Assessment 2: Report on Performance Management Weighting: 50% Due date: 06-05-2017 Length: 1250 words (excluding executive summary, title page, reference list, appendices) presented in Report format Reference Style: APA. (At least 16 relevant journal articles) The task The assessment item is based on the case study provided below. You should read, and carefully analyze the case and respond to the issues presented at the end of the case study within the context of a professionally presented business report. The structure The report should be designed as a management document that can be used to implement recommended changes. It should include a comprehensive analysis of the current situation using HRM theory, performance management models, strategies and frameworks. The report should clearly explain the various options available and analyze the consequences of these. The report must have a clear structure, including headings that identify the separate sections. If you cannot think of a structure, a generic structure would be as follows: • Executive Summary • Table of Contents • Introduction/background • Research/literature (you might integrate this information into each question section) • Topic 1 (including literature and recommendations) • Topic 2 (including literature and recommendations) • Topic 3 (including literature and recommendations) • Conclusion / summary of recommendations • Reference list (in APA style) Research and references Students are expected to engage in extensive research within the academic literature relating to strategic human resource management, performance management, employee performances, employee feedback and other relevant theories, models and frameworks. You will be expected to present information and evidence from, and cite, at least 16 (Sixteen) relevant peer-reviewed, academic journal articles, academic references. Case study Why Accenture is Ditching Performance Reviews Starting September, multinational management consulting firm Accenture will officially get rid of its performance reviews as part of a ‘massive revolution’ in internal operations. ‘Imagine, for a company of 330 000 people, changing the performance management process – it’s huge,’ Pierre Nanterme, CEO of Accenture, told The Washington Post. ‘We’re going to get rid of probably 90 per cent of what we did in the past.’ The company is ditching these reviews as they failed to achieve their primary purpose: to promote better staff performance. Instead, the firm will switch to a more fluid system in which employees receive regular feedback from their superiors. Accenture sees annual appraisals as an excessive use of time, money and effort, and is one of the few businesses moving away from them. In 2014, a survey by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) looked at 391 US and multinational organisations and found that only 3 per cent had fully eliminated reviews. Despite 72 per cent of respondents saying their firms conducted annual performance appraisals, only 2 per cent of HR professionals believed their company deserved an A-rating with regards to how well they managed performance as a result of the data gained. One of the reasons why Accenture has made this move is that they wish to evaluate employees based on their individual roles and performance. ‘All this terminology of rankings – forcing rankings along some distribution curve or whatever – we’re done with that,’ Nanterme said. ‘We’re going to evaluate you in your role, not vis-à-vis someone else who might work in Washington, who might work in Bangalore. It’s irrelevant. It should be about you.’ Although Accenture is one of the few companies to completely overhaul their performance review processes, it turns out that many organizations are aware of their flaws. A recent PwC study conducted in Australia showed that 81 per cent of companies had performance management systems which were only ‘somewhat effective’ at achieving their goals. There is, however, a mixed bag when it comes to scrapping this sort of review process altogether. When a firm has no performance ratings, the PwC study found that this move could result in: • Reduced employee disengagement and less of a fixed mindset • Fewer negative feelings from respondents about being judged • Greater benefits especially in high talent populations • Increased bias with managers creating their own rules • An unofficial, unregulated employee ranking system. Accenture aims to hit a middle ground by regularly supporting its employees and ensuring they perform better without having to evaluate them after they have contributed. ‘It’s all about selected the person. And if you believe you selected the right person, then you give that person the freedom, the authority, the delegation to innovate and to lead with some very simple measure,’ Nanterme said. As to whether the company gets the best value out of this change, only time will tell. Issues to consider for your report: 1) Do you believe that abandoning formal performance reviews is a good idea for an organization like Accenture? 2) Removing all formal performance management reviews may have immediate financial benefits for a firm, but could the resulting issues create problems that end up costing the firm much more than they save? 3) With the understanding that formal performance reviews will not be reinstated, provide some recommendations for how Accenture could effectively monitor, assess, and improve the performance of their employees.