Analysis of performance
Performance reviews are an important tool in the field of organizational performance, a field of research and practice ( 2001). Like cultural performance, the field of organizational performance is a highly contested one. The challenge of efficiency extends from measuring and evaluating performance to creating and developing it. Organizational performance is produced at the level of individuals, teams, departments, organizations, and industries, and it takes place across a wide variety of sectors, including business, nonprofit, educational, and government organizations. Because it stretches across different institutions, efficiency has come to be a social imperative, making it something of a national and business challenge. he contemporary field of organizational performance, like that of cultural performance, is a discursive and practical construct, one whose sites of construction have been overseen by a paradigm of performance research, a gathering of subjects who collect different activities together under the concept “performance” and who participate in this movement of generalization by developing certain models drawn from other fields Performance Management develops out of Scientific Management by challenging many of its basic tenets and seeking to redress its drawbacks (2001).
Performance Management attempts to displace the rational control of workers by empowering them to improve efficiency using their own intuition, creativity, and diversity. While Scientific Management was developed and deployed in an industrializing economy, Performance Management has become the organizational paradigm for an information economy hardwired to computer and communications technologies, wherein information processing and decision-making no longer take place only from the top down, but are diffused throughout an organization. At its most progressive, Performance Management challenges the challenge of efficiency itself, or at least its exclusivity, by introducing a diversity of values and organizational cultures (2006). Performance analysis is the systematic and comprehensive evaluation of a technology or technological system, an evaluation that focuses not only on technical effectiveness, but also other dimensions such as safety, cost, reliability, and quality. Thus, while performance measurement determines whether a technology is currently performing to criteria, performance evaluation interprets this measurement within a wider context of interests and actions. As part of the feedback loop of prediction and performance, evaluation may include assessing current performance in light of the experience base, identifying performance trends and anomalies, and making decisions or recommendations concerning future performances. New tests may be called for or new criteria defined. Designs may be corrected, reconceived, or even scrapped altogether. In addition to performance specifications and criteria, there are also performance standards. Performance standards are evaluative criteria agreed upon and recognized by members of a particular community and designed to be applicable across a wide variety of contexts. Performance standards may apply to materials or processes of construction, but increasingly they have come to be defined in relation to the actual use of a technology, to its performance in the field rather than the lab ( 2002). Performance analysis involves the use of many kinds of tools. This paper intends to critically examine the effectiveness of the Mckinsey’s 7-S framework in promoting alignment using balance scorecard to analyze performance in Tesco Company.
Mckinsey’s 7-S framework and promoting alignment using balance scorecard
The performance challenge facing every organization is to develop management systems that make employees the organization's greatest asset. To successfully reach this pinnacle, an organization must design, develop, and implement a performance alignment process intended to improve its performance and competitiveness in other words, a process that addresses the performance challenge. Addressing the performance challenge proves a difficult undertaking requiring cooperation from the organization, its managers, and its employees ( 2000). One of the best ways of improving organizational and employee performance is by utilizing an organization-wide performance alignment process one that links client needs and expectations to job design and the performance improvement process in such a way as to enhance organizational competitiveness, efficiency, and effectiveness. Two additional strategies are particularly successful in meeting the performance challenge: developing leadership effectiveness and creating virtual teams. Collectively, these strategies effectively transform employees into an organization's greatest asset. A step in applying the performance alignment model is to conduct stakeholder valuation. By doing so, organizations identify the needs, expectations, and organizational realities of each stakeholder (1999).
The information will help improve employee quality and performance, expand market share, and achieve the strategic business goals and objectives of the organization. In addition, organizations will be able to avoid equilibrium, hemorrhaging, centeredness, and expansion practices that prevent them from growing or expanding their business in a positive, effective manner. By understanding organizational stakeholder needs, expectations, and realities, organizations will be ready to link initiatives with their strategic business goals and objectives. Once this linkage has occurred, enlightened organizations develop job designs that enable employees to perform at the highest possible level often meeting or exceeding performance standards. In this way, organizations link their stakeholders with the performance alignment process (Zwell 2000). Once stakeholders' needs and expectations have been identified, organizations can isolate strategies for improving the execution, management, and quality of employee performance. These strategies apply the performance alignment process to the employee level within the organization. In other words, the same strategy being utilized to address the performance challenge at the organizational level can be used to improve the performance of each employee. Consequently, only one approach need be used to transform employees into the organization's greatest asset. Organizational management entails practices used to guarantee that internal functions achieve their respective goals. The most important type of management practice is performance management, which the performance alignment process was designed to improve ( 2003).
The performance alignment process was created to help organizations manage performance at the organizational level. In this way, organizations manage human and material resources, improve interfaces between functions and business processes, and enhance performance outputs generated by employees. The performance alignment process simultaneously improves each of these three components. While the performance alignment process was designed to help organizations address the performance challenge, it can also be used to help manage each employee's performance. That is, the performance alignment process is appropriate for and can be applied to the performer level. The performance alignment process evolves from an organizational performance strategy to a performance management application, useful with each and every employee regardless of level or job responsibilities. Organizations are systems consisting of three distinct levels: organizational, business process, and performer. Each level requires evaluation based of its goals, design, and management practices. While often more expedient to view organizational management from a macro level, the performance challenge can be best addressed by applying the concepts, principles, and ideas of the performance alignment process model at both the organizational and performer levels (1998). The McKinsey 7S model was widely accepted as a framework for change analysis. The key strength of the 7S framework is its simplicity. The model captured the various elements that should be considered but it did not elaborate on the many relationships between them. ( 2002). The Mckinsey’s 7-S framework combines with the balanced scorecard to analyze Tesco as a firm, understand how it performs and it determine means to make sure Tesco would be focused on the alignment process. The Mckinsey’s 7-S framework works with the balance scorecard to understand Tesco’s performance and analyze whether its performance is still within the boundaries of the alignment process. The Mckinsey’s 7-S framework will work better if another element would be added. The Mckinsey’s framework might have been better with the Synergy element because it represents how well all the elements worked together.
0 comments:
Post a Comment