One of the difficulties in performance appraisal management lies in the diversity of appraisal objects, and the applicable appraisal methods, index settings, scoring standards and appraisal results are different. Front-line departments, business departments and core departments often do more and make more mistakes because of the content and nature of their work. However, some functional departments often fail to reflect the differences because of the difficulty in quantifying their work, unreasonable setting of assessment indicators and methods, or inaccurate grasp of the scale of assessment personnel. The phenomenon described in this case is very typical. Over time, the advantages of performance management are not reflected, but the negative impact is growing.

So, what should we do? How to respond. I think we should pay attention to the following points:

First, performance management is inherently differentiated.

The difference is determined by the nature of performance management itself. To balance performance, we must first recognize this difference. This difference has been analyzed in the last article. In fact, in any enterprise, different enterprises and different industries, the status and value of each position are different. In marketing enterprises, sales positions will be the core of enterprise positions; In manufacturing enterprises, the position of production department is more prominent; Among scientific and technological enterprises, the value of R&D department is slightly higher. In other words, all departments within a company are unequal in business value. I used to call it "business value hierarchy".

We know that the goal of each department is the decomposition of enterprise goals. The performance appraisal of each department is based on the overall goal and vision of the enterprise. Around the overall goal of the enterprise, each department provides business or functional support. Some departments or posts are the core, and some are auxiliary support.

Specific to the hotel industry, guest rooms, front desk, catering and other service positions directly facing customers should become the core positions of the company. These departments or positions should also be at the top of the "business value hierarchy". When formulating assessment indicators and standards, we should pay attention to. Because their performance is good or bad, it determines the service quality, image and reputation of the hotel to a greater extent, and affects the business development of the hotel.

So there are two conclusions here: First, based on the importance of front-line departments, the evaluation of their performance results is larger, more detailed and more direct, which has its natural rationality; Second, in terms of performance evaluation index setting and other means, the above positions are appropriately tilted. The so-called balance is not across the board.

Second, the balance of performance appraisal methods

The differences in the content and nature of work between departments and posts exist objectively, but when choosing performance appraisal methods, we can make certain choices in order to achieve the goal of balance.

There are countless methods of performance appraisal, such as BSC, KPI, Mbo and 360. I won't go into details here. I remind you that different evaluation methods can reflect the differences in work content and balance the results. MBO and KPI are closer to the former, and the forced step-by-step method can balance the performance results of employees in different departments (of course, the problem is that it cannot reflect the performance differences between departments). According to different needs, we should choose appropriate methods.

Third, the correction coefficient-our empirical application.

Personally, I am not engaged in the hotel industry, but the practice of our company may have certain reference value.

One of the principles of performance management is to combine the overall goal of the enterprise, the performance of the department and the performance of the individual. The difference of departmental performance, or the imbalance of employees' performance results, actually comes from the difference of personal performance rewards and punishments. Comprehensive use of departmental performance results and employee personal performance results, through the use of correction coefficients, can achieve the purpose of balance.

Specifically, we assess the performance of departments and individuals according to the target management method and KPI, and then arrange employees and departments according to the compulsory distribution method, and set corresponding coefficients. Finally, it is balanced by multiplying the department performance coefficient by the employee performance coefficient. For example, suppose that the department performance ranks first with the value of 1.2, the department second with the value of 1. 1, the personal performance ranks third with the value of 1.0, and the fourth with the value of 0.9. Then, the performance coefficient of the employees ranked second and third in the department is 1. 1 * 65448. Through the correction of department coefficient and individual coefficient, the balance is achieved.

HR must understand the business.

In class on Sunday, a senior HR stated his opinion on the stage: HR must understand the business and have HRBP experience, and give examples. Before, because they didn't understand the business, the business department hated HR personnel, thinking that they were superior and had no suitable support, and the declared material card was very powerful. So the director of human resources sent people to the business department to experience the work. A week later, HR came back to confess. First-line business is too difficult. When it is windy in winter, he can't stand it for an hour. No wonder he doesn't want to recommend female employees to them. He can't do the work at all. He can't get in touch with it in the office, and he has to play computer and have an electric heater. . . . This is the simplest level for HR to understand the business.

