IMPROVING EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE:

MOVING BEYOND TRADITIONAL HRM

RESPONSES
by David Ripley, Ph.D., SPHR

May 1999
Reviewed July 2002

Introduction

Every manager, no matter what his or her role, knows that exceptional employee
performance is critical in today's world. The purpose of this white paper is to discuss the
need for human resource managers to move beyond HR's traditional performance
management approaches and partner with line managers to remove barriers to exceptional
employee performance that exist in organizational work environments. Specific
methodology and action steps are discussed and suggested readings are provided.

How Can We Achieve Exceptional Employee Performance?

The first thing to remember is that employee performance does not occur in a vacuum.
We have to take a systems perspective and look not only at our employees, but also at the
environments in which we expect them to perform. It has been said that if we put good
performers in bad systems, the systems will win every time. We know that behavior in
any facet of our lives is a function not only of the person, but also of the environment—
more specifically, of the interaction of the person and the environment. Behaviors at
work, then, are a function of the interaction of our employees (with their person factors)
and the work environment (all the organizational systems factors). And it is behaviors
that lead to performance.

Depending on whose perspective you choose to believe, as many as two-thirds to four-

fifths of the causes of employee performance problems are attributable to the work
environment, not the employees. If this is true—in fact if it is only partially true—then
one answer to the above question clearly is, "Fix the systems in which our employees
work!"

Yesterday's Solution: Fix the Employees

Yesterday's solution to the issue of employee performance was simple: "Fix the
employees!" The focus was on the immediate problem and the solution was either
training or discipline.

As we grew a bit more sophisticated we became more proactive and got ahead of the
curve by instituting performance management systems that often provided for goal-
setting and performance appraisal processes which gave a more rational and defensible
basis for training and discipline. We also implemented career planning and development
systems, which gave us more of a future focus, and changed the name of the Training and
Development function to Human Resource Development to reflect the broader scope.
These were good things as far as they went, but they are not enough. All this was still
based on the premise that the solution was to fix the employees.

Today's Solution: Recognize Some of the System Factors as Well

Today, we are generally doing a better job. We recognize and deal with most of the
"hygiene factors"—fair pay, reasonable benefits, clean and safe working conditions, etc.
These are important. There is no question that they are necessary for improving employee
performance for fairly obvious reasons. To use simplistic examples, employee
performance improvement interventions may not stand much of a chance if employees
are really annoyed because we did a poor job of implementing a benefits change or if
they are preoccupied with work schedules they consider unfair.

We have also recognized that we have to consider the whole person. We know that
people don't leave their problems "at the door." We understand that when we hire
someone, we get the whole person, including problems from their personal life—from the
person's external system. This is an area we're getting much better at—in terms of
counseling, fitness programs, child care, employee assistance programs, etc. Recent years
have seen company concierges and other innovative approaches to helping employees
deal with the conflicts in their work and personal roles.

This is a big step beyond yesterday's solution of fix the employee with training or
discipline. The competency areas currently tested by the Human Resource Certification
Institute (HRCI) reflect this broad area of knowledge. These areas truly are a critical
foundation for improved employee performance, but they are also not enough. We must
do more. We are looking at personal systems factors outside of work as they impact
employees, but still not looking hard enough at the system factors at work.

Tomorrow's Solution: Deal with the System Factors in the Work Environment as
Well

A relatively simple, but highly effective way of looking at this issue was provided by
Tom Gilbert, who developed a diagnostic tool called the Behavior Engineering Model
(BEM). There are other approaches (see the recommended reading at the end), but the
BEM will serve as a good example. It looks at the following six areas:

1. Information.
2. Resources.
3. Incentives.
4. Skills and knowledge.
5. Capacity.
6. Motivation.
The first three areas, information, resources and incentives, represent the work
environment (system factors) and should be looked at first. We need to ensure there are
no problems in these areas before we rush to fix the employees, who are represented by
the last three areas, skills and knowledge, capacity and motivation (person factors).

