Process Implementation

According to Syed & Kramar (2017), the primary reason for implementing processes in a work environment revolves around the need to scale up operations while improving the efficiency of both existing employees and also the hiring of new employees. However, processes are prone to distracting the normal progress of operations in any work environment by manipulating reluctant job behaviors towards performance in employees. For instance, a performance management system (PMS) is a fundamental human resource unit in a work environment. It controls the decision-making procedures whereas a PMS establishes individual effectiveness towards organizational performance. An appropriate PMS has capabilities for enhancing activity progress in any work setting (Syed & Kramar, 2017).

In opposition, there are a variety of issues that mount up from a weak performance management system and continuance of encompassed implications may in due course deter proper functioning (Samsonowa, 2011). . Significantly, poor implementation of a PMS bequeaths partial accomplishment of its core rationale and, in particular, it devalues the essence of evaluating employee performances. A poor PMS commonly leads to uneven decision making in regards to different aspects that impact performance management including rewarding, payment variability, salary increment and promotion among the employees (Samsonowa, 2011). A PMS that is accomplished poorly has close influence on employees since it negatively impacts their behaviors and job performance.  

Leaders play an important role of ensuring that organizational goals are accomplished effectively through the improvement of performance management system. Importantly, the implementation stage determines the efficiency of a PMS towards performance in all work environments (Tapamoy, 2008).  It is logical that a properly implemented PMS bears an organization improved performance whereas a PMS that is poorly implemented strongly worsens worker performance thus reducing outcomes in an organization. As a result, a better leader should make certain that organizational goals are proportionally compatible with the outputs that every worker is expected to accomplish. The proportionality between organizational goals and worker productivity is a vital measure during PMS implementation considering that the commonly accepted purpose of a PMS is to evaluate the compatibility of employee capability in relation to the achievement of organizational objectives. Hence, it would be necessary to highly invest on observation and assessment techniques to ensure the proliferation of a productive workforce (International Society for Performance Improvement, 2010). 

Transforming a PMS requires adequate capital including financial investment and time. The key purpose for substantial investment is to stimulate employee capability by guaranteeing job satisfaction. Job satisfaction values self-esteem in different orientations hence the need to capitalize on aspects that meets employee expectations (Samsonowa, 2011). Moreover, adequate investment is the key to proper utilization of human resources. For instance, capital adequacy enables the deployment of right number workforce which eliminates chances for issues such as work overload, inequality while standardizing operational progress. Therefore, improving human resource factors has significant benefits that mostly favor performance in an organization. It is true that Standard procedures often induce productivity, increase employee outputs and in due course improving organizational performance. 

Planning

The main theme of remodeling performance management system includes the development a proactive system that will allow effective control of employee performance in accordance with organizational goals. Therefore, the first stage will involve the setting of attainable goals to motivate employees for their accomplishment.  For motivation purposes, employee participation will be included in the decision-making process. Accomplishment of goal setting will lead to the encouraging stage, which underlines the need for providing employees a suitable working environment that supports their efforts to proper completion of allocated job. The stage will entail various managerial practices including employee training and establishment of effective communication channels for productivity (Rahim, Golembiewski & Mackenzie, 2002).  Rewarding is the final stage and so, rewarding will be put in action after job completion. Rewarding is essential in imposing job satisfaction among the workers while building commitment in the entire organization. Different but fair appraisal systems will be used to develop appropriate recognition procedures on aspects of, for example, promotions and salary increment in accordance with the variability of job performance (White & Druker, 2004).

References

International Society for Performance Improvement. (2010). Handbook of improving        performance in the workplace. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Rahim, M. A., Golembiewski, R. T., & Mackenzie, K. D. (2002). Current topics in management:            Vol. 7. New Brunswick, N.J: Transaction.

Samsonowa, T. (2011). Industrial Research Performance Management: Key Performance            Indicators in the ICT Industry. Heidelberg, Neckar: Physica-Verlag.

Syed, J., & Kramar, R. (2017). Human Resource Management: A Global and Critical       Perspective.

Tapamoy, D. (2008). Performance appraisal and management: Concepts, antecedents and           implications.