Coaching, mentoring, counselling: Backbone of PMS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of the study was to study and understand the meaning, process and methodology of coaching, mentoring & counselling and to study the differences between them and the relationship they have and how they form the backbone of performance management and to study the process of performance management. To study a typical mentorship programme and counselling model.

OBJECTIVES

The following were the objectives of the study:-

  1. To study the various aspects of performance management system-meaning, process, components.
  2. To thoroughly study coaching-definition, process and importance.
  3. To study mentoring thoroughly-definition, process & a typical mentoring programme
  4. To do detailed study of counselling-definition, process & counselling model including the various tools for counselling
  5. To study the difference between mentoring & coaching and counselling & coaching.

Research Methodology:-

  • RESEARCH TYPE:- DESCRIPTIVE STUDY
  • METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION:-

I have used secondary data for my research. And this has been collected from:-

  • Various internet sites.
  • Books.
  • Journals.

Coaching, mentoring & counselling:backbone of PMS

Performance management - A management process for ensuring employees are focusing their work efforts in ways that contribute to achieving the agency's mission. It consists of three phases:

  1. Setting expectations for employee performance.
  2. Maintaining a dialogue between supervisor and employee to keep performance on track.
  3. Measuring actual performance relative to performance expectations.

Performance management

An organization's Performance Management System is a set of mechanisms (both processes and techniques) designed to increase the probability that people will behave in ways that lead to the attainment of the organization's objectives. The development of the Performance Management System is a complex task that requires the effective design and linking together of the sub-systems shown in the diagram below:

  • Key Result Areas (from the strategic plan)- Areas of performance essential to the organization's success
  • Objectives (from the strategic plan)- Broad statements of what needs to be achieved in each Key Result Area
  • Goals (from the strategic plan) - Specific, measurable, time-dated performance targets to be achieved. Each objective will have one or more goals.
  • Measurement- Profit measurement, Monetary measurement, Non-Monetary measurement
  • Progress Review- Information about how effectively the organization, department, or individual is performing relative to a goal.
  • Performance Evaluation- Systematic evaluation at the end of the planning period of performance against goals. Typically serves as the basis for future goal setting.
  • Rewards- Extrinsic, Intrinsic, and Psychic

Although our work on Performance Management Systems is customized to meet the needs of each organization, there are some key themes when Management Systems works with clients in this area:

  • We perform an analysis and evaluation of the current performance management system at the organizational, departmental and individual levels. We work with you to evaluate your current performance management system to determine if all of the necessary components are in place. We look at the strengths and limitations of each component, the extent to which they are functioning effectively, and recommend any necessary changes.
  • We work with companies to develop Key Result Area-Based Role Descriptions to enable effective performance management at the individual level. For the individual, the role description, with its Key Result Areas, Objectives, and Goals is the equivalent of the strategic plan for the organization as a whole.
  • We work with senior management to ensure understanding and buy-in for the design of the entire system and its components.

Coaching

Coaching is a method of directing, instructing and training a person or group of people, with the aim to achieve some goal or develop specific skills. There are many ways to coach, types of coaching and methods to coaching. Sessions are typically one-on-one either in-person or over the telephone. Direction may include motivational speaking. Training may include seminars, workshops, and supervised practice.

Coaching process

The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) lists some characteristics of coaching in organisations that are generally agreed on by most coaching professionals: -

  • It consists of one-to-one developmental discussions.
  • It provides people with feedback on both their strengths and weaknesses.
  • It is aimed at specific issues/areas.
  • It is a relatively short-term activity, except in executive coaching, which tends to have a longer timeframe.
  • It is essentially a non-directive form of development.
  • It focuses on improving performance and developing/enhancing individuals skills.
  • It is used to address a wide range of issues.
  • Coaching activities have both organisational and individual goals.
  • It assumes that the individual is psychologically healthy and does not require a clinical intervention.
  • It works on the premise that clients are self-aware, or can achieve self-awareness.
  • It is time-bounded.
  • It is a skilled activity
  • Personal issues may be discussed but the emphasis is on performance on work.

