintaining better performance management within the organisation. Strategic
mapping in this approach facilitates in visualising and communicating the effective ways in
which value can be created by organisations. A strategy map indicated in the figure below serves

18PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
as a simple graphic that which indicates logical cause and effect relationship between strategic
objectives (Cooper & Ezzamel, 2016). Enhancing performance in the objectives observed within
the organisational capacity perspective can facilitate the company in enhancing its internal
process perspective. This in turn also facilitates the organisation in creating effective results in
the consumer as well as financial perspectives explained in the balanced scorecard.
Conclusion
Performance management concept was analysed through explaining the positives and
negatives in the performance management approaches. In evaluating the general framework of
performance management certain individual components such as MBO review and agree along
with 360 degree feedback was analysed. The report explained performance management
approach from a control theory perspective along with evaluating the relevance of balance
scorecard approach in ensuing better performance management in organisations. The report
revealed that performance review and agrees process focuses on offering fair as well as proper
feedback to employees regarding their current performance. It also focuses on recognising the
weaknesses and strengths of individual employees along with whole teams. The report also
revealed that non-cohesive team do not contribute to attain a high performing organisation as
unite the cohesive teams they tend to deal with increased workplace anxiety and tensions.
Moreover, balanced scorecard approach is a strategic performance management tool that can be
employed by the managers to maintain a track of activities implemented by the employees in the
organisation to successfully monitor the consequences taking place from such actions. This
performance management approach is employed by the organisations to communicate the
aspects that the company intends to achieve and it can also facilitate in aligning the everyday
work with the company’s strategies.

19PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
References
Akkermans, H. A., & Van Oorschot, K. E. (2018). Relevance assumed: a case study of balanced
scorecard development using system dynamics. In System Dynamics (pp. 107-132). Palgrave
Macmillan, London.
Alexander, A., Kumar, M., & Walker, H. (2018). A decision theory perspective on complexity in
performance measurement and management. International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, 38(11), 2214-2244.
Cooper, D. J., & Ezzamel, M. (2016). A critical analysis of the Balanced Scorecard: Towards a
more dialogic approach. In Pioneers of Critical Accounting (pp. 201-230). Palgrave Macmillan,
London.
Gregory, P. J., Robbins, B., Schwaitzberg, S. D., & Harmon, L. (2017). Leadership development
in a professional medical society using 360-degree survey feedback to assess emotional
intelligence. Surgical endoscopy, 31(9), 3565-3573.
Grossman, R., Rosch, Z., Mazer, D., & Salas, E. (2015). What Matters for Team Cohesion
Measurement? A Synthesis', Team Cohesion: Advances in Psychological Theory, Methods and
Practice (Research on Managing Groups and Teams, Volume 17).
Hansen, E. G., & Schaltegger, S. (2016). The sustainability balanced scorecard: A systematic
review of architectures. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(2), 193-221.
Herbst, T. H. (2017). Building Leadership Capacity In A University Of Technology: 360-Degree
Feedback As A Tool For Personal And Institutional Transformation. Readings Book, 231.

20PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Kakar, A. K. S. (2018). Engendering cohesive software development teams: Should we focus on
interdependence or autonomy?. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 111, 1-11.
Karkoulian, S., Assaker, G. & Hallak, R., (2016). An empirical study of 360-degree feedback,
organizational justice, and firm sustainability. Journal of business research, 69(5), 1862-1867.
Marcus, M. L. (2018). Multidisciplinary team collaboration during the specialeducation
evaluation process. St. John's University (New York).
Markham, S. E., Markham, I. S., & Smith, J. W. (2015). At the crux of dyadic leadership: Self–
other agreement of leaders and direct reports—Analyzing 360-degree feedback. The Leadership
Quarterly, 26(6), 958-977.
Martin-Rios, C. (2016). Innovative management control systems in knowledge work: a middle
manager perspective. Journal of management control, 27(2-3), 181-204.
Mehralian, G., Nazari, J. A., Nooriparto, G., & Rasekh, H. R. (2017). TQM and organizational
performance using the balanced scorecard approach. International Journal of Productivity and
Performance Management, 66(1), 111-125.
Nurudeen, S. M., Kwakye, G., Berry, W. R., Chaikof, E. L., Lillemoe, K. D., Millham, F., ... &
Sato, L. (2015). Can 360-degree reviews help surgeons? Evaluation of multisource feedback for
surgeons in a multi-institutional quality improvement project. Journal of the American College
of Surgeons, 221(4), 837-844.
Okwir, S., Nudurupati, S. S., Ginieis, M., & Angelis, J. (2018). Performance measurement and
management systems: A perspective from complexity theory. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 20(3), 731-754.

21PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Otley, D. (2016). The contingency theory of management accounting and control: 1980–
2014. Management accounting research, 31, 45-62.
Park, H. S., & Shin, S. Y. (2015). The role of the star player in a cohesive group. Small Group
Research, 46(4), 415-430.
Putra, Y. S., Beaudoin, A., Rousseaux, G., Thomas, L., & Huberson, S. (2019). 2D numerical
contributions for the study of non-cohesive sediment transport beneath tidal bores. Comptes
Rendus Mécanique, 347(2), 166-180.
Shen, Y. C., Chen, P. S., & Wang, C. H. (2016). A study of enterprise resource planning (ERP)
system performance measurement using the quantitative balanced scorecard
approach. Computers in Industry, 75, 127-139.
Yongming, Z., & Yini, S. (2017). The impact of coupling interaction of internal control and CSR
on corporate performance—Based on the perspective of stakeholder. Procedia engineering, 174,
449-455.

22PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Appendices
Appendix 1
Topic Chosen: Performance Management General Framework (Topic 13)
Student ID First Name Family Name Contact
Phone
Number
Allocated Tasks
Elaborating the MBO, Review
and Agree and the 360 degree
feedback performance
management approaches
Developing report on
comparing strengths and
weaknesses of Cohesive
Versus Non-Cohesive Teams
and the Application to High
Performance Organisations
Developing explanations on
Performance Management
from a Control Theory
Perspective and the balanced
scorecard approach

23PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Appendix 2
Period Highlight:1 Plan Actual % Complete Actual (beyond plan) % Complete (beyond plan)
PLAN PLAN ACTUAL ACTUAL PERCENT
ACTIVITY START DURATION START DURATION COMPLETE PERIODS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Activity 01 1 5 1 4 25%
Activity 02 1 6 1 6 100%
Activity 03 2 4 2 5 35%
Activity 04 4 8 4 6 10%
Activity 05 4 2 4 8 85%
Activity 06 4 3 4 6 85%
Activity 07 5 4 5 3 50%
Activity 08 5 2 5 5 60%
Activity 09 5 2 5 6 75%
Activity 10 6 5 6 7 100%
Appendix 3
Student ID References Reasons for Selecting Them
1. 1. Akkermans, H. A., &
Van Oorschot, K. E.
(2018). Relevance
assumed: a case study
of balanced scorecard
development using
system dynamics.
In System
Dynamics (pp. 107-
1. It explained balanced
scorecard development
using system dynamics
2. It facilitated in training
knowledge on A
decision theory
perspective on
complexity in
performance

24PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
132). Palgrave
Macmillan, London.
2. Alexander, A., Kumar,
M., & Walker, H.
(2018). A decision
theory perspective on
complexity in
performance
measurement and
management. Internati
onal Journal of
Operations &
Production
Management, 38(11),
2214-2244.
3. Gregory, P. J.,
Robbins, B.,
Schwaitzberg, S. D., &
Harmon, L. (2017).
Leadership
development in a
professional medical
society using 360-
measurement and
management
3. Explained Leadership
development in a
professional medical
society using 360-
degree survey
feedback to assess
emotional intelligence
4. Team Cohesion:
Advances in
Psychological Theory
5. Elaborated 360-Degree
Feedback As A Tool
For Personal And
Institutional
Transformation

25PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
degree survey
feedback to assess
emotional
intelligence. Surgical
endoscopy, 31(9),
3565-3573.
4. Grossman, R., Rosch,
Z., Mazer, D., & Salas,
E. (2015). What
Matters for Team
Cohesion
Measurement? A
Synthesis', Team
Cohesion: Advances in
Psychological Theory,
Methods and Practice
(Research on
Managing Groups and
Teams, Volume 17).
5. Herbst, T. H. (2017).
Building Leadership
Capacity in a
University Of

26PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Technology: 360-
Degree Feedback as a
Tool for Personal and
Institutional
Transformation. Readi
ngs Book, 231
2. 1. Okwir, S., Nudurupati,
S. S., Ginieis, M., &
Angelis, J. (2018).
Performance
measurement and
management systems:
A perspective from
complexity
theory. International
Journal of
Management
Reviews, 20(3), 731-
754
2. Martin-Rios, C.
(2016). Innovative
management control
systems in knowledge
1. Performance
measurement and
management systems:
A perspective from
complexity theory
2. Innovative
management control
systems in knowledge
work: a middle
manager perspective
3. Team Cohesion:
Advances in
Psychological Theory,
Methods and Practice
4. system performance
measurement using the
quantitative balanced

27PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
work: a middle
manager
perspective. Journal of
management
control, 27(2-3), 181-
204
3. Grossman, R., Rosch,
Z., Mazer, D., & Salas,
E. (2015). What
Matters for Team
Cohesion
Measurement? A
Synthesis', Team
Cohesion: Advances in
Psychological Theory,
Methods and Practice
(Research on
Managing Groups and
Teams, Volume 17).
4. Shen, Y. C., Chen, P.
S., & Wang, C. H.
(2016). A study of
enterprise resource
scorecard approach
5. 2D numerical
contributions for the
study of non-cohesive
sediment transport
beneath tidal bores

28PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
planning (ERP) system
performance
measurement using the
quantitative balanced
scorecard
approach. Computers
in Industry, 75, 127-
139
5. Putra, Y. S., Beaudoin,
A., Rousseaux, G.,
Thomas, L., &
Huberson, S. (2019).
2D numerical
contributions for the
study of non-cohesive
sediment transport
beneath tidal
bores. Comptes Rendus
Mécanique, 347(2),
166-180
3. 1. Nurudeen, S. M.,
Kwakye, G., Berry, W.
R., Chaikof, E. L.,
1. Evaluation of
multisource feedback
for organizations in a

29PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Lillemoe, K. D.,
Millham, F., ... & Sato,
L. (2015). Can 360-
degree reviews help
surgeons? Evaluation
of multisource
feedback for
organisations in a
multi-institutional
quality improvement
project. Journal of the
American College of
Surgeons, 221(4), 837-
844
2. Marcus, M. L.
(2018). Multidisciplina
ry team collaboration
during the special
education evaluation
process. St. John's
University (New York)
3. Okwir, S., Nudurupati,
S. S., Ginieis, M., &
multi-institutional
quality improvement
project
2. team collaboration
during the special
education evaluation
process
3. Performance
measurement and
management systems
4. Innovative
management control
systems in knowledge
work
5. Methods and Practice
of team cohesion

30PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Angelis, J. (2018).
Performance
measurement and
management systems:
A perspective from
complexity
theory. International
Journal of
Management
Reviews, 20(3), 731-
754
4. Martin-Rios, C.
(2016). Innovative
management control
systems in knowledge
work: a middle
manager
perspective. Journal of
management
control, 27(2-3), 181-
204
5. Grossman, R., Rosch,
Z., Mazer, D., & Salas,

31PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
E. (2015). What
Matters for Team
Cohesion
Measurement? A
Synthesis', Team
Cohesion: Advances in
Psychological Theory,
Methods and Practice
(Research on
Managing Groups and
Teams, Volume 17).
4. 1. Kakar, A. K. S. (2018).
Engendering cohesive
software development
teams: Should we
focus on
interdependence or
autonomy? Internation
al Journal of Human-
Computer Studies, 111,
1-11
2. Markham, S. E.,
Markham, I. S., &
1. Engendering cohesive
software development
teams: Should we
focus on
interdependence or
autonomy
2. Analyzing 360-degree
feedback
3. Multidisciplinary team
collaboration during
the special education
evaluation process

32PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
Smith, J. W. (2015). At
the crux of dyadic
leadership: Self–other
agreement of leaders
and direct reports—
analyzing 360-degree
feedback. The
Leadership
Quarterly, 26(6), 958-
977
3. Marcus, M. L.
(2018). Multidisciplina
ry team collaboration
during the special
education evaluation
process. St. John's
University (New York)
4. Okwir, S., Nudurupati,
S. S., Ginieis, M., &
Angelis, J. (2018).
Performance
measurement and
management systems:
4. Performance
measurement and
management systems:
A perspective from
complexity theory
5. Performance
measurement and
management systems
details

33PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
A perspective from
complexity
theory. International
Journal of
Management
Reviews, 20(3), 731-
754
5. Okwir, S., Nudurupati,
S. S., Ginieis, M., &
Angelis, J. (2018).
Performance
measurement and
management systems:
A perspective from
complexity
theory. International
Journal of
Management
Reviews, 20(3), 731-
754
Appendix 4
Meeting No……… Date………….. Time…………….. Venue……………
Student ID Name Points Discussed

34PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
1. Advantages and
disadvantages of
MBO, review and
agree along with 360
degree feedback
approach
2. Strengths and
Weaknesses of
Cohesive Versus Non-
Cohesive Teams and
the Application to
High Performance
Organisations
3. Overview of control
theory, managing
performance through
this process, its
application in
workplace and related
strengths and
weaknesses
4. Perspectives within

35PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
the balanced
scorecard approach
and strategy map
aligned with such
perspectives in
evaluating employee
performance
Appendix 5
Our group expectations are: To analyse the concept of performance management in the context
of management theory. Performance management concept was better analysed through
explaining the positives and negatives in the performance management approaches. In evaluating
the general framework of performance management certain individual components such as MBO
review and agree along with 360 degree feedback was analysed.
We faced following challenges during the assignment: Not sufficient information available on
non-cohesive teams, developing an action plan in developing tasks to be distributed equally
among team members
At the completion of the assignment we have the following insights:
Team cohesiveness is the extent to which team members remain united together in attainment of
a common goal.
Balanced scorecard approach is one of the top ten widely employed management tools all over
the world, a list which encompass closely-related strategic planning at top priority.
If the control theory of performance management is applied in the performance management

36PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT GENERAL FRAMEWORK
process of the organisations employees must focus on undergoing all the type of skills up
gradation and skills training in order to survive.