CLC Building The High Performance Workforce A Quantitative Analysis of The Effectiveness of Performance Management Strategies
CLC Building The High Performance Workforce A Quantitative Analysis of The Effectiveness of Performance Management Strategies
CLC Building The High Performance Workforce A Quantitative Analysis of The Effectiveness of Performance Management Strategies
Council Staff
Practice Manager
Carl Rhodes
Project Lead
Jessie Ann Dalrymple
Lead Consultant
Gillian Marum
Contributing Consultant
Julie Houghton
Director of Content Delivery
Ron Kann
Managing Director
Jean Martin-Weinstein
Executive Directors
Peter Freire
Michael Klein
www.corporateleadershipcouncil.com
Note to Members
Legal Caveat
This project was researched and written to fulfi ll the research requests of several members
of the Corporate Executive Board and as a result may not satisfy the information needs of all
member companies. The Corporate Executive Board encourages members who have additional
questions about this topic to contact the Board staff for further discussion. Descriptions or
viewpoints contained herein regarding organizations profi led in this report do not necessarily
reflect the policies or viewpoints of those organizations.
The Corporate Leadership Council has worked to ensure the accuracy of the information it
provides to its members. This report relies upon data obtained from many sources, however,
and the Corporate Leadership Council cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information or
its analysis in all cases. Further, the Corporate Leadership Council is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional services. Its reports should not be construed as
professional advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances. Members requiring such
services are advised to consult an appropriate professional. Neither the Corporate Executive
Board nor its programs is responsible for any claims or losses that may arise from (a) any
errors or omissions in their reports, whether caused by the Corporate Leadership Council
or its sources, or (b) reliance upon any recommendation made by the Corporate Leadership
Council.
Confidentiality of Findings
This project has been prepared by the Corporate Executive Board for the exclusive use of its
members. It contains valuable proprietary information belonging to the Corporate Executive
Board and each member should make it available only to those employees and agents who
require such access in order to learn from the material provided herein, and who undertake not
to disclose it to third parties. In the event that you are unwilling to assume this confidentiality
obligation, please return this document and all copies in your possession promptly to the
Corporate Executive Board.
Table of Contents
Letter from the Corporate Leadership Council v
Building a High-Performance Workforce: The Study in 10 Conclusions vi
Chapter IOverview and Methodology 1
Chapter IISeven Keys to High Performance 11
The Performance Management System: The Singular Power of Clarity 13
Performance Culture: The Freedom to Take Risks, Communicate, and Be Flexible 18
ManagerEmployee Interaction: Solutions Enabler 23
Formal Performance Review: The Delicate Balance Between Praise and Critique 27
Informal Performance Feedback: The Primacy of Fairness and Accuracy 31
Day-to-Day Work: Connection Over Rewards 36
Job Opportunities: High Profile, Good Fit, and New Skills 41
iii
iv
vi
Executive Summary
Executive Summary
The Performance
Management
System
Ensure employee
understanding
of performance
standards.
Create performance
standards that
are perceived as
fair and linked
to organizational
success and strategy.
Provide feedback
to employees from
multiple sources
(e.g., 360-degree
reviews).
Understanding,
connection, and
fairness are more
important than
system design and
structure.
Performance
Culture
Encourage, yet
manage, risk taking.
Institutionalize
the free flow
of information,
innovation, openness,
and flexibility.
Differentially treating
strong and weak
performers is vital,
but its ultimate
impact on employee
performance is
limited.
Manager
Manager
Employee
Interaction
Managers must
help employees find
tangible, immediate
solutions to specific
work challenges
to improve
performance.
Managers must
provide needed
information,
resources, and
technology.
Managers can be
performance
killers by providing
employees
with unclear
or inconsistent
expectations.
Formal Review
Managers must
emphasize the
positive during
formal reviews.
Discussion of
performance
weaknesses must be
clearly focused on
specific suggestions
for improvement
or development; if
not, emphasizing
weaknesses can
dramatically decrease
performance.
Review should also
include a discussion
of the employees
long-term career in
the organization.
Employee
Informal
Feedback
Fair and accurate
informal feedback on
performance from
a knowledgeable
source is the single
most effective
performance
management lever
available to the
organization.
Feedback should be
voluntary, detailed,
immediate, and
positive.
Day-to-Day
Work
Carefully match
employees to
jobs: employees
who understand
and enjoy their
work significantly
outperform those
who do not.
Take time to explain
the big picture:
employees will
perform better if they
understand how their
work contributes
to organizational
strategy and success.
Job
Opportunities
Provide employees
with highly visible
opportunities that
leverage their
strengths.
Training should
be functionally
relevant and job
specific. General
skills training
is much less
effective.
The promise of
promotions and
financial rewards
drives employee
performance, but the
impact is smaller than
employees personal
connection to their
work.
vii
viii
ix
Chapter I
Overview and Methodology
2a
No Way to Know
There are many drivers of high
performanceleadership, recognition,
development. But it is extremely difficult
to figure out how to actually create a
high-performance environment.
VP of HR
South African Financial Services Firm
2b
3a
In this study, the Council uses this model to test the impact of 106
performance management strategies. By identifying which strategies affect
performance directly or indirectly, or fail to affect performance altogether,
the model offers insight into how scarce performance management resources
should be allocated in order to receive the highest return.
Fair and Accurate FeedbackAn Example: Any given performance
improvement strategy may have both direct and indirect effects on
performance. For example, providing employees with fair and accurate
performance feedback can affect performance directly by giving employees
job-relevant information. But just as importantly, giving fair and accurate
feedback also affects employee performance indirectly by driving a number
of important attitudes, such as discretionary effort or organizational
commitment. The true impact of a given strategy can only be identified by
accurately assessing both its direct and indirect effect.
