BTSR guidebook ~ Training & skills self-evaluation

What provision at this level looks like and feels like

For the organisation

In 2008, 19% of broadcasters evaluated at this level. 1% were lower and 80% were higher.

When provision is at this level, it’s often the case that performance reviews happen… but are viewed as a pointless chore.

There are systems in place that are capable of:

• helping team members to align their performance to the needs of the business
• helping managers to differentiate between strong and less strong performers
• helping managers and trainers to identify training and development needs

…but implementation is flawed and the system does not make the intended contribution to the organisation’s performance. Everybody spends the time and effort to do the reviews, but nothing seems to happen as a result.

In some ways this can be worse than no provision: the organisation experiences many of the negative impacts on performance, motivation and retention – because team members don’t have confidence in the system – plus the effort of jumping through the hoops.

But it’s not all like that. Also at this level are organisations that are just getting started with performance reviews. It’s in the way of things that early efforts can be a bit rubbish. Fine, as long as the organisation recognises the shortcomings and learns from them.

For the training function

However flawed the system, it will provide the trainer with some useful information about training needs.

And an astute trainer can make a big contribution at this level. How? With training and development interventions that help management and team members to do performance reviews better.

Once you’re on the ladder, it sometimes becomes easier to make sense of the next rung.

Benefits & risks of provision at this level

Benefits

Except as a staging post to the next level, this level offers no obvious benefits.

Risks

Base provision involves similar risks – albeit subtler – to no provision:

• Staff will gain from the system some idea of the organisation’s goals, but if their individual performances are not reliably assessed against those goals then they risk being left unsure of the quality of their contributions
• If the system doesn’t reliably feed into decisions about advancement and pay, those decisions might either appear or actually be unfair and counter-productive
• If the system doesn’t reliably identify opportunities for improving performance through training & development, the training & development offered might lack credibility and effectiveness
• If the system does reliably identify opportunities then fails to act upon them consistently, staff become frustrated and the system becomes discredited
• Strong performers might quickly move on to rival organisations.

Processes & benchmarks for evaluating provision at this level

Distinguishing from »medium» provision

The mechanics of the system might be very similar at base and medium levels. The distinguishing features are mainly to do with the way the system is implemented. At this level:

• Performance reviews are carried out on an informal/ad hoc basis, usually by discussion only
• Training needs identified during the review are not systematically addressed
• Appraisal forms are completed hastily and/or superficially and/or sporadically
• Appraisal meetings are not regular and/or are more like a ritual than a purposeful meeting.

Processes

Here are some diagnostic questions:

• Do promotion and pay decisions appear unrelated to the results of performance reviews?
• Do performance reviews vary in scope, method and timing from year to year?
• Can performance reviews, pay reviews and training assessments take place at different, unrelated, times of the year?
• Are performance reviews mainly carried out to generate evidence for a decision that management has already taken (such as a promotion or dismissal)?
• Do the majority of reviews dwell on positive aspects of performance, while glossing over areas where improvement is required?
• Do managers spend less than 2 hours planning, considering, conducting and documenting each team member’s review?
• Can training & development activities be planned, approved and conducted without reference to the results of performance reviews?

If the answers are mostly Yes, that’s a fairly strong indication that the organisation is providing at this level (or lower).

Reference material relevant to this strand and level

Need it meets	Title	Words	Link
Be aware of what to look for in a performance review system; different aims; different approaches	Performance Appraisal	2,002	www.answers.com
Gain a solid understanding of all the key elements of a performance review system	Employee appraisals	6,227 + appendices	www.acas.org.uk (continues on other pages)

Examples of provision at this level

Here are some examples of evidence used by broadcasters, in previous years, to demonstrate provision at this level:

• Completed employee appraisal forms
• Emails regarding people management training
• Plans for people management training (names and dates)
• Development needs addressed in appraisal form
• Appraisal reviews and related timetable
• Appraisals that link to targets.

The wording is broadcasters’ own, and does not necessarily follow our usage preferences

What it takes to get to the next level

In short: taking it seriously.

Typically, base provision involves putting in place the physical elements of a performance review system then largely ignoring them. It’s a bit like those people who buy an expensive guitar but never learn to play. (The difference is that an unused guitar hanging on the wall looks a lot cooler than an unused performance review system… and is probably cheaper!)

Here are some ways to plan your move up:

• Recognise that the changes now required are more to do with behaviour than with systems:
  • first of all, the tone from the top: unless senior management are prepared to put in a focused effort to lead – and harder, to model – the change, you’ll have to learn to be happy where you are
  • once you’ve cleared that hurdle, it’s time for trainers to step forward. What we have here is a gap between desired and actual performance… exactly what the organisation employs trainers for. A decent training budget is a concrete sign of management’s commitment
  • not all interventions have to be courses. A lot can be achieved through written guidance material – and getting management sign-off for the materials further emphasises management’s commitment
• Get the voice of team members into the process. Working collaboratively helps ensure that the system is something you do for your people, not to them
• Think about how changes in the performance review process can enable changes in other strands. In particular, on-job training (Strand 4) happens day by day, employee by employee; the review process provides a valuable route for communicating the efforts and results back to management
• Read the material for high provision as well as medium. (Sometimes, in this area, it’s more cost-effective to make a big step up than a small one)

Of course, if you’re just passing through this level then you’ll know all this already.