Performance Management Cycle

Stage 1
Planning the
Performance

Needs Stage 2
Rewards
Development Supporting the
Performance

Stage 3
Stage 4
Ongoing Performance
Formal Cyclic
Review
Performance Review
Supporting the Performance

Willingness to Degree of control

Ability do & Opportunity x over technology
to do
x x to do and external
appropriate
behaviour factors
 What is HRD?

• Human resource development is any process

or activity that has the potential to develop
adults’ work-based competencies, job-related
satisfaction, and manage and develop their
careers, for personal as well as organizational
gains.
 Providing Managing &
HRD Providing Providing
Guided Developing
Education Training
Experience the Careers

So what is difference between the HRD and Training?

 Short and Long-term dimensions of HRD

Case 1 HR Maintenance Case 2 HR Advancement

herein HRD means getting the Herein, employee development envisages

employees trained, whenever
required, to equip them with certain
abilities just to cope with current
necessities.
career path for the employees and
involves their preparation for greater
responsibilities and challenges in the
future through setting up certain
manpower development objectives so
that the desired changes in the required
skills could be realistically established in
relation to the organization’s future
needs.

Whereas,
HRD ={HR Maintenance + HR Advancement}
HRD = {IPP + PFF}
Different approaches towards the use
of HRD

HRD

Problem-based
Career-based HRD
HRD
(Proactive
(Reactive
Approach)
Approach)
 Summary
Problem-based HRD Career-based HRD
(Human Resource Maintenance) (Human Resource
Advancement)
Nature of Reduced Competency Projected Competencies
competency gap
Closing the performance gap Improving KSAs/activities/processes
Target of HRD
and maintaining competitiveness and creating new competitive
advantage
Factors causing • Changes in Market Trends • Company plans and
the competency projects
gap • Changes in Customers Demands
• Change in technology • PDP
• Promotion to next
cadre
• Transfer to new job with dominating
element of discrimination
• Instant change in procedures
 Problem-based HRD
• It constitutes the traditional approaches to HRD,
reactive in nature – as a means to assess and
address skill deficiencies in the organization.

• In practice this means that each role in the

organization has a competency profile and the
company can pursue its strategy only if all its people
possess the appropriate competencies.
And, when people fail to acquire the required
competency level, they face a performance gap.

Need for such HRD arises from change in the

environmental demands that the individuals
cannot fulfill through their current capacity
level.
 Reactive HRD Roadmap

Non-Competency Non-learning
causes interventions
Identifying
Performance the causes of
Gap Performance Identifying the
Gap appropriate
Competency-
based causes learning
interventions

Transfer of Implementing
Evaluating the
learning if the learning
learning
needed interventions
 Career-based HRD
• This approach, that is proactive in nature, focuses
more on the possibilities for an organization to
perform even better than in the past than just fixing
the deficiencies in the current competencies.

• It refers to the developmental interventions and

techniques that are employed as catalysts for mental
growth in organizations and possibly as a source of
adding value to their competitiveness.
• Modern reflections of these trends are in the form of
total quality management, team building,
empowerment, etc that are believed to be not only
of direct benefit to the organizations for their
businesses, but can also make them run the risk of
losing competitiveness if ignored.

• According to this approach, HRD supports strategy –

both in making and in implementing.
 HRD Role-players
Organization
Support, Opportunities, Environment

Individual itself
(Self-development)

PDP

HRD Professional Line Manager

(Facilitating , Training) (Coaching , Providing
exposures through
osmosis, motivation to
learn)
Role of the Line Manager in On-the-
Job Learning
• There is widely held belief that there will be more
development for a wide range of people if line
managers are more involved in L&D at work.

• This belief emanates from line managers’ role of

being resource people in that they can transform
the everyday events into occasions for learning
and promoting the tacit knowledge through
engaging their subordinates and getting engaged
with them in physical and social activities.
• Thus, they can be seen as holding a gatekeeper role in
respect of the provision of learning opportunities.

• Either they can open the gate to allow individuals

access to developmental opportunities; or they can
keep the gate closed.

• Consequently, in recent years, there has been

considerable emphasis in organizational theory and
practice on delegating to line managers
responsibilities that were previously undertaken by
specialist support departments.
The advantages of greater line management
involvement in helping others to learn can be
related to four main areas;
•the quantity of L&D at work,
•the quality of L&D at work,
•an economical mode of L&D
•more competent management in the organisation
Improved Quantity of L&D
• Since the employees not need go off-the- job for
learning, almost every employee may get engaged
into the process of formal learning on the job under
the L&D programmes initiated by the line managers.

• Against this, amid learning systems headed by the

HRD practitioners traditionally only selected people
could have access to L&D programmes.
Improved Quanlity of L&D
• The second argument is that there will be a better
quality of L&D at work for organisations and
individuals if line managers are more directly
involved.
 The individual performance gaps can be more
effectively closed by the help of the line managers
since they are better familiar with their learning
needs, learning styles as compared to development
through the HRD practitioners who remain distant
from the employees while working.
• On-the-job learning under the aegis of line
managers is result of the healthy action-reflection
cycle which is characteristic of an effective learning.

• Learning thus attained is of far lasting nature as well

because of simultaneity of its application on the job.
An economical mode of L&D
• L&D through line managers does not require the
employee to take time off completely from the job
unlike the traditional classroom training, hence saves
myriad of direct and indirect expenses.
Competent Management in the Organizations
• The third argument is that requiring line managers to be more
involved in the L&D of employees will lead to a transformation
of managers themselves.

• The belief is that by taking developmental

responsibilities on board, line managers will have to
change more, ultimately becoming more competent in
interpersonal interactions in work teams, which in turn
helps to enhance management in the organisation as a
whole.
Barriers in devolution of HRD role to the Line
Managers

• However, role of Line Managers in connection with

on-the-job learning is not as straightforward as it
looks.

• There is a belief that there will be less development

on-the job for many if line managers are made
more responsible for staff development because
following reasons:
• First, line managers’ need to deal with immediate
tasks always takes precedence over employees’
learning so they will be less concerned for employees’
development. Without the option of taking time out
for imparting learning to the subordinates, learning
will suffer.

• Even if time is set aside for learning, in the absence of

well structured learning plans, employees will not get
a complete and coherent package of L&D at work,
which are not possible through the line managers
until they are engaged in PDPs of the employees.
• Second, there is no reason to believe that line
managers can be better skilled developers, coaches
and mentors, and are able to organise and evaluate
high quality L&D processes and practices.

• Third, true to their traditional attitude of

indifference towards development of their staff in
the real world, the line managers mostly act
negatively keeping the gate of learning shut to the
employees killing the richest chances of learning
from on-the-job opportunities.
Common manifestation of such attitude is in the
form of:
•I haven’t got enough time to spend on training the
people. I am already overloaded.
•My boss never helped me how to do things. I learned
it from myself and from my mistakes. So why should I
have to worry about developing my people?
•Training and development is personnel or training
department responsibility. It is nothing to do with me.
• Besides, manager fear that:
– Empowering people will make them weak. It will let
the subordinates take advantage of them.
– They will lose all control of their team and the
subordinates will go off and do what they want.
– People will take liberties the minute they (the
managers) turn back.
– It might do them (the managers) out of a job if people
find out that the team can get along fine without
them. Who needs managers if the staff take all the
responsibility?
 Discussion Questions

1. Define HRD. How it differs from merely maintenance of the

human resources?
2. Discuss the difference between need driven HRD and
opportunity based HRD and with the help of a model show
that both play a complementary role for each in strategy
formulation and strategy implementation .
3. Why the Line Managers by virtue of their position in the
organizations are being seen as the best placed for the
purpose of human resource development and identify the
possible hurdles in the way as well?