Performance Culture
ManagerEmployee Interaction
Day-to-Day Work
t
ac
p
e
t I m a nc
c
e
rm
ir
Ind Per fo
on
D
on irec
Pe t Im
r fo p
r m ac t
an
ce
Individual Performance
Job Opportunities
3b
4a
Definition
Discretionary effort
Extent to which employees put their full effort into their job, are constantly looking for ways to do their
job better, are willing to put in the extra effort to get a job done when necessary, and believe that people
would describe them as enthusiastic about the work they do
Organizational
commitment
Extent to which employees feel a strong sense of belonging to the organization, feel that the organization
has a great deal of personal meaning for them, enjoy discussing the organization with people outside of it,
and feel that the organizations problems are their own
Extent to which employees feel that their work is the right type of work for them and they are the right
type of person for the job
Having necessary
resources
Extent to which employees think that they can always find out what they need to know to do their job
successfully, always have the tools, resources, and technology they need to succeed at work, and know that
they have the skills and knowledge to accomplish whatever it is that is asked of them at work
Team strength
Extent to which employees believe that every person they work with brings something important to the
team, all of the people they work with do their fair share of work, and everyone at work cares about
whether they do a good job or not
Job satisfaction
Extent to which employees describe themselves as very satisfied with their job and with the kind of work
that they do
Intent to leave
Extent to which employees do not intend to look for a new job with another organization in the next year,
do not frequently think about quitting their job and leaving the organization, are not actively looking for a
job with another organization, and have not made phone calls or sent out their rsum in order to find a
job at another organization
Whether employees say that they would be happy to spend the rest of their career at their organization
Whether employees believe they could easily find a job at another organization
4b
5a
Number of
Employees
Performance
Source: CLC Solutions Employee Preferences Database; Corporate Leadership Council research.
5b
6a
Performance
Culture
ManagerEmployee
Interaction
Coworker
involvement
Diffuse decisionmaking authority
Risk taking
Coworker cohesion
Innovation
Flexibility
Differential treatment
of best and worst
performers
Internal
communication
Future orientation
Formal
Performance
Review
Informal
Performance
Feedback
Emphasis on
performance
strengths
Emphasis on
performance
weaknesses
Emphasis on
personality strengths
Emphasis on
personality
weaknesses
Emphasis on skills and
behaviors needed in
the future
Emphasis on specific
outcomes of formal
performance review
(e.g., promotions,
raises, or bonuses)
Emphasis on specific
suggestions for doing
the job better
Emphasis on
long-term career
prospects within the
organization
Emphasis on amount of
effort put into the job
Emphasis on
performance strengths
Emphasis on
performance weaknesses
Emphasis on personality
strengths
Emphasis on personality
weaknesses
Emphasis on skills and
behaviors needed in the
future
Emphasis on specific
suggestions for doing the
job better
Fairness and accuracy of
informal feedback
Feedback that helps
employees do their jobs
better
Immediate versus
delayed feedback
Manager likelihood
to volunteer informal
feedback
Method of delivering
informal feedback (e.g.,
face-to-face, in writing)
Manager knowledgeable
about employee
performance
Day-to-Day Work
Job Opportunities
On-the-Job Development
Opportunities
Opportunity to:
Spend time with a professional
coach
Do challenging and leading-edge
work
Experiment and take risks
Have significant accountability
and responsibility
Help launch a new business,
initiative, or program
Help turn around struggling
business
Work with a mentor
Be promoted
Work for strong senior
executive team
Work in a different country
Work in a variety of jobs/roles
Work in new business units
Work in new functional areas
Work on the things you do best
Work with a diverse group of
people
Training Content
Business (e.g., accounting,
finance)
Diversity
IT
Leadership
New employee orientation
People management (e.g.,
communication, team-building)
Process management (e.g.,
managing timelines or budgets,
resource allocation)
Product
Quality control
Sales
Technical
Other
6b
7a
Structural
Equation Models
(SEMs)
Y3 = + 8X8 + 2Y2 + 3
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
7b
8a
Analysis in Action
The page below provides an overview and example of this analysis using
a sample strategy (informal performance feedback from an employees
manager) and a sample attitude of high performance (discretionary effort).
Step #1: Measure Employee Performance: Company-provided performance
data on employees was standardized into a common scale and subjected to a
number of tests for validity and reliability.
Step #2: Measure Presence and Effectiveness of Performance Levers:
The presence and effectiveness of each performance management strategy
was measured by asking employees a number of questions about their
experiences with each lever. In the example below, employees are asked how
often they receive informal feedback from their managers.
Step #3: Measure Attitudes of High Performance: Each of the Councils
seven attitudes of high performance was measured using a number of
standard scales. The example below presents one of four questions used to
measure discretionary effort.
Step #1:
Measure Employee Performance
Collect
Test
Standardize
CompanyProvided
Raw Data
Validity
and
Reliability
Tests
Percentile
Rank in
Company
5
4
3
2
100
99
98
97
Impact on
Attitudes and
Performance
Estimated Maximum
Change
Change in Performance
Step #5:
Calculate Total Impact
Indirect
Indirect
effects work
through five
key attitudes
Direct
Indirect
Total
Impact
Direct
Change in
Informal
Feedback
Indirect
D ir
Change in Employee
Discretionary Effort?
ec t
Change in Employee
Performance?
Statistical Analysis
Source: Corporate Leadership Council research.
8b
9a
Entertainment
and Media
Financial Services
Chemical and
Energy
Health Care
Manufacturing
Technology
IADB
9b
10a
A Rich Database
Demographics of Survey Participants: The profile of the database shown
below illustrates the diversity of the survey respondents. Broad distribution
across organizational level, work function, geographic region, age, gender,
and tenure allows for robust analysis of the impact of various performance
management strategies on different segments of the workforce. For
comparisons across geographic region, for example, the study examines the
experiences of more than 700 employees from Latin America, 3,900 from
Europe, 500 from South Africa, 2,400 from Asia, 500 from Australia, and
over 10,000 from North America.
