Proposing Processes of Global Performance Management: An Analysis of the Literature

1. Proposing Processes ofGlobal 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 CordulaBarzantny, Groupe ESC Toulouse Business School, France IFSAM 2010, Paris Track G7 – International Management

9. 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

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

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

12. Introduction Overviewof this presentation: • Review of 3 approaches to performance management • Recent empirical and conceptual literatureis mapped to the 4 stages • Concluding observations and suggestionsfor further research Review A 4-stage GPM model Concluding observations and suggestions

13. 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

14. 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 firm-specific set of design parameters • GPM systems designed and operated across diverse process locations

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

16. 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

17. Review Processes and systems Cascio’s seven key issues: • 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)

18. 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)

19. Review Processes and systems Caligiuri’s (2006) challenges: • Select performance constructs • Create conceptual equivalencefor performance dimensions • Determine performance measurement method

20. 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)

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

22. A 4-stage GPM model

24. 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

26. 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

28. 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

30. 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) A 4-stage GPM model

31. 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 stagesas opposed to • used in/by the local social process at later stages in the model (Bjorkman et al., 2009)

32. 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)

33. 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

34. System congruent with a complex, diverse and dynamic business process

35. System congruent with a complex, diverse and dynamic business process

36. Concluding observations & recommendations Thank you for your attention Comments or questions? IFSAM 2010, Paris Track G7 – International Management