Let's look at each of these in a bit more detail. Information is critical for obvious reasons.
It starts with output specifications. People have to know what they are expected to
produce. They need to get feedback. They need to be aware of policy and procedures and
the reasons for these policies and procedures, and so on. Resources, again, is fairly
obvious. No matter how skilled an employee, without the tools and materials (and
information can overlap with resources here) needed to do the job, it probably isn't going
to get done. The best welder in the world can't weld without a torch. The issue of
incentives is a bit more complex, but boils down to this. In the work environment, are
there truly incentives for good performance and truly consequences for poor
performance? Often, we end up, in effect, punishing our best performers. They get all the
tough jobs because we know we can count on them and the poor performers get the easier
work.

"Skills and knowledge" is certainly a familiar area. People have to know how to do their
jobs. Capacity is important for obvious reasons also. No matter how committed the
employee, if we hire someone 5' 10" to guard an NBA center in the low post, he isn't
going to get the job done. Motivation is important also. A strictly person-based definition
of performance is that performance is a function of motivation and ability. We can work
on the ability. It's harder to work on motivation because it is so internal to the individual,
but we can work on the environment and make sure we remove the barriers to
performance. Gilbert also developed a list of questions he called the PROBE
questionnaire, to help determine in which of these areas the cause of an employee
performance shortfall could be found.

How well do we currently address these person and system factors in HRM? If we have
done all the things we currently teach that we should (today's solution), then we probably
do fairly well in the person factors—skills and knowledge, capacity and motivation. We
may have a corporate university and provide excellent training for our employees,
focusing on the skills that will be needed tomorrow as well as today. Our promotion and
selection systems may be good enough to ensure that employee capacity is never an
issue. The rewards, training (including well-trained supervisors or team leaders) and
career focus may combine to help motivate our employees. But all this may not be
enough if there are major problems in the system factors. This is not to say the system
factors are ignored. We put a lot of effort into communications programs and comfortable
facilities, and tweak our compensation programs endlessly. But too frequently, this is not
done with performance improvement in mind and does not result in high performance.

If problems persist in the work environment areas, exceptional performance will not be
achieved. Our organizations have recognized this and have made various efforts over the
past several years to deal with it—with varying degrees of HRM involvement. The
productivity movement of the 1980s, followed by the total quality movement (TQM),
followed by reengineering and business process redesign (BPR)—these can all be viewed
as efforts to improve the environment in which our employees function and improve
employee and organizational performance. By whatever name, this effort is going to
continue. The only issue is whether HRM is going to be a player or will the effort be the
province of outside consultants.

How Can HRM Be a Major Player in This Effort?

Once we are sure a solid basic HR foundation is in place, there are two more issues for
HR organizations and HR Managers who wish to be key players in improving employee
performance—and who wish to do more than provide the traditional HR solutions. The
first is to understand the methodology for diagnosing human performance problems and
designing and implementing performance improvement interventions. The second is to
forge effective partnerships with line managers.

The methodology is not complex. But before the methodology can be used effectively,
one must develop a mindset that recognizes that there are many solutions to employee
performance problems other than training (Marilyn Westmas, of Rayovac, has developed
a taxonomy of well over 200 performance improvement interventions). Then, we need an
understanding of the methodology—a basic approach that is not all that different from
that used daily by HR Managers in problem solving. Start with front-end analysis,
determine the problem area, select, design and develop an appropriate intervention,
implement (perhaps after a pilot) the intervention and evaluate the results to determine if
adjustments are needed. The critical point is that training isn't always the appropriate
intervention—we may need a job aid, an electronic performance support system (EPSS),
more and better information getting to the people doing the work or additional resources.
Problems must be approached with a willingness to look at the whole work environment
and not walk away when it doesn't appear the intervention needed is a traditional HR
approach that we are comfortable with.