Our company also has an example, lunch, if it is fair, the meal fee will be one point per person, but some female employees only eat 1 steamed stuffed bun, and some gay men eat 6 steamed stuffed buns every day. Can female employees have no ideas? It is fair to keep accounts according to quantity.

The same is true of performance appraisal. The logistics department also has quantitative standards for work, and so does the financial department. If you don't understand finance, you can't determine the way to make financial performance. If there is a way, please explain it to the outside brain, and then we will listen and learn. The same is true of engineering. . . . Now there is an advantage, that is, all kinds of information are available on the website, and the methods of performance appraisal of various companies are available. Learn from them. I believe in a word, the heart is willing, but the strength is weak. This question has always been in front of you, so I rushed to understand it, so I passed the test.

Performance is a problem. Many enterprises are implementing it on the surface, but there are also unfair places. With so many years of work experience, most employees are honest and fair. There were only sticks left in the mop, so I timidly applied for a new mop. Actually, it should have been changed a long time ago. If you are willing to answer many complaints seriously, especially if you dare to try to see if you can stand it, you will know that many complaints are because the most basic conditions have not been met, and someone needs to uphold justice for them. This person may be the head of the department or HR.

I always feel sorry for one thing. When sewers stink, there are three kinds of people. One kind of people run as far as possible, and hope it is best to go abroad. The second kind of people would rather smell it for a few years than have it checked or repaired by themselves, but they always complain. The third kind of people don't say a word, go up and check carefully, find problems, solve problems, or ask for help to solve problems. . . . The choice is free, but the result is different.

Let's study the business patiently, conscientiously and practically, break down the performance and do a good job.

Performance appraisal management needs systematic thinking.

First of all, look at the performance appraisal of the case from the perspective of management system thinking.

There is a strange formulation in the case, which makes me doubt whether there is a misunderstanding of systematic thinking in the case.

At the beginning, the company can stabilize its business without performance appraisal, which shows that everyone is very enthusiastic and management is balanced as a system. The function of performance appraisal is to change the state that the incentive status quo is invalid for good performance, so the stable period of operation is not the most direct reason for the implementation of performance appraisal. In this case, from the perspective of the whole management system, performance appraisal can not be the focus of the improvement of the management system at this stage, because the management system has not yet put forward the need for improvement.

When the demand is not obvious, any work will get twice the result with half the effort, because now is not a good time.

Second, if you ignore the first idea, you must take performance appraisal as the key work of the human resources department, and you should pay attention to the following issues.

First of all, we should make clear the purpose, who produced the purpose of performance appraisal.

In management, not all management tools are used, but management has improved, and sometimes it is worse. Therefore, management must focus on the purpose, not management for management's sake.

1. In the case, the desire of department heads to introduce performance management is very weak, and there may be resistance. In fact, this clearly shows that department heads do not need to do performance appraisal. Therefore, under the present circumstances, it is unrealistic to imagine that department leaders need to cooperate with performance appraisal.

2. If this demand belongs to the human resources department, it will be sad, and basically don't want to have a good result. Because the human resources department will face the situation that the boss does not attach importance to it (does not object, but can try it if it is successful) and the department leaders feel that it is unnecessary to increase the work. In this case, what achievements can we expect the human resources department to make?

3, but if it is necessary, there is still a try.

If the boss is also a whim without a purpose, listening to the boss is the best choice for the human resources department. If you provide professional knowledge and let the boss make a decision, you are not qualified to use this brain.

In the west, the tools of performance appraisal management basically need to be decomposed into tasks. The source of decomposition is the purpose of the boss, or to put it bluntly, it is the strategic goal of the company.

If the boss's performance appraisal is targeted, then the human resources department will have a lot of room to play. According to KPI, the boss's purpose should be decomposed into the heads of various departments. I don't believe that department heads don't need the help of human resources department to establish a performance appraisal system, because poor department performance directly affects the performance and interests of department heads. In this case, things will change soon.

