Proposing Processes of Global Performance Management An Analysis

Proposing Processes of Global Performance Management: An Analysis of the Literature Peter J. Dowling, La Trobe University, Australia Allen D. Engle, Sr. , Eastern Kentucky University, USA Marion Festing, ESCP-Europe, Berlin, Germany Cordula Barzantny, Groupe ESC Toulouse Business School, France IFSAM 2010, Paris Track G 7 – International Management

Introduction Ongoing and growing interest in Global Performance Management: • Macro Demand – Global economic discontinuities – Consolidating labour markets – Talent translated into MNE competitiveness • Micro Demand – Sophisticated global strategies – Mature markets – Results and accountability focii • Supply – Technical developments in global decision support systems – Global internet platforms – Individual level information and access

Introduction Three sources of GPM literature: • Expatriate • Cross cultural and comparative • Strategic international human resource

Introduction The proposed GPM model • Captures various research streams (broad) • Has a thorough analytical template (systematic) • Leads to faster identification of patterns in empirical research • Determines areas that lack o empirical evidence o robust conceptual approaches

Introduction Overview of this presentation: • Review of 3 approaches to performance management • A 4 -stage GPM model Recent empirical and conceptual literature is mapped to the 4 stages • Concludingobservationsand andsuggestions for further research

Review Processes and systems French (1982) distinguishes between: • Human processes – such as social comparison, envy, the definition and value of fairness, interest in stability or achievement at work • Organizational systems – HR systems designed to harness and direct these processes toward organizationally relevant ends

Review Processes and systems Applied to GPM: • What human processes must a GPM model be able to accommodate? • Imagery of the airliner • More sophisticated, complete and firmspecific set of design parameters • GPM systems designed and operated across diverse process locations

Review Processes and systems Silverman’s five stage model (1989): Preface - Issues/elements, forms, focus (traits, behaviors, results), actors, conflict resolution 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Clarify employees’ major responsibilities Develop performance standards Give periodic feedback Diagnose and coach Review overall performance

Review Processes and systems Cascio’s (2006) three part process: • Define performance – focus on goals, measures and assessment • Facilitate performance – eliminate roadblocks, provide resources, select employees capable of success in the position • Encourage performance – sufficient rewards, a connection between performance and rewards, an assurance of “voice” and fairness

Review Processes and systems Cascio’s seven key issues: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Systems objective Actors (assessors and assessed) Assessor’s authority Roles and leadership of the process (style) Frequency of formal meetings Form of feedback (critical/supportive, direct/oblique) Form of praise and motivation (money, loyalty, promotion)

Review Processes and systems Caligiuri’s (2006) strategic linkages: • Strategic context: – Global, multidomestic and transnational strategies • Assignment context: – Technical assignments (low developmental intent/low cultural sensitivity needs) – Developmental assignments (High developmental intent/unknown cultural sensitivity needs ) – Strategic assignments (high development intent/high cultural sensitivity needs) – Functional assignments (low developmental goals/high cultural sensitivity requirements)

Review Processes and systems Caligiuri’s (2006) challenges: 1. Select performance constructs 2. Create conceptual equivalence for performance dimensions 3. Determine performance measurement method

Review Processes and systems Caligiuri’s (2006) methods: • How – explicit & objective, vs. open & informal • Who – appropriateness of supervisors, peers, subordinates “Conceptual equivalence” (challenge 2) as bridge between globally standardized performance constructs (challenge 1) and locally tailored methods and training (challenge 3)

A 4 -stage GPM model Proposing a 4 -stage process model of GPM 1: GPM systems context 2: GPM systems design 3: GPM systems operation 4: GPM systems evaluation

A 4 -stage GPM model Systems Context Macro strategy • Strategic interest: - multidomestic - global - transnational • Heritage – Origin Scope of the system • Actors • Roles • Information sources Purpose of the system Development, rewards Design parameters >> • Frequency • Formalization • Feedback capability • Explicit – Implicit • Focus: - traits - behaviors - outcomes Systems Design • Clarify major responsibilities • Develop performance standards • Select performance constructs • Create conceptual equivalence • Determine method of measurement • Decide how to assess • Define measures • Define performance Train systems users >> ations Systems Oper • Give periodic feedback • Dialogue & coach on Systems Evaluati • Evaluate individual formal performance: - Review overall performance - Encourage performance • Aggregate unit • Facilitate performance: profiles −Eliminate roadblocks −Provide resources, • Evaluate - Validity ongoing basis - Acceptance of the GPM system in process (Reaction)

A 4 -stage GPM model Stage 1: Systems context • • Strategic intent Heritage- origins Scope of system Design parameters (moving to systems design stage) – Frequency of formal feedback – Formalized vs. normative emphasis – Actor feedback capabilities – Explicit/implicit, quantitative/qualitative, additive vs. gestalt – Focus on traits, behaviors and/or outcomes

A 4 -stage GPM model Stage 2: Systems design • • Clarifying major responsibilities Developing performance standards Selecting performance constructs Creating conceptual equivalence Determining measurement methods Methods to assess Defining performance Training systems users (moving into systems operations stage)

A 4 -stage GPM model Stage 3: Systems operation • Giving periodic feedback • Dialog and coach • Facilitate performance – Eliminate roadblocks – Provide resources on an ongoing basis

A 4 -stage GPM model Stage 4: Systems evaluation • Individual formal performance meeting – Review overall performance – Encourage performance • Aggregated unit performance profiles • Evaluation of the validity and acceptance of the GPM system-in-process (reaction)

Concluding observations & recommendations • Granted a U. S. bias, the framework can be adjusted as warranted by – empirical results – cultural context warrants • A call for mechanisms (journals, academic institutes, interest groups in academic associations, etc. ) to track developments in this area • Search for systematic cross cultural patterns in the degree of divergence between system – as envisioned in earlier stages as opposed to – used in/by the local social process at later stages in the model (Bjorkman et al. , 2009)

Concluding observations & recommendations • Examples of empirical research were found associated with every area of the 4 -stage GPM model, but remarkably little empirical research found on how MNEs evaluate and use the results of GPM for their various potential purposes (stage four and how stage four issues “loop” back into stage one)

Concluding observations & recommendations • Design GPM for robust use over a variety of potential operating conditions • Design GPM: Realize it will operate as a system in a variety of potentially very different social process contexts around the world • Return to aircraft imagery

System congruent with a complex, diverse and dynamic business process

System congruent with a complex, diverse and dynamic business process

Concluding observations & recommendations Thank you for your attention Comments or questions? IFSAM 2010, Paris Track G 7 – International Management