Other
Nonmanagement
Department
Manager/Director
21%
25%
Other
Management
Work Function
15%
12%
24%
Supervisor/
Administrator
Corporate
Admin
Customer Service
Other*
5%
Engineering
12%
21%
4% and Design
8% Finance/Accounting
Sales 7%
8%
14%
5% Human Resources
Retail
9%
Operations
Professional/
Technical
3% South Africa
53%
13%
Asia/Pacific
IT
4% 3%
3%
Marketing Manufacturing
Australia/
New Zealand
Gender
6170
Years Old
5160
Years Old
14%
3140 Years
1830
Years Old
1%
2130
Years
Female
13%
41%
17%
59%
30%
4150
Years Old
26%
1120
Years
38%
3140
Years Old
3%
Male
57%
10 Years
or Less
10b
11a
Chapter II
Seven Keys to High Performance
11b
12a
The performance strategies are divided below into four levels (A, B, C, D)
based on the magnitude of their impact on individual performance. The
items on the left side of the chart are A-level strategies, meaning they can
each improve individual performance by a remarkable 25.0 percent or more.
In other words, employees whose organizations successfully implement an
A-level strategy rank 25.0 percentile points higher than their peers who
do not receive the same A-level strategy. B-level strategies can improve
performance by 10.0 to 24.9 percent. C-level strategies have a potential
performance improvement of 0.0 to 9.9 percent, while D-level strategies can
actually have a negative impact on employee performance.
B -Level
Drivers
C - Level
Drivers
D -Level
Drivers
50.0
Impact on
Employee 0.0
Performance
(50.0)
25.0
10.0 to 24.9
0.0 to 9.9
<0.0
12b
13a
4. Formal Performance Review: The Delicate Balance Between Praise and Critique
13b
14a
Definitions
Amount of influence employees have in creating development plans, their perspectives on how challenging the development plan is, and
the frequency with which employees refer to development plans
Whether employees believe that they are held accountable for skills, behaviors, and outcomes that are critical to their organizations and
their business units success
Whether employees understand how their organizations formal performance review system works
Whether employees understood the standards they were evaluated on in their most recent formal performance review
Whether employees believe that most people in their organization get the performance ratings they deserve
Whether employees believe that the standards they were evaluated on in their most recent formal review were fair and realistic
Whether employees believe the formal performance review system is clearly linked to their organizations overall strategy
Number of formal performance reviews employees have with their manager (the person they directly report to)
Whose opinions were included in employees most recent formal performance review (e.g., the people who directly report to them,
peers, direct managers, senior executives in the organization, clients or customers from outside the organization)
Whether employees most recent formal performance review produced a written development plan for them
Whether their organization has a procedure for addressing employees concerns about the outcome of their formal performance review
System credibility
Employee belief in the formal performance review system as a determination of who gets promoted and who gets raises and bonuses
Use of rank-ordering
Whether their organization formally ranks people at their level in order of their performance from best to worst
14b
15a
Content
Mean = 1.6
45.0
High
36.1
Change in
Performance
20.0
8.1
5.8
5.2
4.6
3.7
3.6
3.0
2.0
1.4
0.2
(0.1)
s
ing
it
ou
ye
plo
Em
e
ye
lp o
de
Un
ks
at
M
at
Th
f
go
ow
or
W
ste
Sy
r
fo
ir
Fa
Pr
es
c
en
es
ar
St
ce
rie
Pr
em
vie
ib
ed
Cr
nc
of
36
Pr
E
of
ce
n
se
Pr
e
ye
plo
ge
d
an
t
en
Pla
fD
nk
r
be
of
(1.0)
ing
ed
eiv
c
Re
a
fR
Us
o
lity
er
rd
-O
pm
elo
ev
bi
ca
li
pp
Pla
pm
elo
ev
e
es
t
en
Re
-D
fG
re
eg
st
Sy
ilit
ur
d
ce
va
so
s
ne
ds
d
an
c
an
er
fP
in
nd
sta
Lin
k
Em
bil
a
nt
c
eA
Em
or
yf
er
Be
Sy twe
ste e
m nP
an erf
d or
O m
rg an
an ce
iza M
tio an
Ex
na ag
t
e
l S em
Pe nt
tr a e
rfo to
te nt
rm W
gy
an hi
ce ch
Ra Em
tin pl
gs oy
Th ee
ey s R
D ece
es iv
er e
ve
plo
y
Pe ee
rfo Un
r m de
an rst
ce an
St din
an g
da of
rd
s
Low (5.0)
al
ie
ev
m
or
um
en
all
Ch
* Each bar presents a statistical estimate of the maximum total impact on employee performance each strategy will produce. The total impact includes the strategys direct
impact on performance as well as any indirect impact it may have through employee attitudes. The maximum total impact is calculated by comparing two statistical estimates:
the predicted performance level for an employee who scores high on the strategy and the predicted performance level for an employee who scores low on the strategy.
The impact of each strategy is modeled separately. A strategy that fails to achieve traditional levels of statistical significance is denoted with a white bar (t < 2.0).
25.0
10.0 to 24.9
0.0 to 9.9
<0.0
15b
16a
Indirect:
Understanding Standards:
Impact on Performance*
Employee Understanding
of Performance Standards
Number of Formal
Performance Reviews
Presence of
360-Degree Review
Commitment (34.0%)
Commitment (4.8%)
Commitment (6.9%)
= Total:
* The total impact of a strategy on employee performance is a weighted sum of the strategys direct and indirect effects. Each direct and indirect
effect is weighted differently, which is why the direct and indirect effects do not sum to the total impact. Percentages next to employee attitudes
denote the maximum percentage change produced by each strategy, expressed as a percentage of the total possible change.
16b
17a
Indirect:
8.1
6.6
Commitment (2.0%)
6.4
6.3
6.1
Meeting
with an
Executive
Coach
Meeting
with a
Mentor
Feedback
Importance
5.0
Score
0.0
Creating
Interacting
Leadership with Peers
Development
Plan
Percentage of
Respondents
14%
Almost
Never
17%
22%
14%
18%
10%
5%
Almost
Every Day
The total impact of a strategy on employee performance is a weighted sum of the strategys direct and indirect effects. Each direct and indirect effect is weighted
differently, which is why the direct and indirect effects do not sum to the total impact. Percentages next to employee attitudes denote the maximum percentage
change produced by each strategy, expressed as a percentage of the total possible change.
Importance scores, derived from conjoint analysis, measure the relative importance leaders place on each program for the development of their leadership skills.