IMPORTANCE

Coaching is about using day-to-day work experiences as a learning opportunity via the facilitation of an experienced 'coach'. It involves encouraging self-reflection to unlock a person's potential to maximize his or her own performance by helping them to learn from experience. Coaching typically has a practical focus aimed at addressing real workplace challenges and can either be treated as a short-term intervention or a longer-term developmental process.

Mentoring

Mentorship refers to a developmental relationship in which a more experienced or more knowledgeable person helps a less experienced or less knowledgeable person—who can be referred to as a protégé, or apprentice -- to develop in a specified capacity. There are several definitions of mentoring in the literature. Foremost, mentoring involves communication and is relationship based. In the organizational setting, mentoring can take many forms. One definition of the many that has been proposed, is "Mentoring is a process for the informal transmission of knowledge, social capital, and the psychosocial support perceived by the recipient as relevant to work, career, or professional development; mentoring entails informal communication, usually face-to-face and during a sustained period of time, between a person who is perceived to have greater relevant knowledge, wisdom, or experience (the mentor) and a person who is perceived to have less (the protégé).

Mentoring is a slightly different way of working which has more of a teaching element in it.

  1. Mentoring involves a more active exploration of your journey as a human soul using a number of techniques such as visualisation, journal keeping and creative work.
  2. This can be a challenging way of finding meaning and purpose in life and then working towards specific goals. It embraces the concept of emotional literacy and looks at, in an active way, the ways in which your unconscious programming stops you reaching your full potential.
  3. As with counselling, mentoring also provides the emotional support necessary for the exploration and healing of the blocks - those areas of yourself which may have been wounded in the past and which may be preventing you from having choices about how you are, how you relate and how you experience your life.
  4. Mentoring can be particularly suitable for those whose life and/or career appears to have lost meaning or, alternatively, those in training as counsellors, psychotherapists or any profession needing emotional literacy, leadership and an understanding of the workings of the human psyche.

Mentoring is usually described as "the relationship between a senior and more junior member of an organization directed towards the advancement and support of the junior member" (Fowler and Gorman, 2004). It is a long-term relationship (either formal or informal) associated with the provision of support and guidance and 'passing on of wisdom'. Although typically used for the support of inexperienced managers new to a job or organisation it is now increasingly common for CEO's and directors to have their own mentors. A trusted external mentor can be an invaluable support in problem solving and acting as a 'friendly ear' with whom to share sensitive issues that would be difficult to share with colleagues or more junior members of staff.

A typical mentorship programme has three phases as described below:-http://www.irodo.com/mentor.jpg

Phase one:

  • Set clear objectives for the mentoring and provide structure and a feedback process.
  • Compile a profile to reveal specific development areas (e.g. impulse control or assertiveness - emotional intelligence dimensions), which could provide objectives for the mentoring process.
  • Administer the Bar - On Emotional Intelligence Inventory, and or MBTI (Myers - Briggs Type inventory), depending on the need of the protégé. Integrate information into a detailed development plan.

Phase two:

Mentoring sessions: Two hours every two weeks.

Phase three:

Review progress after 4 sessions. Mentor and Protégé give feedback and clarify expectations.

We could also have a meeting with the manager to keep him/ he updated, should it be required.

After review contract is done for another 4 sessions, if required.

Process could be described in the following way:

Counselling

Counselling shares many similarities with coaching but is closer to the therapeutic relationship between therapist and patient. Although often instigated in response to work-related issues there is a significant psychological dimension: addressing the person as a whole rather than just in a professional capacity. The processes involved are more about understanding, challenging and enabling than providing feedback. Counselling is not about giving advice but is about getting people to see things from a different viewpoint and encouraging them to take action to solve their problems themselves.

Talking about your problems in confidence with a trained listener who has nothing to with the rest of your life can help you to:

  1. Clarify your thoughts and feelings in a way which enables you to move forward and make changes in your life.
  2. Feel heard and understood by another human being.
  3. Understand and express feelings which might feel difficult or uncomfortable in your day-to-day relationships.
  4. Recognise old coping strategies and skills which were necessary to you in the past but which may not be helping in your current circumstances.
  5. Understand what you have to contribute to the different intimate, working and domestic relationships in your life, and also the unconscious ways in which you might sabotage these relationships.
  6. Understand and appreciate your own unique value as a human being.
  7. Take an active part in becoming the person you really want to be.

The counselling model

The table below shows the basic framework, with examples of tools that can be used to help.

Coaching and mentoring - what's the difference?

Why coaching and mentoring? You will recognise that to survive and prosper in these tough times, your organisation has to be performing at the highest level of effectiveness.

executive coachingThis means leadership skills, decision-making, staff relations, creativity, stress and time management, meeting control or sensitive issue handling, has to be of the very highest order.

Executive coaching and mentoring can help you in all those vital areas and more, because it's all about the future ... ... discovering your hidden potential and achieving it - fast!

Brefi Group has enjoyed enormous success doing exactly this for leading organisations around the world for over two decades.

Differences between mentoring and coaching

It is helpful to understand these differences as, although many of the processes are similar, they are generally delivered by individuals with different qualifications and different relationships with their client.

CONCLUSION

Coaching, mentoring & counselling are different from each other but are related to one another and together they form the backbone of a performance management system. These three are the ways of implementing a performance management system.

CASE STUDIES

Case Study A

In late 2002 the Healthy County Health Department convened a wide range of organizations and entities in order to develop a community health improvement plan. This collaboration included community representatives from local hospitals, clinics, community-based organizations, schools, churches as well as the county public health agency. A Healthy County Community Health Council (the "Council") was established; its goal was to improve the overall health of the county's population through a community-wide health improvement plan that would prevent disease, promote physical and mental health, and better the quality of life within the community. The Council identified common community health values and a health vision for the large metropolitan population it served. In addition, a mission statement was drafted for the local public health system.

In order for the Council to obtain the necessary information for the community health improvement plan, strategies and tools from NACCHO's MAPP (Mobilizing for Action through Planning and Partnerships) process were used. MAPP includes four assessment activities:

  1. Community Health Status Assessment, which attempts to answer the question, "How healthy are our residents?" The compilation of local health data and the examination of changes over time were assessed in comparison with local, state and national level data and with national health objectives established for the year 2010 through the Healthy People 2010 process.
  2. Forces of Change Assessment. During this assessment a randomly selected group of participants from the community provided input as to "What is occurring or might occur that affects the health of our community or the local public health system?" As a result of this assessment, the important forces of change affecting the community as well as the potential impacts of those forces.
  3. Local Public Health System Assessment, which attempts to answer the question, "How well are essential public health services being provided to our community?" was conducted. The collaborative used tools, consisting of standards and indicators, developed by Public Health Practice Program Office of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to perform this assessment.
  4. Community Themes and Strengths Assessment, which seeks to identify "What health and health-related issues are important to our community?" Both a survey and a focus group were conducted to examine perceptions of community health and the quality of life within the community.

The Council established a subcommittee that was charged with developing an ordered list of the most important health problems and issues facing the community. The subcommittee was provided with data and information derived from the four assessments. After the compilation and analysis stages were completed, the collaborative refined the vision and mission statements for the community health improvement plan. Health problems and issues were then prioritized, and goals, objectives and workplans were formulated for the priority health needs. The end result was a community health improvement plan that identified priority community health problems and issues, and delineated plans to achieve targets identified in the plan.

Case Study A - Discussion Questions

This case study describes a communitywide effort to improve the health status of the county's population. It includes aspects of performance management in order to accomplish this end. The following questions focus on performance management issues involved in community health improvement efforts.

