Australian Managers Can’t Do Employee Performance Management

The Performance Management Institute of Australia conducted a survey of Australian Manager attitudes towards the Performance Management process. Approximately 140 Managers responded from a wide variety of businesses and enterprises.
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia (PRWEB) December 17, 2005 — The Performance Management Institute of Australia conducted a survey of Australian Manager attitudes towards the Performance Management process. Approximately 140 Managers responded from a wide variety of businesses and enterprises.

The Survey found that:

1. Most Performance Management systems in Australia are antiquated.

79.4% are based on filling out paper forms and only 22.8% are capable of producing meaningful reports.

2. Most Australian organisations don’t understand what top performance means in relation to their employees.

Performance data is used in only 11.8% of organisations to help identify top performers. Also, only 20.6% of organisations use Performance data for identifying potential successors. Skills and experience may still be the overriding factors in determining staff performance, with little consideration given to past Performance data.

Only 38.2% of businesses use Performance data during the recruitment selection process.

These results appear to debunk the talent shortage myth. Australian organisations are their own worst enemies when it comes to identifying and therefore retaining their top people and on implementing high impact succession plans.

3. Only 26.8% of Australian organisations tie rewards to performance.

Seniority, cronyism and other soft measures are still used by 63.2% of Australian organisations to link rewards to performance.

4. Most Managers don’t work towards satisfying client or investor needs.

Managers believe that 75% of Performance Management Objectives are aligned to Business Strategy but only 54.4% of Managers say they are highly conversant with the organisation strategy.

Only 21.1% of Managers say that their objectives are aligned to Investor expectations and only 56.6% to Customer expectations.

This confirms that only half of all Managers really understand the organisation strategy. It might also mean that a large number of organisation strategies are unclear about desired customer or investor outcomes.

There is a clear disconnection between what Managers believe they have to achieve and actually achieving good outcomes for both clients and investors.

5. Poor management training continues to dog Australias line Managers.

Most Managers surveyed do not know how to run the Performance Management process.

About 66.2% saying that they have not had formal training in Performance Management. Over 75% say that they have had no training in managing good or poor performance or dealing with emotional employees.

6. The lack of adequate reporting is causing most Performance Management systems to fail.

Only 33.1% of organisations have real time reporting. In the majority of cases, there is little consequence for Managers who don’t execute the Performance Management process and therefore objective setting and periodic reviews simply don’t happen.

"I appeared for 4 successive interviews for a job position at a media company. The very
"We have recruited a guy in our company and found that he edited his Btech
Can you challenge your employer at the Court of law if you were terminated for
"I completed MCA in 2009, after that I did some teaching job and tried for
"I am working in a manufacturing industry as a Sr. HR Officer. I have recently

  • kshantaram

    i feel the scenario is similar in many upcoming indian family managed organisations, where the performance appraisal system exists for demonstration, but is more a burden to all to be co-ordinated by hr to the best of its ability and annual increments finalised at the last moment and often late – the appraisal forms stored for reference only; the elements of counseling,training needs analysis,organisational planning and development do not find a priority in action as integral to the organisational values and philosophy : the hods and the management by intution know whom and how they would like to reward for which a system is probably not needed, it is more a procedure to be done to satisfy hr and can be ignored too :

    lot of committment,patience,priority and a passionate willingness for organisation development and culture building needed which may develop as one pulls ahead under these stressful competitive times, it’s the chicken or the egg story again!

    why then blame australia! yes this is why perhaps as i had understood harbhajansingh could mutter something there and get off, condoned on the australian ground there if i am correct – in a lighter vain!

    to me when i read hr texts over the last 30 years, the problems of human behaviour and implementation are similar across the globe put in the form of lessons/texts to be idealised and followed by those who would like to benefit.

    maybe a cross-cultural statistical presentation could have been useful not
    isoloating the australians perhaps!

    just sharing my impulsive views – i do advocate best hr practices everywhere with my own passion and we need to continue to persuade in a calliberated manner.


  • Rajendra Sawant

    Performance measurement is not proforma exercise its tailored made instrument to judge the performance of individual employee in the given business enviornment. Factors like Global and Regional economy, product economy, customers confidence and marketing strategies as well as management flexibility to cope up with the changing targets and decision making autonomy in organization determines the performance of individual.

    You cannot ask worriers to fight war without weapon and judge their performance just on the result of war and individual potential on an art of safeguarding his own life measuring tricks of surviving as performance.