Tackling the Performance Gap

Let me start with a story about a conversation that I am sure many have had at some stage.

I was having a coffee with a friend recently and after catching up with what was happening in each other's life we started to reflect on people we had worked with over the years. Eventually we got to the question of 'so whatever happened to' at which time Bob's name came up.

My companion said Bob is still around but things have gone pretty badly of late, so my friend related the story to me.

Bob was recently being coached in leadership skills and was making progress but it was tough going. It seems Bob had been in senior management for many years and this new leadership stuff was really challenging his habits, habits that he had developed over many years. Bob's leadership skills which were poor at the best of time had become entrenched and had never been challenged by his employer.

Unfortunately the leadership coaching had come a bit too late.

It seems Bob's leadership style had developed to a point where his team have made accusations about his authoritarian style and aggressive approach.

These accusations had become so serious that Bob is now on a period of extended leave while an investigation into the allegations of bullying and harassment are investigated.

In my conversation with my friend we agreed we had seen Bob display the early signs of these behaviours many years ago. The behaviours we had observed some ten years before were entirely consistent with what had come to pass. We could have predicted this outcome so long ago, but key players in the organisation were not ready to listen.

How many could relate similar stories? I know 20:20 hindsight is a great facility, but what can we learn from these situations?

Let me suggest the outcome was predictable. The organisation could have intervened earlier to work with Bob in developing enduring leadership behaviours that would have brought him and the organisation success. I suggest Bob's promotions and career advancement were probably based on his technical, not his leadership skills.

The organisation now faces the direct costs of possible compensation claims and investigations. There will be for some time a loss of capability through extended absences and the costs incurred by a number of disenfranchised people who want to leave.

It could have been predicted ten years earlier.

We also see the flip side of Bob's story. It is not unusual for us in working with organisations undergoing substantial change, to meet managers who are trying to implement change and are challenged by uncompromising and entrenched staff. In some situations these managers become overwhelmed by the intransigence of their people. They perceive they are powerless to challenge these behaviours and in some instances are in fear of making a mistake and incurring the wrath of their organisation for getting it wrong.

Bob's organisation has a performance management system. So why did it fail to achieve the behavioural change required to ensure Bob's success?

Our experience suggests organisations don't make the investment at the front end of the process; they don't build the requisite skills in their people or their leadership. From our experience Bob's organisation did not understand what it needed to do early in Bob's career or the risks associated with not making that investment. Indeed, one gets the feeling that there was an assumption that somehow the right behaviours would arise out of the ether.

Is this important and should we be concerned? It seems many organisations have been succeeding in the face of these dilemmas for years.

As the workforce ages and the working population shrinks, organisations face three big challenges.

They want to attract and recruit good people;
They want to retain the people they have; and
They need to get the very best out of their people.

In the past there was sufficient downsizing that there was always the opportunity to lose those people who could not cope through some form of redundancy. That process allowed organisations to pay those people who weren't performing to leave the organisation. They were happy, the organisation was happy. Everyone was satisfied, or that's how it appeared..

The luxury of losing people and then simply recruiting a replacement is over. Today in a shrinking workforce we have to be much smarter, and in leaner organisations there are no corners for the spectators to hide.

So, over the past fifteen years, many organisations became more focused on their performance management systems. The trap that many fell into however, was they failed to see that behavioural change was a goal of implementing the performance management system. It is not enough just to have the forms and the calendar of dates for performance reviews.

From our experience the universal complaint about performance management systems is that they are all about the forms, the policy and the process. What is missing is the behavioural change by the individual, both the staff members and the senior executive. What's missing is the capability of the individual to take personal responsibility for their growth and development and for the choices they make. What's missing is the requirement that the manager/leader conducts an effective performance conversation and that they are empowered and skilled enough to have that conversation.

Successful performance management systems are as much about behaviour change as they are about the process.

To achieve a sense of empowerment by our leaders to manage performance and personal accountability by our people we need:

Leaders capable of challenging behaviours that are not supporting a performance based culture and encouraging those behaviours that do.
People who are able to cope with the challenge of behavioural change.

Unfortunately, we often see situations where the praise and promotion is directed to those who don't rock the boat. The reverse is also true, if you get it wrong, if you make a mistake the opportunities dry up. In some situations doing the right thing takes a lot of effort. By sanctioning those that tried and got it wrong or by making the process too difficult, do organisations reinforce avoidance.

In my opening example, if Bob's managers had consistently had those conversations about his leadership style and interpersonal skills, if they had felt empowered to have those conversations and if my colleague had been able to hear the message and respond then I suggest the outcome would have been very different.

You might ask what the evidence might be that an organisation's performance management system is failing to achieve behavioural change. From our experience the evidence would be:

An organisation where people simply going through the motions, completing the boxes of the performance reporting forms.
A general reluctance to challenge unacceptable behaviours or even to recognise and encourage good behaviours.
A recognised gap between what the performance policy says and what is actually achieved.
Sanctions for getting it wrong, reinforcing the status quo.

At the individual level you are likely to see behaviours akin to:

A disempowered workforce
People maintaining the status quo not willing to explore opportunities or to take risks.
Conflict and stress in the workplace
Patterns of absence - long and short term
Demand on Employee Assistance Programs
Workplace cynicism

Organisations must build into their leaders the ability to develop relationships and to have those conversations that support and encourage performance focused behaviour. Similarly we need leaders who are willing to challenge behaviours that impede a performance focused culture and to act on situations before they become crises. We also need people who are ready to receive feedback constructively, to be able to act and to take responsibility for the choices they make.

So what are the behaviours that underpin an individual's ability to hear the message, to cope with being challenged by their leadership? To create habits that reinforce and support a performance based culture we need people who have developed:

Support networks inside and outside the organisation, which may well include a mentor.
Planning skills that will ensure success including success in their career.
The ability to communicate and to propose solutions not just dump problems with others.
The capacity to treat mistakes as learning opportunities and past accomplishments as a marker for their future success.
The courage to manage the tension between the competing demands of work and personal life.

At an organisational level, evidence that it has such a performance focused culture would be that:

Exploration is encouraged and the risk managed.
A planning culture is reinforced; there is an expectation of success.
Communication is encouraged not just from above but is expected from all levels.
Networks are encouraged and isolationist thinking within the organisation challenged.
The courage to question when work / life balance isn't apparent.

How does this relate to performance management? We have to understand effective performance management is not an event or a process. It's not a date or a form. It's not about meeting once or twice a year. It's about the day to day interactions between your leaders and their people; it's about achieving a performance based culture

I called this article 'Tackling the Performance Gap', the gap I am referring to is the gap between what is intended by performance management systems and what they actually achieve. In my opening story I referred to a person whose performance had never been challenged in ten years. I wonder if his organisation had made the investment up front would it now be facing the costs and reputation damage it is now left to deal with.

I leave you with these three questions:

Is your performance management system more about the forms and dates and less about behavioural change?
Is it creating a performance based culture?
What do you need to do that's different?

Kevin can be contacted by phone on (02) 6260 7558 or email at kevin-rowe@changedrivers.com.au