17b
18a
Performance Culture
The next lesson focuses on organizational culture and the importance of a
culture of risk taking, internal communication, and flexibility to individual
performance.
4. Formal Performance Review: The Delicate Balance Between Praise and Critique
18b
19a
Performance Culture
Definition
Coworker involvement
Employees perceptions of whether their coworkers take pride in the organization, put a lot of effort into
what they do and are willing to volunteer, and whether it is difficult to get people to do extra work
Diffuse decision-making
authority
Employees perceptions on whether many actions can be taken without the approval of the manager and
whether small matters have to be referred to someone higher for a final answer
Whether employees believe that their organization has a strong desire for high-risk, high-return investments
Risk taking
Coworker cohesion
Whether employees believe that initial failures dont reflect on their competence (i.e., if people fail in the
process of creating something new, the organization encourages them to keep trying)
Whether employees take a personal interest in each other, get along well, feel like they have a lot in
common, and pitch in to help each other out
Whether employees describe their organization as having a lot of team spirit
Innovation
Flexibility
Employees perceptions of whether their organization encourages them to find new ways around old
problems, develop their own ideas, and improve upon the organizations methods
Whether employees agree that their organization can be described as flexible, continually adapting to
change, and always moving toward improved ways of doing things
Employees perceptions on whether or not top managers are set in their ways
Differential treatment of
best and worst performers
Employees beliefs that the best performers always get promoted and get much larger raises and bonuses
than the worst performers
Whether the organization weeds out the worst performing employees
Extent to which there is good communication between peers
Internal communication
Whether employees believe their managers are willing to share all relevant information
Number of opportunities for junior staff to have informal conversations with senior personnel
Future orientation
Employees perceptions on whether the ability to plan ahead is highly valued in their organization,
management constantly plans for the future of the organization, and people are encouraged to take a
long-term view of their career
19b
20a
38.9
34.4
Change in
Performance 25.0
22.9
16.7
9.5
7.7
7.2
4.7
1.5
Co
-M
on
isi
ec
D
se
ak
ing
ke
r
Co
wo
r
D
iffu
iffe
Au
re
th
nt
or
an ial T
ity
d W re
at
or me
st n
Pe t o
rfo f B
rm es
er t
s
n
he
sio
en
t
ve
m
n
r ie
nt
O
re
tu
ke
rI
nv
ol
at
io
tio
ov
a
Inn
Fle
xib
ilit
Fu
Co
wo
r
Int
er
na
lC
om
Ri
sk
m
un
ica
Ta
k
tio
ing
0.0
* Each bar presents a statistical estimate of the maximum total impact on employee performance each strategy will produce. The total impact includes the strategys direct
impact on performance as well as any indirect impact it may have through employee attitudes. The maximum total impact is calculated by comparing two statistical estimates:
the predicted performance level for an employee who scores high on the strategy and the predicted performance level for an employee who scores low on the strategy.
The impact of each strategy is modeled separately. A strategy that fails to achieve traditional levels of statistical significance is denoted with a white bar (t < 2.0).
25.0
10.0 to 24.9
0.0 to 9.9
<0.0
20b
21a
Indirect:
Risk Taking:
Impact on Performance*
Internal Communication:
Impact on Performance*
Risk Taking
Internal
Communication
Differential Treatment of
Best and Worst Performers
Commitment (45.7%)
Commitment (43.2%)
Commitment (23.2%)
+ Direct:
= Total:
Increases
Individual Performance
by 38.9%
* The total impact of a strategy on employee performance is a weighted sum of the strategys direct and indirect effects. Each direct and indirect
effect is weighted differently, which is why the direct and indirect effects do not sum to the total impact. Percentages next to employee attitudes
denote the maximum percentage change produced by each strategy, expressed as a percentage of the total possible change.
2002 Corporate Executive Board
No Direct Impact
Increases
Individual Performance
by 1.5%
21b
22a
Organization
The Performance
Management System
Ensure employee
understanding of
performance standards.
Create performance
standards that are perceived
as fair and linked to
organizational success
and strategy.
Provide feedback to
employees from multiple
sources (e.g., 360-degree
reviews).
Performance
Culture
Understanding, connection,
and fairness are more
important than system design
and structure.
22b
23a
ManagerEmployee Interaction
The third key lesson centers on the importance of the manageremployee
relationship. Specifically, it discusses the sizeable impact that managers can
have on employee performance by providing tangible solutions to day-today challenges at work.
4. Formal Performance Review: The Delicate Balance Between Praise and Critique
23b
24a
ManagerEmployee Interaction
Definition
How strong or weak employees believe their manager is in breaking down a project into manageable components
How strong or weak employees believe their manager is in clearly communicating expectations overall and in regard to specific
work or assignments
How strong or weak employees believe their manager is in creating work plans and timetables
How strong or weak employees believe their manager is in diffusing unhealthy rivalries or competition between team members
Whether employees believe that their manager encourages them to be positive and enthusiastic about their job and the
organization
Whether employees agree that their manager expresses confidence in their ability to do their job successfully
How strong or weak employees believe their manager is in helping a team get started on a new project
Employee perception of whether their manager helps them attain the information, resources, and technology they need to do
their job successfully
Whether employees agree that their manager helps find solutions to problems at work
How strong or weak employees believe their manager is in holding people accountable
How strong or weak employees believe their manager is in identifying or removing unnecessary barriers at work (such as
unnecessary rules or regulations)
Inspires others
Whether employees feel that their manager listens carefully to their views and opinions on work issues
How strong or weak employees believe their manager is in measuring performance and results
How strong or weak employees believe their manager is in persuading and encouraging others to move in a desired direction
How strong or weak employees believe their manager is in rewarding and recognizing achievement
How strong or weak employees believe their manager is in translating a long-term goal or objective into a step-by-step plan
Employee indications of how often their manager makes a fundamental change to their work projects or assignments in
response to unforeseen developments or events
24b
25a
18.5
16.7
16.2
Change in
Performance
11.9
7.3
6.8
6.8
6.7
6.1
5.7
5.6
5.6
5.3
4.6
4.4
Makes
Frequent
Changes to
Projects and
Assignments
0.0
(30.0)
Helps Find
Solutions
to
Problems
at Work
Breaks
Down
Projects into
Manageable
Components
Helps Attain
Needed
Information,
Resources,
and
Technology
Clearly
Communicates
Expectations
Translates
Long-Term
Goals into
Step-byStep Plans
Helps
Team Get
Started
on New
Projects
Creates
Clear Work
Plans and
Timetables
Encourages
Employees
to Be
Positive and
Enthusiastic
About Work
Identifies/
Removes
Unnecessary
Barriers
Holds
People
Accountable
Persuades and
Encourages
Others to
Move in
a Desired
Direction
Measures
Performance
and Results
Listens
Carefully
to Views
and
Opinions
Diffuses
Unhealthy
Rivalries and
Competition
Inspires
Others
Recognizes
and Rewards
Achievement
Expresses
Confidence
in Ability to
Do the Job
(27.8)
* Each bar presents a statistical estimate of the maximum total impact on employee performance each strategy will produce. The total impact includes the strategys direct
impact on performance as well as any indirect impact it may have through employee attitudes. The maximum total impact is calculated by comparing two statistical estimates:
the predicted performance level for an employee who scores high on the strategy and the predicted performance level for an employee who scores low on the strategy.
