Fluent Essays

Respond to two (2) Colleagues see attachment for detail instructions:  * 3 - 4 paragraphs per colleagues  * No plagiarism * APA citing   * 24 hours Week 2 Discussion 1: To prepare for this Discussion: Please select the links below to open and view this weeks lecture:  · Reading – Chapters 2 and 3 of The Performance Consultant’s Field book “See attachment” · Lidinska, L., & Jablonsky, J. (2018). AHP model for performance evaluation of employees in a Czech management consulting company. Central European Journal of Operations Research, 26(1), 239–258.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-017-0486-7 ·  Lu, X., & Guy, M. E. (2019). Emotional labor, performance goal orientation, and burnout from the perspective of conservation of resources: A United States/China Comparison. Public Performance & Management Review, 42(3), 685–706.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2018.1507916 Assignment: Respond to at least two of your peers postings in one or more of the following ways: · Share an insight about what you learned from having read your peers’ postings and discuss how and why your peer’s posting resonated with you professionally and personally. · Offer an example from your experience or observation that validates what your peer discussed. · Offer specific suggestions that will help your peer build upon his or her own virtual communication. · Offer further assessment or insight that could impact your peer’s future communications. · Share how something your peer discussed changed the way you view things. · 3 – 4 paragraph response per each colleagues · No plagiarism · APA citing · 24 hours Bottom of Form 1st Colleague – Stephen   Stephen Jarman  Week 2 Discussion Assignment – The AHP Model  Top of Form Position of Agreement with the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Model             Over 100 years since Scientific Management captivated the industry’s attention for establishing a competitive advantage through human capital with occasional updates such as Management-by-Objectives (MBO), the nature of work and workers has evolved further than the means of performance management. Past convention of performance evaluation was to document a body-of-evidence as a case for or against advocating an employee’s promotion and compensation increase, or demotion and even termination. Conventional models assume people as assets who are held captive, even regarded as victims, of employment. Today the employment landscape has a much different terrain where employees demands include key conditional attributes such as fairness, training & development for future possibilities, immediate gratification and feedback, and progressively integrated status’ for job growth (Lidinska & Jablonsky 2017).             Organizations, especially ones that must compete by way of knowledge workers, must adapt to current and future needs in ways that attract and retain the best of human capital. A foundation element for maintaining required talent bench strength is appropriate and adaptive performance appraisal design criteria including the following: · A forum for frequent feedback and direct contact, it’s expected and necessary · Vital to evaluation is a focus on future possibilities, goals, and individual development · Inputs must come from multiple points-of-reference inclusive of the person’s peers and other stakeholders · Positive reinforcement or opportunities for improvement will need specifics aligned to organizational objectives · Simple and quick inputs from evaluators into a data system that meets the needs of administrating information asynchronously that provides the means to necessitate real-time aspects of performance feedback · Congruence with mission, vision, values must be transparent to captivate interests for striving for excellence in doing meaningful work (Lidinska & Jablonsky) Context of Organizational Cultural to Consider with AHP Model             As stated, congruence with the purpose of the work, or intent, will be a factor of consideration before, during, and post-performance appraisal. Whenever the role of representing the organization places emotional labor on employees – i.e., require them to ‘pretend’ their behaviors – instead of being in the situation of authentic engagement in meaningful work that contributes in ways that are appreciated, the condition of burnout arises from emotional dissonance that must be understood in light of the AHP model. It is important to note that in a chronic working environment that leads to job burnout, even a seemingly highly effective performance management process, or AHP, will not bring significant and positive outcomes in terms of improved performance. On the other hand, people in roles that are transparently aligned with the purpose of the organization – i.e., enable them to behave in ways that are ‘sincerely engaged’ – generally do not experience job burnout as severe as those in roles that require them to behave insincerely (Lu & Guy, 2018). Importance of AHP for Higher Engagement, Innovation, and Autonomy The point of establishing and mastering a performance management process such as AHP is to build and sustain a work environment that encourages people to authentically engage with