THE Interior Minister, Mr Cletus Avoka, has hinted that police officers at the national, regional and district headquarters are to be tied to performance contracts “in a new effort to inject professionalism and competence into the service”.
Even though he did not put a finger on the date of introduction of the new appraisal system, he stated categorically that “all those who are found to be non-performing will be replaced after an annual assessment of their work”.
Justifying the plan, he said, “If chief directors and other heads of state-owned organisations are made to sign performance contracts, then it is perfectly in order to ask security chiefs to also sign such contracts by which they will be assessed.”
The DAILY GRAPHIC fully appreciates the fact that Mr Avoka’s vision is in line with best international practices in human resource management. Indeed, well-known authorities on the subject define performance management (PM) as: "A process which is based on a number of activities designed to improve strategic focus and organisational effectiveness through continuously securing improvements in the performance of individuals and teams."
Performance management also provides an enabling framework to integrate performance improvement activities, such as corporate objective setting, performance assessment, identification of potential, training and career development, succession planning, as well as intrinsic and extrinsic rewards.
But, just as there are two sides to every story, PM has its advantages and disadvantages, although it is generally accepted that the positives far outweigh the negatives.
Let us look at some of the advantages. One of the huge benefits in managing performance is in the adage that “whatever gets measured gets done”.
Furthermore, through PM, it is easier to ensure that an organisation’s strategy is translated into reality, not forgetting the fact that PM systems can be used to contribute strongly as a vehicle for encouraging and managing change in organisational culture.
However, the experts agree that sometimes performance contracts can be very subjective. In other words, they can be used to intimidate subordinates if they are not professionally and objectively handled. But this fear is also allayed by the fact that although the appraisal is subjective, the benchmarks for rewarding performance are scientific and measurable.
It is for this reason that the DAILY GRAPHIC cautions the directors at the Interior Ministry who will be working out the details of the contracts to use performance objectives that are specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound.
Whatever system is put in place should also provide a feedback and recognise hard work as a means of motivating people to realise their maximum potential.
Anything short of that will defeat our attempt to chart a new path of development in the right direction.
No comments:
Post a Comment