This model is divided into three parts. The first is professional expectations - a conversation between leadership and individual about their strengths and areas for development based on their job role and the company ethos. The second is personal personal performance - the individual being supported to develop goals that relate to their needs and how the company can work with them to grow and maintain their talent. The third is immersion learning - the on the job learning that connects the previous two and constitutes performance in practice.
The model focuses on co-creation of performance learning so the initial step is staff designing the program and prototyping. Once the design had been developed it would focus on cycles of inquiry that continued throughout the year rather than relying on twice a year meetings or 360 degree feedback. This would look different in each organisation. In some it may be groups of four working together and holding each other accountable. In another it may be line managers having a five minute feedback with each staff member weekly and a monthly goal sharing session. The model would need staff learning in dialogue/discussion, accountability language; clear timeframes and expectation; clear norms of working together.anyone can start this on a small scale in their team by starting the conversation with their team and cocreating ideas together. The emphasis will be on high quality accountability conversations across the team and keeping these short, regular and rigorous. They would be a two way conversation, not done to.
Hi Cheryl-- thanks for your ideas! I think you are right the the emphasis of any replacement for Performance Management should be on high quality, regular accountability conversations... and I especially agree that these are *two-way* dialogues. Really like the way you have articulated this!
- Log in to post comments
You need to register in order to submit a comment.