their work, thus avoiding emotional dissonance and burnout. AHP, done well and in tandem with alignment to the organization’s purpose, will have positive outcomes such as increased productivity, employee engagement, and retention (Lu & Guy). Viewpoints on Performance Consulting             In the abstract by Lidinska & Jablonsky, the case is made that AHP enables both a relative and an absolute performance evaluation process – relative to current and past performance, absolute for filling the contract pipeline. Having spent 15 years in performance consulting and established as a performance consultant, there are two must-have and accurately portrayed tools for future business development – keen insights and self-awareness to learn from inside the boundaries of a project, and a balanced skills development matrix that can be used to honestly identify and close gaps needed in the field. The biggest failure modes of a performance consultant are i) a lack of self-awareness, ii) denial of reality, and iii) inability to learn - this is very well described in the attached journal article. (Argyris, 2001). References Argyris, C., (2001) Teaching smart people how to learn. Strategic Learning in a Knowledge Economy, 297–314. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080517889-22 Lidinska, L., & Jablonsky, J. (2017, August 24). AHP model for performance evaluation of employees in a czech management consulting company. Central European Journal of Operations Research. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10100-017-0486-7. Lu, X., & Guy, M. E. (2018). Emotional labor, performance Goal orientation, and burnout from the perspective of conservation of resources: A United States/china Comparison. Public Performance & Management Review, 42(3), 685–706. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2018.1507916 Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Top of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form 2nd Colleague – Susan Christmas Discussion 1 - Week 2 Susan Christmas  Top of Form Summary on agreement or disagreement with the AHP model Lidinska and Jablonsky explain that the AHP model is meant to incorporate quantitative and subjective factors when evaluating employees. The AHP model is also meant to accurately measure the overall performance of the employees (Lidinska & Jablonsky, 2018). I agree that the AHP model could be a beneficial tool for evaluating employees; however, I confess that I felt the formulas that are used were insanely complicated and I found myself quite lost while reading through that section of the article. I made several attempts to read through the formulas and try to understand them, but it was not clicking for me. However, I know it makes a huge difference that the figures are expected to be input into an Excel document where the scores will be calculated for you. Key elements of application Lidinska and Jablonsky summarized their article by saying the AHP model is a general decision-making tool. Some of the key elements to this approach are fairness and simplicity. It is also believed the AHP model eliminates mistakes in the process of management decisions. On the flip side, implementing the AHP model during the initial stages is more time consuming than traditional techniques (Lidinska & Jablonsky, 2018). The article consistently mentions how simple the AHP model is, but I beg to differ. Nothing about this concept appeared simple to me, but I still believe it is likely a great model and I just need more time to understand it. Important elements of innovation, evaluation, and a general decision-making approach According to Lidinska and Jablonsky, the innovation in performance management consists of several important elements when evaluating performance. Among those are evaluation criteria, evaluation frequency, weights of the criteria, and the rating system (Lidinska & Jablonsky, 2018). Emotional dissonance, goal orientation, and burnout In the article written by Lu and Guy, the authors discuss a comparison study that was done between public workers in the United States and China. The study was seeking to determine how cultural context affects the performance of emotional labor and public performance. Ultimately, the study concludes that employees that pretend (when an employee feels differently than the emotion they are showing) will end up burning out on their job, but those that authentically express their feelings at work will likely not end up burning out (Lu & Guy, 2019). This correlates to the AHP model because it provides management with insight on how to improve performance and reduce turnover. References Lidinska, L., & Jablonsky, J. (2018). AHP model for performance evaluation of employees in a Czech management consulting company. Central European Journal of Operations Research, 26(1), 239-258.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-017-0486-7 Lu, X., & Guy, M.E. (2019). Emotional labor, performance goal orientation, and burnout from the perspective of conservation of resources: A United States/China Comparison. Public Performance & Management Review, 42(3), 685-706.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2018.1507916 Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form