The impact of each strategy is modeled separately. A strategy that fails to achieve traditional levels of statistical significance is denoted with a white bar (t < 2.0).
25.0
10.0 to 24.9
0.0 to 9.9
<0.0
25b
26a
Commitment (42.9%)
Commitment (35.9%)
No Direct Impact
Indirect:
+ Direct:
= Total:
Increases
Individual Performance
by 23.7%
* The total impact of a strategy on employee performance is a weighted sum of the strategys direct and indirect
effects. Each direct and indirect effect is weighted differently, which is why the direct and indirect effects do
not sum to the total impact. Percentages next to employee attitudes denote the maximum percentage change
produced by each strategy, expressed as a percentage of the total possible change.
Increases
Individual Performance
by 4.4%
26b
27a
4. Formal Performance Review: The Delicate Balance Between Praise and Critique
27b
28a
Definition
Emphasis on performance
weaknesses
Amount of emphasis employees believe their manager placed on skills and behaviors they
need to develop in the future in their last formal performance review
Amount of emphasis employees believe their manager placed on specific suggestions for
doing their job better in their last formal performance review
Amount of emphasis employees believe their manager placed on their long-term career
prospects within the organization in their last formal performance review
28b
29a
Being Specific and Targeted Also a Key Driver: While the impact is slightly
less than for emphasizing strengths, being specific with employees on the
outcomes of the formal performance review (e.g., promotions, raises, or
bonuses) also has a positive impact on performance of 6.6 percent.
These findings offer insight into what managers should emphasize and avoid
during formal review discussions with employees. Constructive comments
on skills in need of development and specific suggestions for doing the job
better are clearly very valuable, but are dwarfed by two extremes on the
skyline: emphasizing the positive and emphasizing the negative. The next
page offers further detail to explain the sizeable gap in performance impact
between these two items.
Emphasize the Future: The middle of the graph also reveals the importance
of emphasizing employees long-term career prospects during formal
reviews. The sizeable impact on performance from communicating with
employees about their long-term potential within the organization suggests
that the traditional view of the labor marketone in which employees spend
their career at only one or two organizationsmay not be as outdated as
previously believed.
40.0
36.4
21.3
Emphasis on
Performance
Weaknesses
9.1
Change in 0.0
Performance
6.6
Emphasis
on Specific
Outcomes of
Formal Review
Emphasis on
Performance
Strengths
Emphasis on
Personality
Strengths
Emphasis on
Specific Suggestions
for Doing the
Job Better
5.3
4.2
Emphasis
on Skills and
Behaviors
Needed in
the Future
Emphasis on
Personality
Weaknesses
(5.5)
Emphasis on
Long-Term
Career Prospects
(26.8)
(40.0)
* Each bar presents a statistical estimate of the maximum total impact on employee performance each strategy will produce. The total impact includes the strategys direct
impact on performance as well as any indirect impact it may have through employee attitudes. The maximum total impact is calculated by comparing two statistical estimates:
the predicted performance level for an employee who scores high on the strategy and the predicted performance level for an employee who scores low on the strategy.
The impact of each strategy is modeled separately. A strategy that fails to achieve traditional levels of statistical significance is denoted with a white bar (t < 2.0).
25.0
10.0 to 24.9
0.0 to 9.9
<0.0
29b
30a
Indirect:
+ Direct:
= Total:
Emphasizing Performance
Strengths
Emphasizing Performance
Weaknesses
Commitment (21.2%)
Commitment (2.2%)
Increases
Individual Performance
by 36.4%
* The total impact of a strategy on employee performance is a weighted sum of the strategys direct and indirect effects.
Each direct and indirect effect is weighted differently, which is why the direct and indirect effects do not sum to the
total impact. Percentages next to employee attitudes denote the maximum percentage change produced by each
strategy, expressed as a percentage of the total possible change.
Decreases
Individual Performance
by 26.8%
30b
31a
4. Formal Performance Review: The Delicate Balance Between Praise and Critique
31b
32a
Definition
Amount of emphasis employees say their manager places during informal feedback
on the amount of effort they put into their job
Amount of emphasis employees say their manager places during informal feedback
on their performance weaknesses
Amount of emphasis employees say their manager places during informal feedback
on their personality strengths
Amount of emphasis employees say their manager places during informal feedback
on their personality weaknesses
Amount of emphasis employees say their manager places during informal feedback
on the skills and behaviors they need to improve in the future
Amount of emphasis employees say their manager places during informal feedback
on specific suggestions for doing their job better
Whether employees believe that the informal feedback their manager gives them
about their work performance is fair and accurate
Whether employees believe that the informal feedback their manager gives them
about their work performance helps them do their job better
Whether employees believe that the informal feedback their manager gives them
about their work performance is detailed and specific
Employee reports of about how often their manager gives them informal feedback
about their work performance
Whether employees need to ask their manager for informal feedback about their
work performance in order to receive it
Manager knowledgeable about employee performance How much employees think their manager knows about their level of performance
Source: Corporate Leadership Council 2002 Performance Management Survey.