  1. Identify the target of this performance management application. Whose or what's performance is being improved?
  2. Describe what the performance accomplishment is this case study.
  3. Which of the four components of performance management are evident in this case study? Which are not?

    • Does this case study demonstrate the use of performance standards? How?
    • Does this case study demonstrate the use of performance measurement? How?
    • Does this case study demonstrate the use of reporting performance? How?
    • Does this case study demonstrate the use of quality improvement? How?
  4. Which specific performance management components in this case study could be enhanced? How?
  5. Assume that the state health agency has required all communities in this state to complete a similar process in order for the state to develop a state health plan and state health priorities. No other statewide planning activities would be undertaken. In this scenario, what problems would you foresee from a performance management perspective? What might be done to enhance specific performance management components into a statewide health improvement initiative?
  6. Have you been (or are you now) involved in a communitywide health improvement effort? If so, which components of comprehensive performance management were in place? What suggestions do you have for improving that effort?

Case Study A - Discussion Questions: Facilitator's Notes

  1. Identify the target of this performance management application. Whose or what's performance is being improved?
    • This case study focuses on the performance of a local public health system in improving the health status of the population.
  2. Which of the four components of performance management are evident in this case study? Which are not?
    • All four components were used in the case study. A performance management system is the continuous use of the 4 performance management components so that they are integrated into an agency's core operations. Performance management can be carried out at multiple levels, including the program, organization, community, and state levels. However it is applied, the performance management cycle is a tool to improve health, increase efficiency, and create other benefits and value for society.
    1. Does this case study demonstrate the use of performance standards? How?
      • Performance standards include identifying relevant standards, selecting indicators, setting goals and targets and communicating expectations. Performance standards are objective standards or guidelines that are used to assess an organization's performance. They may be based on national, state or scientific guidelines or be based on the public's or leaders' expectations.
      • The case study addresses the beginning stages of gathering all stakeholders and representatives from the community. The collaboration resulted in the formation of a Community Health Council which communicated its expectations and identified the mission, vision and goals of this effort.
      • The Council needs to identify relevant standards or indicators that will be used to assess the performance of the collaborative community health improvement plan. Standards or indicators may be set based on national, state, or scientific guidelines; by benchmarking against similar organization; based on the public's or leaders' expectations (e.g., 100% access, zero disparities); or other methods.

      Note: For additional questions refer to Section II: Performance Standards of the Performance Management Self-Assessment Tool.

    2. Does this case study demonstrate the use of performance measurement? How?
      • Performance measurement is the refining of indicators and defining measure. Performance measures are quantitative measures of capacities, processes, or outcomes relevant to the assessment of a performance indicator. It also includes developing a data system which can collect the data based on the measures.
      • The four MAPP assessments are used as the major source of performance measures. After targets are established, data or information, often called indicators, related to those standards are identified and collected standard. The various indicators collected through the MAPP assessments provide the Council with a means of measuring performance relative to the targets it has identified.

      Note: For additional questions refer to Section III: Performance Measurement of the Performance Management Self-Assessment Tool.

    3. Does this case study demonstrate the use of reporting performance? How?
      • The reporting of performance component includes analyzing data, feeding data back to managers, staff, policy makers, and constituent, and developing a regular reporting cycle.
      • The data and information derived from the four assessments were collected and analyzed by the subcommittee appointed by the Council. The data was fed back to the Council and to the various stakeholders in the community, including the organizations collaborating through the Council.
      • There was no mention of a regular reporting cycle or determination if targets were met, goals achieved, or when to re-assess.

      Note: For additional questions refer to Section IV: Reporting of Progress of the Performance Management Self-Assessment Tool.

