人力資源管理績(jī)效管理外文翻譯文獻(xiàn)

人力資源管理績(jī)效管理外文翻譯文獻(xiàn)人力資源管理績(jī)效管理外文翻譯文獻(xiàn)(文檔含中英文對(duì)照即英文原文和中文翻譯) 原文：PerformanceManagement:ReconcilingCompetingPrioritiesIanZiskinFourHRthoughtleadersfromacademia—JohnBoudreauoftheUSCCenterforEffectiveOrganizations,ChrisCollinsoftheCornellCenterforAdvancedHRStudies,PatWrightoftheMooreCollegeofBusinessattheUniversityofSouthCarolina,andDaveUlrichofUniversityofMichiganandtheRBLGroup—engagedindiscussionsonPerformanceManagementwithIanZiskin,President,EXecEXcelGroupLLCandBoardmember,HRPeople&Strategy.IanaskedJohn,Chris,Pat,andDavetosharetheirperspectivesontopicsincluding:?WhatPerformanceManagementis??Whatmakesthebiggestdifferencetoeffectivevs.ineffectivePerformanceManagement??WhatthebiggestsourcesofdebateanddisagreementhavebeenregardingPerformanceManagementovertheyears,andwhetherwehavemadeanyprogressinresolvingtheseissues？?IftheyweregoingtofixorkillanythingaboutPerformanceManagement,whatitwouldbeandwhy？?WhatbigimplicationsthereareforfuturerequiredchangestoPerformanceManagementinlightoffuturework,workforceandworkplacetrends？Ziskin:ThereisalotoftalkinorganizationsaboutwhetherPerformanceManagementisworkingeffectivelyoreverhas.WhatdoyouthinkPerformanceManagementis?Collins:Thismaybethequestionoftheyear.PerformanceManagementhasbecomeeverythingandthereforenothing.Itservessomanypurposes—compensation,feedback,talentdevelopment,succession,etc.—thatitmaynotserveanypurposeverywell.Boudreau:It'sanongoingrelationshiptobalancetheneedtoevaluatepeoplewiththeneedtodevelopthem.It'snotaboutbromides,forms,scores,toolsorsystems.Wright:PerformanceManagementisaboutaligningbehaviorinawaythatincreasesorganizationaleffectiveness.Ulrich:IthinkweneedtolookatPerformanceManagementfromthreelevels:cultural,systemsandpersonal.Attheculturallevel,it'saboutwhethertheorganizationjudgespeoplebasedonmeritocracy(results),hierarchy(power)orrelationships(connections).Atthesystemslevel,it'saboutdeterminingwhetherpeoplemeetormissobjectives.Atthepersonallevel,it'saboutassessingtheindividual'sdedicationtodeliverbothfinancialandsocialresults.Ziskin:GivenyourpointofviewaboutPerformanceManagement,whatmakesthebiggestdifferencetowhetheritiseffectivevs.ineffective?Collins:Itstartswithhavingacultureofopenness,honestyandrealfeedback—andthenholdingpeopleaccountable.Thisprocessbeginsandendswithgoodleaders,andallofourmoneyshouldbeinvestedindevelopingleaderstolead,ratherthanspendingmoneyonnewPerformanceManagementsystemsandtools.Boudreau:Effectivenessrestsintheskillsandmotivationsofthepeopleinvolved,notinthePerformanceManagementsystemitself.Itisparticularlyimportanttocreateasharedframeworkandprioritiesbetweenmanagersandtheiremployees.Ulrich:ThefourgenericstepsofPerformanceManagementhaveremainedrelativelystableovertime:setstandards,assessagainstthosestandards,allocateconsequencesandprovidefeedback.ImprovementsintheeffectivenessofPerformanceManagementhavecomefromenablingexternalstakeholderstoprovideinputonstandardsandperformance,makingtheperformancediscussionmoreaboutthefuturethanthepast,usingtechnologytosimplifytheprocess,tailoringtheconsequencestobetterreflectindividualemployeecontributionsandvalue,andaccommodatingbothteamaswellasindividualfeedback.Wright:Badtools,badevaluations,badfeedbackandbadlinkstorewardsystemsleadtobadPerformanceManagement.Ziskin:IfyoulookbackovertheyearsofdebateaboutPerformanceManagement,whatoneortwothingsstandoutinyourmindasthebiggestsourcesofdebateanddisagreement?Boudreau:Thebiggestdebatehasbeenaboutwhatarewetryingtoachieve?It'salwaysbeenaboutdevelopmentofpeoplevs.evaluationoftheirperformance,andwhetherthesetwodifferentprioritiescanbereconciled.Collins:Doyouseparateperformancefeedbackfromcompensation,andhowdoyoudoboth?Wealsoneedtolearntoseparatethediscussionaboutcurrentperformancefromthefuture—futurerolesandfutureperformancerequirements.Wright:Thedebatecontinuesoversimplifyingtoolsvs.customizinguniquetoolstospecificjobs,roles,situationsandindividuals.Ulrich:Thereareanumberofolddebatesandsomenewdebates.TheolddebatesincludePerformanceManagementshouldbeusedfordiscussingfinancialresultsordevelopmentpotential(yestoboth),whetherweshouldmeasureresultsaswellasbehavior(yestoboth),whethermanagersshouldbeaccountabletodoperformancereviews(yes),andwhoshouldownPerformanceManagement—thelineorHR(thelineownsit,HRisthearchitect).Ziskin:Havewemadeanyprogressinresolvingthedebateovertheseissues?Boudreau:Wehavemadeprogressinsomething,suchasthegrowingrecognitionthateffectivePerformanceManagementismuchlessaboutformsandmuchmoreaboutrelationships.Collins:Iamgravelydisappointedintheprogresswe'vemadeinthepast20years,especiallyinaccommodatingnewwaysofworkingsuchasmoredistributed,virtualwork.Wealsohavenotmadeenoughprogressinaccountingforteamperformanceinsteadofjustindividualperformance.Wright:Wearemakingprogressinlinkingresults,behaviorsandrewards.I'dsaywearebeginningtoachievebestprinciplesinPerformanceManagement,butwehavenotyetachievedbestpractices.Ulrich:ThefollowingnewdebatesaremoreinterestingtomethantheolddebatesImentionedabove,andeventhoughwearebeginningtomakesomeprogress,weneedmuchmore:howwesimplifytheprocess,howwehavemeaningfulpersonalconversationsbetweenleadersandemployeesandhowwebuildaperformanceculturewheremeritocracyisexpected.Ziskin:InlightofthePerformanceManagementdebatesandrelatedmixedprogresswehavediscussed,ifyouweregoingtofixorkillonethingrelatedtoPerformanceManagement,whatitwoulditbyandwhy?Collins:IwouldfixPerformanceManagementbyinvestinginbetterleadersgivingbetterfeedback,ratherthantryingtofixPerformanceManagementbyinvestinginbettertools.Boudreau:IwouldkillthedebateaboutPerformanceManagementforms,toolsandtechnologyenhancements,andinsteadputmorethan80percentofourresourcesintoteachinganddevelopingleadersandemployeestogetthemostoutoftheperformancefeedbackdiscussion.Ulrich:IwouldkillPerformanceManagementcomplexity,andsimplifytheprocess.Sometimes,theprocessbecomestheenditself,andthereismeans/endinversion.Wright:Iwouldkilltheparochialismthatcomesfrommyway,mytoolandmyprocess.ThereisalottobelearnedfromhowothersaredoingPerformanceManagement.Ziskin:Whenyouconsiderthefutureofwork,theworkplaceandtheworkforce—andhowallthesethingsarechangingandaffectingbusinessperformance—whatoneortwobigimplicationsarethereforrequiredchangestoPerformanceManagementinthefuture?Ulrich:ThebiggestimplicationsforthefutureIseearesimplificationofthePerformanceManagementprocessandmoreoutside/inperspectivewherebyPerformanceManagementismoreconnectedtoinputfromexternalstakeholders.Wright:Wewillseeagreateremphasisonevaluatingresults,theendproduct,ratherthanbehavior,becauseglobaldispersionofworkwillmakeitmuchmoredifficulttodirectlyobservebehavior.Boudreau:Asaresultofincreasinglyvirtual,remote,temporaryandindependentwork,performanceassessmentcannolongeronlybedonebyleaders—itwillalsobedonebyothersincludingpeersandemployeesthemselves.PerformanceManagementwillnolongerbetheprovinceofleaders.Collins:PerformanceManagementisgoinginthedirectionofmorefrequent,moretransparent,morevirtual,moreratersandmoreteam-based.Ziskin:Basedoninsightsfromouracademicexperts,aswellasfrommyownexperience,ifyouareworkingtoreconcilethecompetingprioritiesassociatedwithPerformanceManagement,thinkaboutthefollowingguidelines:?Simplifyandde-emphasizeformsandprocessinfavorofimprovingthequalityofrelationshipsandconversationbetweenleadersandemployees?AccommodatetrendstowardmorevirtualandflexibleworkandchangingdemographicsthoroughPerformanceManagementapproachesthatemphasizetransparency,frequencyandinputfromabroaderrangeofinternalandexternalconstituents?MovefromarelativelynarrowfocusonPerformanceManagementtoabroaderemphasisonPerformanceCulture\o"SearchforPeople&Strategy"People&Strategy.2013,Vol.36Issue2,p24-25.2p.