32b
33a
14.7
Change in
Performance
10.6
10.0
6.7
3.1
Fairness
and
Accuracy
(30.0)
Manager
Likelihood
to Volunteer
Informal
Feedback
Feedback
That Helps
Employees
Do Jobs
Better
Manager
Knowledgeable
About
Employee
Performance
Emphasis on
Personality
Strengths
Immediate
Versus
Delayed
Feedback
Detailed
and
Specific
Feedback
1.2
1.1
Emphasis
on Specific
Suggestions
for Doing
the Job
Emphasis
on Amount
of Effort
Put into
the Job
0.2
Emphasis on
Personality
Weaknesses
0.0
Emphasis
on Skills to
Develop in
the Future
Method of
Delivering
Informal
Feedback:
Face-to-Face
(3.2)
(10.9)
Emphasis on
Performance
Strengths
* Each bar presents a statistical estimate of the maximum total impact on employee performance each strategy will produce. The total impact includes the strategys direct
impact on performance as well as any indirect impact it may have through employee attitudes. The maximum total impact is calculated by comparing two statistical estimates:
the predicted performance level for an employee who scores high on the strategy and the predicted performance level for an employee who scores low on the strategy.
The impact of each strategy is modeled separately. A strategy that fails to achieve traditional levels of statistical significance is denoted with a white bar (t < 2.0).
25.0
10.0 to 24.9
0.0 to 9.9
<0.0
33b
34a
Indirect:
+ Direct:
= Total:
Commitment (40.0%)
Commitment (39.2%)
Increases
Individual Performance
by 39.1%
* The total impact of a strategy on employee performance is a weighted sum of the strategys direct and indirect effects. Each
direct and indirect effect is weighted differently, which is why the direct and indirect effects do not sum to the total impact.
Percentages next to employee attitudes denote the maximum percentage change produced by each strategy, expressed as
a percentage of the total possible change.
Increases
Individual Performance
by 25.8%
34b
35a
Manager
ManagerEmployee
Interaction
Formal Review
Informal Feedback
35b
36a
Day-to-Day Work
Lesson six examines the importance of employees day-to-day work,
revealing that personal connection, rather than incentives, drives high
performance.
4. Formal Performance Review: The Delicate Balance Between Praise and Critique
36b
37a
Day-to-Day Work
Definition
37b
38a
Personal Connection
Mean = 11.2
Work
Characteristics
Mean = 0.0
Incentives
Mean = 3.5
High 20.0
13.2
13.1
12.5
11.1
Change in
Performance
9.0
10.0
8.3
8.0
6.4
4.2
4.1
3.8
3.6
2.0
Em
Em
Inf
ng
lle
a
Ch
nd
ec
oj
of
Pr
Em
e
ye
plo
ise
ed
eiv
ed
eiv
P
or
yf
Re
ar
ar
ed
eiv
rc
Pe
ed
eiv
pp
t
or
ce
Ra
H
or
yf
an
rm
fo
r
he
r
Pe
ed
eiv
it
un
Re
tin
In
ig
ize
:S
it
a
nu
n
fA
pp
O
d:
er
e
cr
lM
it
un
as
t
or
rc
Pe
r
Pe
Ra
Re
:
rd
io
ot
ro
Ba
in
Sa
se
ts
sig
As
lar
of
Un Pro
it jec
an t
d to
O Bu
rg si
an ne
iza ss
tio
n
ns
io y
ct ateg
e
nn Str
Co and
f
g o rk
din Wo
n
ta n
rs ee
de etw
n
U B
ta
nc
Se
in
ce
lue
t
lec
en
nm
po
r
e
ye
plo
ing
j
ro
Im
ec
he
T
of
ts
po
r
to tan
Em ce
plo of P
Im
ye ro
po
es jec
rt
P ts
an
er an
c
so d
to e o
na A
Em f P
l D ssi
r
plo oj
ev gnm
e
elo e
ye ct
es s a
pm nts
L nd
en
on A
t
g- ss
Te ign
rm m
Ca ent
re s
er
es
ye
plo
Im
Em
Co plo
m yee
ple U
te nd
Pr er
oj sta
ec n
ts din
an g
d of
As H
sig ow
nm t
en o
ts
t
en
ym
njo
or
ir W
ts
ize
of
a
nu
An
s
nu
Bo
S
d:
ar
w
Re
c
Re
O
d:
ar
Re
r
Pe
* Each bar presents a statistical estimate of the maximum total impact on employee performance each strategy will produce. The total impact includes the strategys direct
impact on performance as well as any indirect impact it may have through employee attitudes. The maximum total impact is calculated by comparing two statistical estimates:
the predicted performance level for an employee who scores high on the strategy and the predicted performance level for an employee who scores low on the strategy.
The impact of each strategy is modeled separately. A strategy that fails to achieve traditional levels of statistical significance is denoted with a white bar (t < 2.0).
Pr
oj T
ec im
ts e
an to
d C
As om
sig p
nm let
en e
ts
0.0
0.0
Low
ts
nd
0.0
ts
en
nm
sig
As
ec
oj
fP
o
er
um
25.0
10.0 to 24.9
0.0 to 9.9
<0.0
38b
39a
Indirect:
+ Direct:
= Total:
Employees Enjoyment
of Their Work
Commitment (35.6%)
Commitment (57.4%)
No Direct Impact
Increases
Individual Performance
by 13.2%
* The total impact of a strategy on employee performance is a weighted sum of the strategys direct and indirect effects.
Each direct and indirect effect is weighted differently, which is why the direct and indirect effects do not sum to the
total impact. Percentages next to employee attitudes denote the maximum percentage change produced by each
strategy, expressed as a percentage of the total possible change.