    4. Does this case study demonstrate the use of quality improvement? How?
      • Quality improvement process relies on the use of data for decisions to improve policies, programs and outcomes, then manage those changes and create a learning organization.
      • The information provided does not describe what actions were taken to improve efforts to address specific priority health problems identified in the planning process.
      • There are no processes identified for the plan to ensure that they continually take actions to improve performance and accountability.

      Note: For additional questions refer to Section V: Quality Improvement Process of the Performance Management Self-Assessment Tool.

  3. Which specific performance management components in this case study could be enhanced? How?
    • Performance standards: Public health agencies and their partners can benefit from using national standards, state specific standards, benchmarks from other jurisdictions, or agency specific targets to define performance expectations. Standards for health outcomes could be developed from Healthy People 2010 national health objectives tailored to the unique circumstances and assets of this community. Standards for public health processes and capacity could be derived from The National Public Health Performance Standards Program (NPHPSP) which defines performance in each of the 10 Essential Public Health Services for state and local public health systems and governing bodies. The NPHPSP supports users of the national standards with a variety of technical assistance products including online data submission and an analytic report back to the user jurisdiction.
    • Reporting of Progress: It would be beneficial to create a regular reporting cycle. After the program has developed its new objectives, these too then should be reviewed to see if targets and goals have been achieved and the entire process be re-assessed.
    • Quality Improvement:
      • The community health improvement plan prioritized health problems and issues, identified goals and objectives and established clear work plans that assigned responsibility, redeployed resources, assured accountability for results, and an established timetable.
      • Including a process to use performance information to decide areas for more evaluation.
    • Additional Questions to Discuss:
      • Is there a set specific performance standards, targets, or goals? How do you determine these standards? Is there benchmark against similar state organizations or use national, state, or scientific guidelines?
      • Is there a way to measure the capacity, process, or outcomes of established performance standards and targets? What tools do you use to assist in these efforts?
      • Is there documentation or reporting of progress? Is this information regularly available to managers, staff, and others?
      • Is there a quality improvement process? What do you do with the information gathered in the progress report or document? Is there a process to manage changes in policies, programs, or infrastructure that are based on performance standards, measurements, and reports?
  4. Assume that the state health agency has required all communities in this state to complete a similar process in order for the state to develop a state health plan and state health priorities. No other statewide planning activities would be undertaken. In this scenario, what problems would you foresee from a performance management perspective? What might be done to enhance specific performance management components into a statewide health improvement initiative?
    • Aggregating data and information from all communities in the state would be useful for a statewide health improvement effort, but aggregating a series of local assessments would not be sufficient enough. Therefore, statewide standards and targets should be used and it is likely that additional data (indicators) would be necessary. Certainly there should also be a statewide body (similar to the Council) that convenes the process and assures involvement of important stakeholders (which may differ at the state level from those assembled at the local level). Improvement efforts would likely involve different or additional parties
  5. Have you been (or are you now) involved in a communitywide health improvement effort? If so, which components of comprehensive performance management were in place? What suggestions do you have for improving that effort?
    • Use the Performance Management Self-Assessment Tool to help identify all the components of the system that should be applied.

Case Study B - Public Health Workforce Development

Public expectations have demanded heightened emergency preparedness and response and focused a spotlight on public health workforce preparedness. Concerns that public health workers are not fully prepared to respond to a wide range of threats, hazards, and emergency events have led to expanded efforts to increase the skill and competency levels of the public health workforce. This case study examines public health workforce preparedness in one state from a performance management perspective.

The State Department of Public Health (SDPH) is responsible for protecting and promoting the health of the state's 15 million residents. The SDPH has seven regional offices, three labs and more than two thousand employees. The state is comprised of 100 counties served by 98 Local Health Departments (LHD) that must meet standards established by SDPH for basic public health services. LHDs also receive a variety of grants and contracts from SDPH for specific categorical programs and services, including a very large and relatively new one for Bioterrorism and Emergency Preparedness. There are approximately 10,000 full and part time employees working in SDPH and the state's LHDs.


