CAPÍTULO II. MARCO TEÓRICO
2.4. CORREDORES ECOLÓGICOS Y TURÍSTICOS
Given the many competing projects and the usual scarcity of resources, some organiza- tions may be reluctant to implement a performance management system. Primarily, the reason is a lack of any perceived value added to a system that requires many resources (particularly time from supervisors) and that seems to produce little tangible payoffs. The need to align organization and unit priorities with the performance management system is one of the key factors contributing to obtaining the much-needed top manage- ment support for the system.
Top management is likely to ask, “Why is performance management important?” One answer to this question is that performance management is the primary tool that will allow top management to carry out its vision. The performance management sys- tem, when aligned with organization and unit priorities, is a critical tool to (1) allow all employees to understand where the organization stands and where it needs to go and (2) provide tools to employees (e.g., motivation, developmental resources) so that their behaviors and results will help the organization get there. Fundamentally, the implementation of any performance management system requires that the “What’s in it for me?” question be answered convincingly. In the case of top management, the answer to the “What’s in it for me?” question is that performance management can serve as a primary tool to realize its vision.
Building support for the system does not stop with top management, however. All participants in the system need to understand the role they play and receive a clear an- swer to the “What’s in it for me?” question. Communication about the system is key. This includes a clear description of the system’s mechanics (e.g., when the performance planning meetings will take place, how to handle disagreements between supervisor and employees) and the system’s consequences (e.g., relationship between performance evaluation and rewards). As discussed in Chapter 1, not involving people in the process of system design and implementation can create resistance, and the performance management system may result in more harm than good.
Consider the role that good communication played in the launching of a revamped performance management system at Bankers Life and Casualty (http://www.bankerslife.com), an insurance company specializing in insurance for seniors and headquartered in Chicago. In November 2000, Edward M. Berube was appointed as its new president and CEO. Berube understood that Bankers Life and Casualty was facing important challenges, including new customer demands, the impact of the Internet, outsourcing, and increased competition. So, Bankers Life and
Casualty engaged in a very aggressive marketing campaign, which included retaining actor Dick Van Dyke as its company spokesperson. In spite of these efforts, however, internal focus groups revealed that while employees understood the organization’s strategic plan, they did not understand what role each person was supposed to play in helping the organization execute its strategy. In other words, employees did not have a clear understanding of how each person could help achieve the organization’s strategic goals, including focusing on the following three key areas: (1) distribution scope, scale, and productivity; (2) home office productivity and unit costs; and (3) product revenue and profitability.
Bankers Life and Casualty realized that a better link between strategy and indi- vidual and team performance could be established by improving its performance management process. The HR department, therefore, proceeded to overhaul the performance management system so that the three areas of strategic importance just outlined would be part of everyone’s performance evaluation and improvement efforts. The design and implementation of the new system was a joint venture between the HR and the communications departments. First, the HR and communications team spoke candidly with the CEO about his expectations. The CEO responded with overwhelming support, stating that the performance management system would be implemented for every employee on preestablished dates, and that he would hold his team accountable for making this happen. Then, to implement the performance management system, each unit met with its VP. During these meetings, each VP discussed how his or her unit’s goals were linked to the corporate goals. Next, HR and communications led discussions surrounding goal setting, giving feedback, and writing developmental plans. Managers were then given the opportunity to share any feedback, concerns, or questions that they had about the program. During this forum, managers exchanged success stories and offered advice to one another. These success stories were then shared with the CEO. The CEO then shared these stories with those who reported directly to him to strengthen the visibility of his support for the program.
In short, the performance management system at Bankers Life and Casualty helped all employees understand their contributions to the organization’s strategic plan. This was a key issue that motivated the CEO to give unqualified support to the system. This support gave a clear message to the rest of the organization that the performance management system was an important initiative. The support of the CEO and other top executives, combined with a high degree of participation from all employees and their ability to voice concerns and provide feedback regarding the system, was a critical factor in the success of the performance management system at Bankers Life and Casualty.
Summary Points
• Strategic planning involves defining the organization’s present and future iden- tity. The overall purpose of a strategic plan is to serve as a blueprint that allows organizations to allocate resources in a
way that provides the organization with a competitive advantage.
• Strategic planning serves several purposes, including defining an organization’s identity, preparing for the
Chapter 3 • Performance Management and Strategic Planning 81
future, analyzing the environment, providing focus, creating a culture of cooperation, generating new options, and serving as a guide for the daily activities of all organizational members. • Performance management systems must rely on the strategic plan to be useful. The behaviors, results, and developmental plans of all employees must be aligned with the vision, mission, goals, and strategies of the organization and unit. • The process of creating a strategic plan
begins with an environmental analysis, which considers internal (e.g., organiza- tional structure, processes) as well as external (e.g., economic, technological) trends. Internal trends can be classified as either strengths or weaknesses, and external trends can be classified as either opportunities or threats. A gap analysis consists of pairing strengths and weaknesses with opportunities and threats and determining whether the situation is advantageous (i.e., lever- age), disadvantageous (i.e., problem), or somewhere in between (i.e., constraint and vulnerability).
• The second step in creating a strategic plan is to write a mission statement based on the results of the gap analysis. A mission statement defines why the organization exists, the scope of its activities, the customers served, and the products and services offered. Mission statements also include information about what technology is used in production or delivery, and the unique benefits or advantages of the organiza- tion’s products and services. Finally, a mission statement can include a state- ment of values and beliefs, such as the organization’s managerial philosophy. • The third component of a strategic plan is the vision statement, which includes a description of future aspirations. Whereas the mission statement empha- sizes the present, the vision statement
emphasizes the future. In many cases, however, the mission and vision state- ments are combined into one statement. For vision statements to be most useful they must be brief, verifiable, bound by a timeline, current, focused, under- standable, inspiring, and a stretch. • After the mission and vision
statements are created, the next step in the strategic planning process is to generate specific goals that will help fulfill the mission and vision. Goals provide more specific information re- garding how the mission and vision will be implemented. Typically, goals span a five-year period.
• The final step in the strategic planning process is to identify strategies that will help achieve the stated goals. These strategies are game plans and usually address issues surrounding growth, sur- vival, turnaround, stability, innovation, and leadership. The HR department plays an important role in identifying strategies because its members have knowledge of the organization’s mission and vision as well as the organization’s internal capabilities, or what is called an organization’s human capital.
• The organization’s strategic plan, includ- ing the mission, vision, goals, and strate- gies, cascades down to all organizational levels. Thus, each division or unit also creates its own strategic plan, which should be consistent with the organiza- tion’s overall plan. The most effective sequence for doing so is for the units to first agree on common strategies and then specify unit-level goals.
• The tasks and KSAs included in indi- vidual job descriptions must be congru- ent with the organization’s and unit’s strategic plans. In other words, job descriptions should include activities that, if executed well, will in turn help execute the mission and vision. Job descriptions that are detached from
strategic priorities will lead to perform- ance evaluations focused on behaviors and results that are not central to an organization’s success.
• The various choices in designing the performance management system are directly affected by an organization’s strategic plan. Different missions and visions lead to different types of systems, for example, emphasizing behaviors (e.g., processes) as opposed to results (e.g., outcomes).
• Top management must be aware that the performance management system
is a primary tool to execute an organi- zation’s strategic plan. This awareness will lead to top management’s support for the system. In addition, all organizational members need to be able to answer the “What’s in it for me?” question regarding the system. Implementing the performance management system will require con- siderable effort on the part of all those involved. Those doing the evaluation and those being evaluated should know how the system will benefit them directly.