Human Capital forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

HR’s three biggest performance management mistakes

Notify me of new replies via email
HC Online | 20 Jul 2015, 04:39 AM Agree 0
Avoid these three simple performance management mistakes or you could end up with a date in court.
  • | 20 Jul 2015, 11:36 AM Agree 0
    I support this article completely, it never ceases to amaze me the amount of employers who tolerate poor performers or worse still pay 'go away' money to avoid confrontation. The FWC in my experience as an employer advocate has been fair, there is no situation they have not seen before and recognise a concocted claim for unfair dismissal. That being said there is a process that must be followed as the article mentions.
  • Kate | 20 Jul 2015, 12:07 PM Agree 0
    I take particular offence at the article heading, suggesting it is "HR's three mistakes". In 20 years I regularly see line managers making these mistakes. It is HR who usually has to come in and pick up the pieces, be the one to make the tough decisions or defend the results of poor performance management. Suggesting in the heading that HR makes these mistakes is, I think, poor form.
  • Bernie Althofer | 21 Jul 2015, 07:10 AM Agree 0
    From my perspective (and not as a HR person), it seems to me that line managers and supervisors play a critical role in managing performance. Whilst HR might be the delegated 'owners' of the organisational performance management policy and procedures, the effective implementation lies with the line managers and supervisors.

    Unfortunately where organisations do not provide consistent or regular training in relation to the performance management processes, and where the culture is such that 'short cuts' are taken, and where line managers or supervisors are too closely aligned with their workers, they will not make the decisions required to manage under performing employees.

    I once spoke to a senior manager regarding his role and actions in relation to IR and HR. He indicated that 90-95% of his time was spent 'sorting out' IR and HR problems created by his middle managers. The middle managers were being rewarded for operational results and were not being trained in IR or HR related matters. In some cases, some of the middle managers were acting on what they thought should be done, and not what was required to be done. It makes sense to me to ensure that if a line manager or supervisor has some legislative obligation (sometimes reflected in job or position descriptions), then they should at least receive training. HR could play a key role in ensuring that these line managers are equipped to make decisions that will not adversely impact on the organisation.

    In all the years I have been providing advice, support or guidance in relation to workplace bullying, workplace practices (including performance management) and communication have been the two stand out issues that contribute to allegations and/or perceptions of workplace bullying. Putting all the blame on HR creates a perception or belief in the minds of some line managers and supervisors that they can simply pass IR or HR decisions on to HR for them to handle.
  • Robin | 29 Jul 2015, 04:15 PM Agree 0
    The problem, as the article suggests, is not taking immediate action at first signs there is an issue. Time has marched on and those involved have had enough but now must endure more angst to ensure fair process is followed. And yes, HR is not accountable for Manager's inability to manage although HR does have responsibility to support line management and ensure they have the necessary training and skills to do the people management part of their jobs. An effective HR practitioner who works with the business to ensure this happens is what employers need. I totally support getting rid of the problem during the "probationary" period - if things are not looking good then, in all likelihood, they will not improve with time.
Post a reply