|
June 1998 Linking Individual Performance to Strategic Plans An early pioneer, the Submarine Maintenance Engineering, Planning and Procurement Activity (SUBMEPP), discovered a powerful connection between their organizational expectations, goals, and outcomes and their performance management process. A small, technical Department of Navy field activity, the mission of SUBMEPP is to centrally perform engineering and planning required to deliver life cycle maintenance and modernization products and service for submarine operations. Strategic Planning. The strategic connection between organizational performance and individual performance emerged as SUBMEPP worked through its strategic planning process on its journey become a quality-focused organization. According to Linda Sparkman, Total Quality Director, their strategic plan looked good prior to 1997, but did not result in increased accountability throughout the organization. They revised the strategic plan in 1997 and stressed accountability. They also began applying the Malcolm Baldridge Award framework to help guide them to achieve work class status in their business. To that end, it became clear that their strategic plan required changes to numerous systems, processes, functions, and programs across the activity, including performance management. They saw that linking their new performance management program with their strategic plan would help achieve the increased accountability they sought.
Performance Planning. As part of the strategic planning process, an organizationwide employee survey revealed, among other things, a growing dissatisfaction with the performance management process. SUBMEPP established a team, including labor representation, to improve the performance management process. In the early phases, they identified no significant flexibilities to improve their performance management process. The existing performance appraisals focused more on tasks unique to the various positions within the organization rather than common expectations and organizational outcomes. As Sparkman observed, "We were so new to strategic planning and the quality program that we never considered how our performance management process could tie to organizational expectations, goals, and outcomes." After researching private and public sector performance management plans, and much internal dialogue, the team identified organizational expectations, goals, and outcomes as the driving force behind new individual performance elements and standards. They identified common elements and standards for employees and management that focused on improving not only individual performance but organizational performance as well. Simultaneously, they continued wrestling with a major concern: their five-level program would help remove employee apprehension and help managers communicate more effectively. They decided to wait to make any changes until they could implement a two-level program.
Performance Management Program. SUBMEPP implemented both their new strategic plan and their new two-level performance management program in January 1998. Their performance management program consists of a strategic plan with goals and objectives, guiding principles, and performance measurement, as well as common performance expectations for both employees and management. It communicates and reinforces the critical linkages between the activity's strategic intent, individual performance, and organizational performance. From OPM's perspective, the integration of the strategic plan into the performance management process as SUBMEPP has done can be viewed as one way to include an additional performance element into the process. Their performance elements and standards embody direct ties to the guiding principles of quality, customer, and team. They further designed a feedback loop to capitalize on communication and leadership influence. Supervisors and managers receive specific guidance on the linkages between elements and guiding principles and the strategic plan. They are required to discuss the linkage with each employee so that employees understand the connection between what they do everyday and achieving the desired organizational expectations, goals, and outcomes. In turn, employees provide "no risk" feedback to their supervisors, initially on an annual basis, on how well the supervisors communicated the strategic plan and employee responsibilities.
New Links. In further support of their strategic plan, SUBMEPP is currently linking their selection process for new supervisors to supervisory performance management criteria. In the future, they plan to link their employee development process with their performance management program and the strategic plan. They see value added in guiding the development of employees according to the competencies they value in their workforce and leadership. According to Sparkman, the SUBMEPP strategic plan is a living document that guides what they do, how they do it, and where they see themselves in the future. It is not a glossy booklet that collects dust on a shelf. Assessing individual, team, and organizational performance is a continual process, not just an annual event. This drive for continuous improvement requires that all employees clearly understand how and where they fit into the business picture. Performance management is a critical piece of that picture. Sparkman will speak at the fourth annual national performance management conference, TRANSFORMATIONS '98, September 9-10, 1998. You may contact her at 207-438-6228 or email her at sparkman@submepp.navy.mil for more information.
|