As part of the overall state Bioterrorism and Emergency Preparedness Program a learning management system (LMS) was developed and deployed in collaboration with a neighboring state's school of public health (SPH). The statewide LMS is web based and incorporates an online worker assessment tool based on competencies linked to courses organized around the same competencies. The overall framework is consistent with the national competency formulations advanced by the Council on Linkages between Academia and Practice and with the National Bioterrorism and Emergency Readiness Competencies. Basic competencies for all public health workers, cross-cutting competencies for front line and more senior public health professionals, and specialized competencies in emergency preparedness and response are then addressed in courses that have been developed by the SPH and by the state and local agencies. SDPH requested that each LHD administer this assessment tool to determine the level of preparedness in the state.

The assessment process focuses on nine basic public health job roles linked to the Core Public Health Competencies and the Emergency Preparedness and Response Competencies. All staff members of the LHDs were assigned one of these nine job roles and directed to complete the self assessment tool on the LMS. The self assessment tool is designed to self-assess the level of competency within their assigned job role. Each staff member rated their level of confidence in their ability to perform each competency expectation. After the staff completed the assessment an automatic individualized report was generated. Each LHD compiled their staff assessments to create an aggregate report.

Based on these aggregate reports, SDPH assessed the preparedness of LHDs. Ninety percent of the local public health agency staff completed the online self-assessment tool. Aggregated reports identified that 67% required training in one or more of the nine emergency response and bioterrorism preparedness core competencies. The reporting capability of this system allowed for SDPH to determine specific training needs for the various functional roles across all LHDs. Based on this analysis training programs and courses were planned to address the needs that were identified in the assessment process.

After 3 months of training, all LHDs were reevaluated and the results were compared to those from the previous assessment. The second assessment showed that 80% of the staff felt confident in all areas of emergency response and bioterrorism preparedness. Based on these results SDPH established new guidelines for the next year's Bioterrorism funding for LHDs requiring that each LHD provide evidence that all staff undergo a complete competency-based assessment at least annually and that 90% of all LHD staff are competent in the nine emergency readiness and bioterrorism competencies. New employees must be assessed and trained (if necessary) within ninety days of being hired.

Case Study B - Discussion Questions

This case study describes a public health workforce development effort and includes aspects of performance management in order to accomplish this end. The following questions focus on performance management issues involved in public health workforce development efforts.

  1. Identify the target of this performance management application. Whose or what's performance is being improved?
  2. Describe what the performance accomplishment is this case study. Which of the four components of performance management are evident in this case study? Which are not?
    1. Does this case study demonstrate the use of performance standards? How?
    2. Does this case study demonstrate the use of performance measurement? How?
    3. Does this case study demonstrate the use of reporting performance? How?
    4. Does this case study demonstrate the use of quality improvement? How?
  3. Which specific performance management components in this case study could be enhanced? How?
  4. If a companion activity were to be conducted at the local level, what approaches might be taken to incorporate the performance management components?
  5. Have you been (or are you now) involved in a human resources or workforce development effort? If so, which components of comprehensive performance management were in place? What suggestions do you have for improving that effort?

Case Study B - Discussion Questions: Facilitator's Notes

  1. Identify the target of this performance management application. Whose or what's performance is being improved?
    1. This case study is focused on improving the level of workforce preparedness in local health departments.
  2. Which of the four components of performance management are evident in this case study? Which are not?
    1. All four components were evident in this case study. A performance management system is the continuous use of the 4 performance management components so that they are integrated into an agency's core operations. Performance management can be carried out at multiple levels, including the program, organization, community, and state levels. However it is applied, the performance management cycle is a tool to improve health, increase efficiency, and create other benefits and value for society.
    1. Does this case study demonstrate the use of performance standards? How?
      • Performance standards include identifying relevant standards, selecting indicators, setting goals and targets and communicating expectations. Performance standards are objective standards or guidelines that are used to assess an organization's performance. They may be based on national, state or scientific guidelines or be based on the public's or leaders' expectations.
      • In this case study, the standards are the competencies used within the assessment tool. These competencies are based on national standards set by the Council on Linkages between Academia and Practice and with the National Bioterrorism and Emergency Readiness Competencies developed through NACCHO's Public Health Ready initiative.