譯文：績(jī)效管理：協(xié)調(diào)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的優(yōu)先事項(xiàng)IanZiskin來自學(xué)術(shù)界的四位HR思想領(lǐng)袖：在南加州大學(xué)中心所研究有效組織的JohnBoudreau、在康奈爾大學(xué)高級(jí)人力資源研究中心工作的ChrisCollins、在南卡羅來納大學(xué)摩爾商學(xué)院的PatWright以及在密歇根大學(xué)和RBL集團(tuán)工作的DaveUlrich，與Ian總裁（掌管Excel集團(tuán)有限責(zé)任公司、董事會(huì)成員、HR人員和策略）從事績(jī)效管理事務(wù)。Ian就以下幾個(gè)問題向他們提問，并讓他們互相分享觀點(diǎn)：績(jī)效管理是什么？如何最大的區(qū)別有效的和無效的績(jī)效管理？在過去的幾年里，關(guān)于產(chǎn)生績(jī)效管理的爭(zhēng)論和分歧的最大原因是什么，我們?cè)诮鉀Q這些問題上是否取得進(jìn)展？如果就績(jī)效管理的事務(wù)來整頓或改變管理，那該怎么做，為什么？在未來的工作、勞動(dòng)力和工作場(chǎng)所的情形中，什么是影響未來的績(jī)效管理需求變化？Ziskin：“有很多關(guān)于績(jī)效管理的工作有效性或曾經(jīng)的工作的討論。你們認(rèn)為績(jī)效管理是什么?”Collins：“這可能是當(dāng)前所面臨的問題?？?jī)效管理似乎成為關(guān)乎一切的工作又像是一個(gè)獨(dú)立的工作。它與很多的目標(biāo)有聯(lián)系—如補(bǔ)償、反饋、人才發(fā)展、繼承等，然而卻不能周全?！盉oudreau：“它是一種持續(xù)的平衡評(píng)估人員需求和開發(fā)人員需求的聯(lián)系，它不是簡(jiǎn)單的固定架構(gòu)、形式、數(shù)據(jù)、工具或系統(tǒng)。”Wright：“績(jī)效管理是關(guān)于提高組織績(jī)效的調(diào)整行為?！盪lrich：“我覺得我們需要從三個(gè)層次看待績(jī)效管理：文化、系統(tǒng)和個(gè)人。在文化層面,關(guān)于是否基于組織的精英（成果）、層次結(jié)構(gòu)(權(quán)力)或指導(dǎo)人員(關(guān)系)；在系統(tǒng)層面,關(guān)于是否確定人員達(dá)到或沒有到達(dá)目標(biāo)。在個(gè)人層面,它是關(guān)于為了創(chuàng)造金融和社會(huì)結(jié)果而評(píng)估個(gè)人的奉獻(xiàn)?！盳iskin：“鑒于你們關(guān)于績(jī)效管理的觀點(diǎn)，如何最大的區(qū)別有效與無效的績(jī)效管理？”Collin：“它開始于廣闊的文化、誠實(shí)和真實(shí)的反饋，即人們要對(duì)自己的行為負(fù)責(zé)。這個(gè)過程開始和結(jié)束于優(yōu)秀的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人，即我們應(yīng)該把所有的錢投資于開發(fā)中的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者,而不是把錢花在新的績(jī)效管理系統(tǒng)和工具上。”Boudreau:“效益取決于人的技能和動(dòng)機(jī)，而不是在于績(jī)效管理系統(tǒng)本身。創(chuàng)建一個(gè)在經(jīng)理和員工之間的共享框架和優(yōu)先項(xiàng)目是特別重要的?！盪lrich:“績(jī)效管理的四個(gè)通用步驟隨時(shí)保持相對(duì)穩(wěn)定狀態(tài)：設(shè)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，對(duì)這些標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行評(píng)估，并提供反饋的結(jié)果。有效績(jī)效管理的改進(jìn)通過利益相關(guān)者提供的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和績(jī)效的設(shè)定，使得關(guān)于未來績(jī)效商討比過去更多，并利用技術(shù)來簡(jiǎn)化流程，更好地反映員工個(gè)人的貢獻(xiàn)和價(jià)值的成果，以及容納團(tuán)隊(duì)、個(gè)人的反饋?！盬right：“差的評(píng)估、鏈接、反饋和獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)系統(tǒng)工具會(huì)導(dǎo)致糟糕的績(jī)效管理?！盳iskin:“如果你們回顧近幾年來關(guān)于績(jī)效管理的熱議，你們認(rèn)為最大的爭(zhēng)論和分歧的來源的一個(gè)或兩個(gè)觀點(diǎn)是什么?”Boudreau:“‘我們希望達(dá)到的目標(biāo)是什么?’一直是最大的爭(zhēng)論。它是關(guān)于人員開發(fā)和人員績(jī)效的評(píng)估這兩個(gè)不同的優(yōu)先事項(xiàng)是否能協(xié)調(diào)的問題?！盋ollins:“使績(jī)效反饋脫離薪酬，怎么兩全呢？我們也需要學(xué)會(huì)用未來（即未來的角色和未來的績(jī)效需求）視角來看待現(xiàn)在的績(jī)效工作。”Wright:“為了特殊工作、角色、情景和個(gè)人情況，爭(zhēng)議一直圍繞簡(jiǎn)化工具和定制獨(dú)一無二兩方面進(jìn)行?！盪lrich:“有許多舊的論點(diǎn)和一些新的論點(diǎn)。舊的論點(diǎn),包括績(jī)效管理是否被用于財(cái)務(wù)業(yè)績(jī)或發(fā)展?jié)摿?都是肯定的)；我們是否應(yīng)該對(duì)行為結(jié)果采取措施（都是肯定的）；管理者是否應(yīng)該承擔(dān)績(jī)效評(píng)估責(zé)任（是的）；誰將負(fù)責(zé)整個(gè)績(jī)效管理（是直線經(jīng)理還是HR專員）?！盳iskin:“我們對(duì)這些問題的商討有什么進(jìn)展？”Boudreau:“我們?cè)谀承┦虑樯先〉昧诉M(jìn)展，如人們?nèi)找嬲J(rèn)識(shí)到，有效的績(jī)效管理是不太關(guān)心的形式