How to balance the performance appraisal results of first-and second-line department managers?

Our company belongs to the hotel service industry, and now the assessment of managers is like this: set yourself a goal for the next month every month and score at the end of next month. Because front-line departments have task indicators, if they fail to complete or have complaints from guests, the score will be lower; The work of second-line departments is relatively fixed, such as finance department and engineering department. And these departments will score higher. In this way, the personnel of the finance department and the engineering department rank first in each assessment, and the managers of the front desk, guest room and restaurant rank behind, and even the money is deducted. Seriously affect internal unity and the morale of front-line managers.

In the face of such a situation, how should the personnel department balance?

1\ Different types of work will lead to different assessment criteria: employees in the bank have different types of work, so employees can be allowed to set the criteria a little lower. The number of customer complaints is greater than or equal to 2 times/month, and points will be deducted if it exceeds. The finance department, engineering department, etc. are all controlled by themselves, and the financial work requires zero error rate, and the workload of this functional department is relatively stable, so that front-line employees and management will not increase or decrease their workload because of different seasons. Performance appraisal is to balance the imbalance between departments within the enterprise. If the functional departments always take the first place, other departments will have no direction to struggle.

2\ Conduct unified standard assessment according to departments of the same nature; For example, the first-line service department and the first-line operation department will implement the same set of assessment standards, and the functional departments will be independent, which will polarize and avoid the differences between the first-line and second-level departments. From the analysis of enterprise structure, relatively speaking, the second-line departments will be better than the first-line in salary and welfare, and the labor intensity will be weaker. It is also a group of people with low authority at the enterprise level who directly bring benefits to enterprises. If they have no advantage in performance appraisal, it will have a negative impact.

3\ cross-examination; Cross-examination is conducted by relevant departments. For example, the performance of kitchen employees is assessed by the Food and Beverage Department, which of course needs to account for a certain proportion in the assessment indicators. Mutual supervision and communication are helpful to the communication between departments, to the cooperation in work, and to deepen the understanding of work between departments. There is no better method for performance appraisal, and the method suitable for the enterprise itself is a good method.

Never use a ruler to measure.

Different positions and different salaries should also have different assessment standards. Your company is a typical service industry, and the front-line departments directly face customers, so it is inevitable that there will be complaints when dealing with customers every day. Therefore, in the assessment, we should distinguish it from the second-line departments that do not directly face customers. We should not use an assessment standard to carry out performance, otherwise your performance system will be incomplete and there will be many hidden dangers.

Especially for this kind of enterprises, I think we should find key indicators and improve them when formulating assessment indicators. How to formulate for the second-line departments? Because of the nature of their work, their work is relatively fixed, and the affairs they handle every day are similar. Mainly assess their seriousness and timely completion rate. As long as it meets the standard, even if it is qualified, there is no penalty, because the salary is not as high as the first line. However, we should pay attention to some strategies when evaluating front-line departments. I think we can adopt the structure of basic salary plus high performance. That is to say, if you do well, you can enjoy higher performance pay, which is much higher than those second-line departments that are not easy to make mistakes. If you often make mistakes, you will be deducted a lot, and you will not get a high-performance salary or even a bonus. This will encourage them to finish their work more seriously and avoid making mistakes.

How to balance two levels of employees? First, modify the existing performance appraisal, distinguish the appraisal standards of the two departments, and find out the accurate appraisal key indicators; Second, solicit opinions from employees extensively, sometimes employees' opinions will give us new ideas and inspire us with new ideas; Third, try new methods for a period of time, and practice test is the best method. Only by improving the shortcomings will there be new and more reasonable performance appraisal standards; The fourth is to communicate the ideas of the two departments and let everyone know why this new performance regulation is introduced and what benefits it has for everyone. It is important to have a unified understanding; Fifth, focus on the work of department leaders, who directly face employees to some extent, and their understanding will determine the success of this work improvement; Sixth, honor the promise of rewards and punishments in time, so that employees can understand that good work means getting more money, and bad work means being punished, thus promoting more employees to work hard for high performance goals.