      Note: For additional questions refer to Section II: Performance Standards of the Performance Management Self-Assessment Tool.

    2. Does this case study demonstrate the use of performance measurement? How?
      • Performance measurement is the refining of indicators and defining measure. Performance measures are quantitative measures of capacities, processes, or outcomes relevant to the assessment of a performance indicator. It also includes developing a data system which can collect the data based on the measures.
      • The LMS is the data system that was developed to collect data. The online worker assessment tool based on competencies is the performance measure. The indicators were refined by assigning LHD staff members one of the nine job roles within the LMS.

      Note: For additional questions refer to Section III: Performance Measurement of the Performance Management Self-Assessment Tool.

    3. Does this case study demonstrate the use of reporting performance? How?
      • The reporting of performance component includes analyzing data, feeding data back to managers, staff, policy makers, and constituent, and developing a regular reporting cycle.
      • The individual reports were compiled and an aggregate report was created. Based on these reports, SDPH assessed the preparedness of the LHD staff. The reports also were analyzed to determine specific training needs. This data was fed back to the state and local health departments as well as individual workers. A regular reporting cycle was established.

      Note: For additional questions refer to Section IV: Reporting of Progress of the Performance Management Self-Assessment Tool.

    4. Does this case study demonstrate the use of quality improvement? How?
      • Quality improvement process relies on the use of data for decisions to improve policies, programs and outcomes, then manage those changes and create a learning organization.
      • Based on the data from the reports, new policies were created for both current employees and new hirers.
      • After a significant competency based training, employees are reevaluated to track changes in competencies. By instituting reevaluation of employees annually, the state is taking actions to improve performance and accountability.

      Note: For additional questions refer to Section V: Quality Improvement Process of the Performance Management Self-Assessment Tool.

  3. Which specific performance management components in this case study could be enhanced? How?
    • Performance Measurement - Have managers complete the assessment tool for the employees for interrater reliability.
    • Reporting of Progress - The SDPH should additionally complete the same evaluation for its staff. By additionally evaluating their staff, it will provide a more accurate assessment of the state's preparedness.
    • Quality Improvement Process - Same policies could be applied at the state level.
    • Additional Questions to Discuss:
      • Is there a set specific performance standards, targets, or goals? How do you determine these standards? Is there benchmark against similar state organizations or use national, state, or scientific guidelines?
      • Is there a way to measure the capacity, process, or outcomes of established performance standards and targets? What tools do you use to assist in these efforts?
      • Is there documentation or reporting of progress? Is this information regularly available to managers, staff, and others?
      • Is there a quality improvement process? What do you do with the information gathered in the progress report or document? Is there a process to manage changes in policies, programs, or infrastructure that are based on performance standards, measurements, and reports?
  4. If a companion activity were to be conducted at the local level, what approaches might be taken to incorporate the performance management components?
    • The local health departments can use this process to evaluate the level of preparedness for its employees. Training plans can be developed by supervisors for specific functional roles, as well as for individual workers based on the individualized reports.
    • Individualized assessments can be re-administered and compared to the previous assessment by a supervisor on an annual basis or following a significant competency based training.
  5. Have you been (or are you now) involved in a human resource or workforce development effort? If so, which components of comprehensive performance management were in place? What suggestions do you have for improving that effort?
    • Use the Performance Management Self-Assessment Tool to help identify all the components of the system that should be applied.

Please be aware that the free essay that you were just reading was not written by us. This essay, and all of the others available to view on the website, were provided to us by students in exchange for services that we offer. This relationship helps our students to get an even better deal while also contributing to the biggest free essay resource in the UK!