Increases
Individual Performance
by 13.1%
39b
40a
Impact of Financial
Incentives on Retention
7.00
Importance
Score
Incentive
4.30
3.85
3.57
3.46
3.50
Perceived Reward
Size of Bonus
Impact
on Intent
to Stay
Increase in
Base Salary
19.1%
Merit Increase
18.9%
Annual Bonus
19.1%
t
en
nv
ir
on
Ba
pa
ny
E
Co
k
L
ife
on
W
or
nv
ir
lan
en
m
ne
Be
kE
d
an
W
or
Increases
Individual Performance
by 2.0%
pm
en
ta
nd
at
io
pe
ns
m
= Total:
ev
elo
Co
ce
fit
s
0.00
* The total impact of a strategy on employee performance is a weighted sum of the strategys direct and indirect
effects. Each direct and indirect effect is weighted differently, which is why the direct and indirect effects do
not sum to the total impact. Percentages next to employee attitudes denote the maximum percentage change
produced by each strategy, expressed as a percentage of the total possible change.
40b
41a
Job Opportunities
The final lesson of this chapter discusses the value of on-the-job
development and training. High-profile development opportunities that
match employees interests and skills have the most sizeable impact on
performance.
4. Formal Performance Review: The Delicate Balance Between Praise and Critique
41b
42a
Job Opportunities
Definition
Whether employees have a professional, paid consultant from outside their firm who speaks with them about their job and career
Amount of time those with a professional coach spend with this person each month discussing their job and career
Amount of opportunity employees say they have to do challenging and leading-edge work
Amount of opportunity employees say they have to experiment and take risks
Amount of opportunity employees say they have to have significant accountability and responsibility
Amount of opportunity employees say they have to help launch a new business, initiative, or program
Amount of opportunity employees say they have to help turn around a struggling business or project
Whether employees say they have someone in their organization to whom they go for advice about their job and career
Amount of time they spend with this person each month discussing their job and career
Amount of opportunity employees say they have to be promoted with the organization
Amount of opportunity employees say they have to work for a strong executive team
Amount of opportunity employees say they have to work in countries they havent worked in before
Amount of opportunity employees say they have to work in a variety of jobs and roles
Amount of opportunity employees say they have to work in new business units or divisions
Amount of opportunity employees say they have to work in new functional areas (such as marketing or finance)
Amount of opportunity employees say they have to work on the things they do best
Amount of opportunity employees say they have to work with a diverse group of people
Whether employees believe their training to be effective (i.e., improved skills and abilities, advanced career, held accountable)
Whether employees in business functions have received business training since joining the organization
Whether employees have received diversity training since joining the organization
Whether employees in IT functions have received IT training
Whether employees have received leadership training
Whether employees have received new employee orientation
Whether employees have received people management training
Whether employees have received process management training
Whether employees have received new product training
Whether employees have received quality control training
Whether employees in sales functions have received sales training
Whether employees have received technical training
Source: Corporate Leadership Council 2002 Performance Management Survey.
42b
43a
General
Training
28.8
25.7
23.8
20.9
18.4
16.7
Change in 15.0
Performance
15.4
13.2
9.5
6.3
7.5
5.6
5.3
5.0
4.9
4.1
1.7
0.0
<1.0
n
s
le
es ach
m
its
or
ct
es reas
m
io
lity ork
sk
tri
nt
ol
op
ea ogra roje tabi
Un izat
Ri
e
e
n
R
A
T
P
Co
u
s
l
W
o
f
o
ke
e
nd ona
al
r P oun
ive r Pr
a M ines rgan
D
o
a
C
t
g
a
n
o
T
i
u
d
p
o
ith Bus
nt
ou
cc
O
ct
ss
bs
sio
-E
ec
nd rou
e,
sY
un ffere ofes
Ex ativ
ine nd A ding
he of Jo
ta
k w or
F
G
t
s
r
n
i
ih ng ior
iit
r
o
a
e
a
e
s
in
Bu
ty
ew in D
rs
W ion
Le
im
aP
ith
e T Sen ss, In ling bility
rie n N
d
er
ive
is
k
th
a
n
th
i
W
i
v
p
g
r
i
g
i
e
D
a
s
V
g
o
d
w
n
k
a
D
Ex
a
g
on usin
ru
on
te
W me
or
in
k o Str
St
gin
sp
B
ith
i
ew mo
k
n
W
e
a
or
r
T
w
a
e
N
o
R
o
k
ew nd
W for
all
nd
in
Pr
nt
W
or
k
pe
Ch
rk
a N rou ifica
Be
W
S
o
o
h
or
A
n
c
D
W
W
rn
un
Sig
e
Tu
La
v
p
a
l
H
elp He
H
st
Be
2.0
n
ng
ng ning
ng
ng ning
io
ng ning ining ning ning
ing
ini aini
i
at
ini
i
ini
i
i
i
ini
t
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
ain
r
ra
r
r
n
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
T
T
T
T
e
T
T
T
T
T
T
Tr
i
T
f
l
t
t
t
r
l
e
y
s
p
IT
ro
les
uc
O
en nica
en
sit rshi
es
so
vic
nt
e
Sa
m
er
es
od gem
sin Ser
h
o
e
e
e
v
r
n
i
c
u
y
d
g
P
C
e
a
B
a
a
D
Te
er
tiv
plo ew
an
an
Le
lity
m
m
M
fec e M
N
E
f
ts o Qua
s
E
l
es
ew
Cu
op
oc
N
Pe
Pr
* Each bar presents a statistical estimate of the maximum total impact on employee performance each strategy will produce. The total impact includes the strategys
direct impact on performance as well as any indirect impact it may have through employee attitudes. The maximum total impact is calculated by comparing two
statistical estimates: the predicted performance level for an employee who scores high on the strategy and the predicted performance level for an employee who
scores low on the strategy. The impact of each strategy is modeled separately. A strategy that fails to achieve traditional levels of statistical significance is denoted
with a white bar (t < 2.0). Impact of training courses controls for time spent in training and training effectiveness. Impact of training effectiveness controls for specific
course and time spent in training. Function-specific training is defined as training for functional employees in their functional area (e.g., IT training for IT employees).
