Within this context the ministry adopted a Performance Management and Appraisal System, which includes a Learning and Development Policy, which includes the strategic objectives of ensuring the availability of qualified staff for the OPM to meet its programme priorities and requirements and to improve organizational performance as well as enabling the ministry to attract, retain, motivate and develop its staff and the growth of their career.
Main principles of OPM Learning and Development Policy
The policy applies to all OPM staff members. Under this policy, the following principles govern learning and development at the OPM:
- Learning and development are a shared responsibility of the Organization, its managers and its staff members.
- Learning and development priorities shall be based on organizational needs derived from programme priorities and on the assessment of individual needs,
- Career growth and development goals in relation to current job requirements;
- Learning and development should be relevant to current or future work and consistent with the Organization’s values, goals and operational priorities.
Framework to Evaluate Policy in respect of Organizational Learning
The Performance Management Appraisal System (PMAS) is a comprehensive of performance management and evaluation scheme designed to facilitate organizational learning by integrating individual learning modules into the ministry’s strategic planning framework. PMAS provides an objective basis for the appraisal SMART targets agreed based on discussions between the jobholder and their manager/supervisor. The underlying foundation of the appraisal system is an appreciation by each and every employee that their contribution and potential is understood and channeled into “doing the right things” and not only “doing things right”. PMAS is intended to be viewed as a win-win system. The employees skills, talents and interest will be honed and guided for maximum performance and the organization will benefit from the combined performance of all staff.
PMAS enshrines six fundamental principles and values, namely: effective communication; objectivity; transparency; fairness; equitable treatment; and mutual respect and trust. PMAS achieves success by ensuring that: (1) all work programmes (division/unit and individual) are geared to achieving the goals of the organization; (2) common understanding of job requirements; (3) individual performance reviewed against mutually agreed performance standards; (4) feedback on performance is provided regularly; (5) training and development needs are identified and addressed; (6) improved communication between managers/supervisors and other staff to foster a more open and participative environment; (7) good performance is recognized and improvement encouraged; and (8) poor performance is appropriately managed and addressed.
PMAS is an adaptive cycle that starts with the setting of goals and subsequently if necessary manages poor performance and conflicts. It is also a cyclical iterative process; consequently the products/outcomes of earlier steps/stages are refined and incorporated into subsequent stages of the system. As represented in figure 1, key government priorities and objectives identified external to the ministry are distilled and incorporated into the ministry’s strategic planning process. The ministry’s strategic plan is rolled over on a three-year basis and is operationalized annually. From year-on-year operational plans, departmental/divisional plans are expanded and further broken down into individual employee work plans against which individual performance is measured.
A key component of the PMAS is the importance it places on personal development plans for each staff member which articulates any training or other development intervention to be recommended over the next year. This development plan represents an agreed listing of priority learning and development needs; a timeline as to when these needs will be met; and importantly any foreseeable constraints.
To reinforce organizational learning the PMAS is incentivized to promote positive learning and rational action in furtherance of set organizational objectives. Alternately, poor performance is penalized providing a disincentive to negative learning approaches and irrational behavior.
From the above it can be seen that PMAS does accord with the six themes of organizational learning, mentioned above, as theorized by Argyris et al.
Figure 1: Graphical outline of the PMAS
GOVERNMENT PRIORITIES
(Key government objectives)
MINISTRY/DEPARTMENT’S STRATEGIC PLAN
(Longer term goals and objectives linked to the wider key government objectives)
BUDGET ALLOCATIONS
(Financial resources to be made available to the Ministry/Department based on key government objectives)
MINISTRY/DEPARTMENT’S OPERATIONAL PLAN
(Goals and objectives for a given Financial Year)
DIVISION/UNIT’S ACTION PLAN
(How each Division or Unit of the Ministry/Department will contribute to the implementation of the operational plan)
INDIVIDUAL WORK PLAN
(How each individual will work towards helping their Division/Unit achieve its objectives)
In addition, PMAS is best compatible with a formal management system as identified by Shrivastava, 1981 whereby organizational learning is perpetuated through the design and implementation of formal management systems for information, planning, and control. As such, the systemization of organizational activities draws upon the knowledge of individual members and standardizes the ways in which this knowledge may be used.