This last point is key to forging effective partnerships with line managers, team leaders or
self-managed work teams. There are tremendous opportunities for synergy when we
combine the skills and perspectives of HR representatives with the people involved with
the work on a daily basis. We have to be willing not to walk away when the solution
appears to be outside the traditional HR area of expertise. Rather, we have to be true
business partners, stay with the people with the problem, help find the expertise needed
and ensure that the solution is designed and implemented in such a way that it leverages
our employees' capabilities. We don't have to be the subject matter experts in all
intervention areas, but we have to understand the process. We need to be involved at all
stages, and that will only happen if the people with the problem view HR as a function
that has something to bring to the table in this regard. With that in mind, some action
steps are offered in the next section.

What Specific Steps Should HR Take to Address the Remaining System Factors?
For larger HR organizations, it is critical to have the current T&D or HRD group make
the transition from a training organization to a performance improvement organization.
Those who now support various elements of the organization as trainers need to be
exposed to performance improvement methodology and, most of all, need to be willing to
look at human performance solutions other than training. It has been said that if you give
a small boy a hammer, he will find an inordinate number of things that need pounding—
and those of us who have raised small boys recognize the element of truth in that
statement. We all tend to see problems in terms of our favorite solution—which is
typically one we're good at implementing—so our trainers may have to stretch a little.
But some companies have already successfully made this transition. These staff
members, in many cases, will already have good relations with those they support, but are
seen just as trainers, not as professionals who can help diagnose a performance issue and
help come up with interventions other than training. If HR is to be a key player in overall
performance improvement, this is the impression that has to change. The transition begins
when HR people are called in for training, see in their front-end analysis that training is
not the answer and, rather than bowing out, offer some other suggestions as to how to
proceed.

In smaller HR organizations, this is tough because HR is already stretched. The HR

Manager already has to be all things to all people and here is one more area that he or she
must become competent in. At the same time, if the HR Manager does not become
knowledgeable in this area, get out of the office and form the partnerships, he or she will
leave the field to external consultants by default. If, on the other hand, the HR Manager
does become knowledgeable, he or she can at least be in the position of working with the
external consultants and helping to guide the process.

Large or small, in working with human performance issues, remember:

1. Develop an understanding of human performance improvement methodology.

2. Be willing to use all the available tools, not just your favorite. The tools are just
tools. The goal remains performance improvement.
3. Be open to any and all approaches. The issue is what will work, not whether the
approach is a typical HR solution. Maybe an internal person is the answer, maybe
an external person is the answer, maybe an internal alliance is the best approach
or maybe a consortium of companies is needed to work on the issue.
4. Partner with line managers and those with expertise in using tools you are not
familiar with. Build networks of people who can bring expertise to the table that
you lack.
5. Don't worry overly about what's on your business card—whether it says "Training
and Development," or "Human Resource Development," or "Performance
Improvement" or simply "Human Resources." If you do the job, they will call you
back, and if you don't, they won't—no matter what your card says.
6. Don't get involved in turf wars with other parts of the organization that typically
take a different approach. When you do, it simply makes you look foolish in the
eyes of the rest of the organization. Rather, build strategic partnerships with
 others in the organization that may have something to offer so you can quickly
bring a significant amount of expertise to bear on the problem.
7. Take a systems approach. No intervention exists in a vacuum, and every
intervention has some impact beyond its area of initial application. Try to bring all
those affected to the table. Don't fall into the old trap of optimizing one part of the
system while sub-optimizing the whole.

Where Can You Learn More?

For those who wish to learn more about methodologies for getting at the system factors in
the work environment and improving employee performance, the following sources are
recommended:

Dean, P. J. Performance Engineering at Work. Washington, DC: The International

Society for Performance Improvement, 1999.

Dean, P. J., & Ripley, D. E. Performance Improvement Pathfinders. Washington, DC:

The International Society for Performance Improvement, 1997.

Gilbert, T. F. Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance (Tribute Edition).

Washington, DC: The International Society for Performance Improvement, 1996.

Rummler, G. A. & Brache, A. P. Improving Performance: How to Manage the White

Space on the Organization Chart. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1995.

Stolovitch, H. D. & Keeps, E. The Handbook for Human Performance Technology. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1999.

Thanks to David E. Ripley, Ph.D., SPHR, for contributing this paper. It is

intended as general information, and is not a substitute for legal or other
professional advice.