25.0
10.0 to 24.9
0.0 to 9.9
<0.0
43b
44a
Matching Employees with What They Do Best: The graphic in the center
of the page provides further details on the single biggest performance driver
in this category: providing employees with opportunities to do what they do
best. As shown below, creating opportunities for employees to capitalize on
their strengths increases discretionary effort by nearly 30 percent and drives
organizational commitment by an astonishing 50 percent. Furthermore,
finding opportunities for employees to do what they do best increases
their feeling that they are in the right job by more than 65 percent. These
sizeable positive effects on various high-performance attitudes, coupled
with a substantial direct impact, leads to a total impact on performance of
29 percent.
Experiment and Take Risks: The final item listed belowthe opportunity
to experiment and take risksalso drives a number of critical highperformance attitudes. As presented earlier in the organizational culture
section, not only does providing opportunities for managed risk taking
and experimentation increase employees effort level, commitment to the
organization, and belief that they are well matched with their job, it also has
a notable direct impact on individual performance. Experimentation and
risk taking provide employees with clear opportunities to develop new skills,
leading to a total performance improvement of over 15 percent.
Indirect:
+ Direct:
= Total:
Experiment and
Take Risks
Commitment (41.3%)
Commitment (49.1%)
Commitment (47.1%)
Increases
Individual Performance
by 6.3%
Increases
Individual Performance
by 28.8%
* The total impact of a strategy on employee performance is a weighted sum of the strategys direct and indirect effects. Each direct and indirect
effect is weighted differently, which is why the direct and indirect effects do not sum to the total impact. Percentages next to employee attitudes
denote the maximum percentage change produced by each strategy, expressed as a percentage of the total possible change.
Increases
Individual Performance
by 15.4%
44b
45a
Indirect:
+ Direct:
= Total:
Function-Specific IT Training:
Impact on Performance*
Process Management
Training
Function-Specific
IT Training
Commitment (3.5%)
Commitment (1.6%)
Increases
Individual Performance
by <1.0%
* The total impact of a strategy on employee performance is a weighted sum of the strategys direct and indirect effects.
Each direct and indirect effect is weighted differently, which is why the direct and indirect effects do not sum to the
total impact. Percentages next to employee attitudes denote the maximum percentage change produced by each
strategy, expressed as a percentage of the total possible change. Function-specific training is defined as training for
functional employees in their functional area (e.g., IT training for IT employees).
Increases
Individual Performance
by 13.2%
45b
46a
Employee
Day-to-Day Work
Job Opportunities
46b
47a
Chapter III
Building the High-Performance Workforce:
Guidelines for Performance Improvement
47b
48a
A, B, C, and D Drivers
Taken together, the A, B, C, and D performance drivers act as a blueprint for
focusing organizational investments on the strategies that matter most to the
high-performance workforce.
A-Level Performance Strategies (page 48b): The page below provides
the overall list of A-level performance strategies in rank-order by their
impact on individual performance. These nine items result in the largest
improvements in employee performance of all 106 potential performance
strategies examined in the research. Careful selection and implementation of
the right strategies can lead to huge individual performance improvements
of more than 25 percent.
With the exceptions of manager quality and day-to-day work, each of the
seven categories of performance strategies is represented on the list of A-level
strategies, meaning that high performance is about excellence across all
components of the performance management process. Careful and precise
strategy selection, providing fair and accurate informal feedback, creating a
culture of managed risk taking and internal communication, emphasizing
performance strengths, and ensuring that employees understand the
standards upon which they are evaluated should go furthest to improve
employee performance.
B-Level Strategies (page 49b): The inventory of the Councils 22 B-level
performance strategies, in their order of impact, is presented on page 49b.
Each B-level driver can improve performance by between 10 and 25 percent,
providing organizations with another set of tools that have a significant
and positive impact on the performance of the workforce. Like the A-level
performance strategies, the B-level strategies also come from each of the
seven different performance management categories examined in the
research.
Attribute Category
Informal Feedback
2. Risk taking
Performance Culture
5. Internal communication
Performance Culture
Informal Feedback
Job Opportunities
Informal Feedback
Job Opportunities
48b
49a
49b
50a
50b
51a
51b
52a
The Performance
Management
System
Ensure employee
understanding
of performance
standards.
Create performance
standards that
are perceived as
fair and linked
to organizational
success and strategy.
Provide feedback
to employees from
multiple sources
(e.g., 360-degree
reviews).
Understanding,
connection, and
fairness are more
important than
system design and
structure.
Performance
Culture
Encourage, yet
manage, risk taking.
Institutionalize
the free flow
of information,
innovation, openness,
and flexibility.
Differentially treating
strong and weak
performers is vital,
but its ultimate
impact on employee
performance is
limited.
Manager
Manager
Employee
Interaction
Managers must
help employees find
tangible, immediate
solutions to specific
work challenges
to improve
performance.
Managers must
provide needed
information,
resources, and
technology.
Managers can be
performance
killers by providing
employees
with unclear
or inconsistent
expectations.
Formal Review
Managers must
emphasize the
positive during
formal reviews.
Discussion of
performance
weaknesses must be
clearly focused on
specific suggestions
for improvement
or development; if
not, emphasizing
weaknesses can
dramatically decrease
performance.
Review should also
include a discussion
of the employees
long-term career in
the organization.
Employee
Informal
Feedback
Fair and accurate
informal feedback on
performance from
a knowledgeable
source is the single
most effective
performance
management lever
available to the
organization.
Feedback should be
voluntary, detailed,
immediate, and
positive.
Day-to-Day
Work
Carefully match
employees to
jobs: employees
who understand
and enjoy their
work significantly
outperform those
who do not.
Take time to explain
the big picture:
employees will
perform better if they
understand how their
work contributes
to organizational
strategy and success.
Job
Opportunities
Provide employees
with highly visible
opportunities that
leverage their
strengths.
Training should
be functionally
relevant and job
specific. General
skills training
is much less
effective.
The promise of
promotions and
financial rewards
drives employee
performance, but the
impact is smaller than
employees personal
connection to their
work.
52b
53a
http://www.corporateleadershipcouncil.com
54a
Study Requested
Quantity
____________
_______________________________________
Institution
_______________________________________
Address
_______________________________________
_______________________________________
_______________________________________
Telephone ___________________________________________
COPY AND FAX TO: