High Performance leads to Low Performance
Most High Performance organizations turn into Low Performance
Organizations within 2 to 3 years.
High Performance can provide a great focus on the work design and productivity of employees. The over all performance and productivity of employees is continually challenged and expected to increase year over year.
However the execution difficulties with High Performance are enormous. There are countless failures in the area and there can be negative long term ramifications. It all comes down to management discipline, active listening and human connections.
The concept of High Performance is not a quick fix program or silver bullet; too many executives attempt to sell it in that manner to their board, managers and employees. It is often introduced with the hype that is associated with a marketing program or product launch; rather than weaving it in as a fundamental ongoing leadership practice.
When the concept of High Performance is initially introduced, it must be seen as the opportunity to raise the over all level of skills and the level of performance in the long run. There must be considerable training and documentation for all managers and employees, including how the new E.Performence system will function. The communications related must be focused on information and not appearing as if it were a sales pitch.
There should be new productivity measurement tools implemented and of course a priority placed on the utilization of meaningful measures. There should be a strong link to skills development. It must be clearly communicated to managers that individuals may be let go based on performance over a suitable period of time. However it’s not to be utilized for ongoing or large scale downsizing programs.
When done properly High Performance is straight forward and the basic activities within the process are extremely effective. However in many cases, why was High Performance brought in to the organization? It was due to the fact managers had been providing ineffective performance management or they were providing no performance management to speak of. The organization had got itself into a real pickle and fooled itself in thinking there was an easy way out.
The organization’s easy way out is the removal of the subjectively identified poor performers. They want these employees terminated. So the organization introduces High Performance as a hard change dimension rather than a soft change dimension. When this is done High Performance turns into a continual downsizing or dumb sizing exercise.
Many organizations have turned the trendy concept of High Performance into an excuse for weak managers to let go the employees which they have deemed poor performers. Many of these employees have been given little or no management attention to correct the perceived performance issues. The lack of management discipline is very apparent.
It becomes easier to fire employees then to manage performance and develop skills. Then the downsizing spiral begins and many of the decisions that are made on who is terminated are very questionable. Downsizing is still a political exercise in countless entities, if one truly investigates the whole process.
The High Performance culture becomes a continual firing line where professional terminators execute at will. Meanwhile, professional recruiters are scrambling to find scarce skills in the market place. Too much of this behaviour and it starts to feel like a circus. Never mind the expense overruns on termination and recruiting.
Of course, many executives and managers claim their process of High Performance is objective. However in few cases this is true. Subjectivity still weights heavy in the setting and reviewing of objectives with destructive politics beginning to take hold; since in many cases High Performance is associated with massive downsizing.
After 2 or 3 years of inaccurate employee evaluations, manipulated data and raise the bar pressures, destructive politics is deeply entrenched and will flourish at all levels. With the continual letting go of the supposed bottom 10% of employees per year; the High Performance Games have been mastered by most that are left. The lack of objectivity is apparent.
Great employees have been let go. Some former employees have to be contracted back. Real skill development becomes minimal. Team work is lower than it ever has been.
Of course, there are some minimal productivity gains; mainly due to advancing technology and the competition dragging the organization along. The trust and Loyalty are at an all time low. A long term cancer has set in and there are no quick fixes on that one. The entity has become a Low Performance organization.
High Performance seems great in theory, but should we scrap it in reality? Definitely not! The building of a real High Performance culture and its associated tools has benefits for all. I am adamant that the incredible management discipline, active listening and effective human connections required are the corner stones of the High Performance culture.
If you have any doubt of your organization’s ability to construct and maintain these corner stones then you must not attempt High Performance. However if your entity has these corner stones; then the High Performance advantage awaits.