The PMAS cycle consists of 3 primary review stages that are best compatible with the Deutero-learning model from Argyris & Schon’s theories of the different levels of organizational learning (shown in figure 2). The PMAS cycle commences with both supervisor and employee developing and agreeing on performance objective targets that represent benchmark standards of performance enunciated in the employee’s work plan. At a mid-point, typically a 6 months period, a half-year review is conducted to assess if performance is on track – that is, is the employee achieving the expected results. The outcome of this mid-point review forms the first loop of the Deutero-learning which seeks to answer the question did we do things right? Any adverse performance is subject to corrective action in order to improve year-end results. Close to the end of the fiscal year an annual performance review is undertaken. This review is more detailed and seeks to test the validity of assumptions made in crafting the employee’s work plan, primarily performance standards and targets agreed on. This process forms the second loop, which seeks to answer the question are we doing the right thing? The third loop is formed where the results of individual employee annual reviews are compiled; analyzed; distilled into divisional/departmental reports and submitted for group analysis via an organizational performance assessment, the findings of which are incorporated into the ministry’s operational plan for the next year and also used to update the organization’s strategic plan. From this third loop, organizational learning is concretized by means of establishing new objectives and standards of operations that adds to organizational memory and serves to guide future action.
Figure 2: Argyris & Schon’s Deutero-learning Model
Assumption sharing
PMAS also comprises a staff suggestion policy that generates new ideas and actions in order to foster a team approach to organizational improvement. OPMs’ suggestion policy also acknowledges suggestions that have led to cost savings and cost recovery. Acknowledgements are observed in either cash or kind.
Developing Knowledge of Action-outcome
Two examples of knowledge bases that exist at the Office of the Prime Minister are (1) Management Information System knowledge base and (2) a Procurement Contractor database.
Institutionalized experience
PMAS helps to refine as well as improve routine tasks and subsequently facilitates the creation of Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). In addition to the structured approach of PMAS the ministry attempts to build an enabling culture for life-long learning through the provision of scholarship, coaching mentoring a number of educational foras/group sharing sessions (financial planning, career development) and access to self-actualization learning via library, journal and magazine subscriptions.
The OPMs’ supplemental approaches to learning & development are outlined in table 1 below.
Table 1: supplemental approaches to L&D
Gaps and Recommendations
Figure 3: Incomplete Learning Cycles 1, Daniel Kim “Linking Individual Learning and Organizational Learning” (1993)
Based on the evaluation, the gaps that are identified as follows:
Opportunist learning: Political interference leads to seemingly adhoc decision making which bypasses the ministry’s SOPs. This practice has been identified as a threat to achieving the ministry’s mission. This practice arose because the ministry is trying to be all things to all people.
Fragmented Learning: Both Staff and mangers view PMAS as onerous, as a consequence they are not as diligent with keeping logs and journal. This leads to a break in transition of individual learning being committed to organisational memory.
Situational Learning: Given the political nature of the office, incidence of situational learning is limited. Although PMAS encourages team building through shared solutions (problem solving), Given the political nature situational learning more often occurs during crisis situations, where individual on the spot problem-solving does not change personal mental models and as such the organization is not offered a chance to absorb the new knowledge .
Action Plan (refer Link between Individual and Organizational Organization Kim p13-end)
Quality improvement meetings improves strategic planning.
PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT ACTION PLAN
For the period August 2011 to December 2012
A reflective account
Having been accepted into Bradford’s Business School’s distance learning MBA programme, I followed instructions and engaged the induction programme, it was a thorough introduction to Blackboard, a very integral portal to my distance MBA experience. My first modules of study was Business Accounting and Business Economics, I quickly got a reminder that I don’t efficiently read academic books. Both modules had eluminate tutorial sessions, during the introductions
I quickly got a sense of the immense diversity at Bradford not just in country of origin but also in prior experience. I was, to say the least, nervous. Pangs of self-doubt crossed my mind. People seemed much smarter than me and some really seemed to have their game on, and this was the first semester! Why had I not chosen an IT focused Masters of the Science and entered this place of awesome strangers? The answer was to follow. But first I made a pact with myself: to remember that I did deserve to be here and my experiences would add to the overall class experience. This is essential. I have already learned a lot from my classmates.
Classes are taught through case studies, visual aids, videos of guest speakers and yes, sometimes just plain old brief powerpoint presentations and audio recording. I had often wondered how a subject like economics could be taught through case studies, especially to someone without a shred of economics background. Turns out they are rather effective because they simulate (yes, to a limited extent) the real life experience.
It’s not all about self-study , eluminate tutorial sessions and formative assignments. In fact, that’s just the baseline and no one at Bradford Business School is expected to operate at baseline. At the three quarters way point of the first semester with the final exams looming, I was way off the rhythm of coping with both the reading and assignment obligations. I have become more selective about the events I go to, the associations I choose to get emails from and the things that are important to me.
After receiving feedback from my tutors for my first four modules it became clear that critical thinking is a weakness that needs to be addressed urgently.
Unfortunately my lack of staying on par with the reading requirements showed no improvement and was clearly reflected in my grade outcome.
Upon commencing, the Managerial and Professional Development module, I completed the Honey & Mumford’s Learning Style Questionnaire, which revealed a strong preference for being an activist. This probably also relates to my lack of preparation for presentations. Thinking about this skill has also led me to think about how I function as a manager more generally – the ‘problem-solving’ role mentioned above is not necessarily the best. As a result, I research time management articles and pamphlets and decided to address this as another skill area, discussed below. This reinforced my understanding that I need to reconsider my use of time.
Covey’s matrix made me realise I spend too much of my time in Quadrant 1 – ‘Firefighting’ and, as a result, I’ve reviewed some of my study practices and now I plan better as a team and my delegation has improved. The presentation planning checklist is one example of reducing the need for last-minute panic (Quadrant 1) by thinking ahead.
Keeping a learning journal seemed like a chore at first – not an activist behaviour – but with hindsight I can see that it made me stop and think. It is a practice I will continue with, even if I don’t use it very often or I’m reflecting mentally rather than in writing.
Finding opportunities to develop my skills has made me think more purposefully and creatively. I have also realised that it is an excellent way of building relationships with colleagues. Asking for feedback has encouraged others to be more open in return, so I have become more skilled in critical appraisal and giving feedback.
The PDP process has made me feel more in control and able to work out my own priorities and resources. I think much more about important ‘progress tasks’ so I’m less likely to get caught out as I did with my poor presentation. As a result, I’m a bit calmer and more effective as a supervisor; my staff has commented on this. I’m also more aware of their development needs and have developed a more systematic development and succession plan which my manager wants to extend to other departments.
REFERENCES
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. A. (1978) Organizational learning. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Cyert, R.M., & March, J.G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
Lähteenmäki, S. 2001. Critical Aspects of Organizational Learning Research and. Proposals for Its Measurement. British Journal of Management, June 2001,
Merriam-Webster, Merriam Webster dictionary, Available at:
[Accessed July 15, 2011]
Parsons, Talcott. Shils, Edward - Toward a General Theory of Action (1951)
Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann [1966] The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise its the Sociology of Knowledge. Garden City, New York: Anchor Books
Probst, G. and B. S.T. Buchel (1997). Organizational learning. London: Prentice Hall.
Shrivastava, P. (1983). A typology of organizational learning systems. Journal of Management Studies, 20(1), 7-28.
by
kbraham (student)
