Organizational performance assessment can be defined as a process of evaluating the performance of an organization against some well defined goals and targets. It lays much emphasis on the accomplishments of an organization in relation to its mission and the stated objectives. In the situation of a government department, the assessment would check the major mandates, ambitions, priority and the performance schedules and evaluates the advancements that have been made towards the accomplishment of these ambitions. In short, refers to the practice whereby an organization institutes the stricture in which programs, acquisitions and investments reaches the preferred results. The process of measuring performance always requires the employment of statistical evidence to find out the progress toward the defined objectives of the organization. The basic aim of any assessment is usually to provide a response that is relative to the goals of the organization, which increases its chances of accomplishing the stated goals effectively. The assessment gains true value when it is used as the foundation for appropriate decisions. Evaluation is not to know the performance of the organization but to help it to improve on its performance (Kotelnikov, 2001). Public organizations are taking this idea to publish collections of their own performance measurements (Murphey 1999).
The role of organizational performance assessment
Organizational performance assessment is used to evaluate how well an agency or an organization is performing. In order to do the evaluation, the managers should determine what the organization should be accomplishing. (Kravchuk & Schack,1996). The processes of evaluation are consisting of two variables. The first one is the data of the performance of the organization. The second one is a point of reference that will create a structure for the analysis of that data. For an organization to assess its performance, it needs standards to make comparison of its legitimate performance against previous performance or sometimes from the performance of similar organizations or the standards of the industry.
Presently, managers do not mechanically control their workforce. They however still apply measures to control and direct, despite the fact that they allow some sort of freedom to the employees (Robert & David, 1996). An organization can generate measurement systems specifying given actions that they would like to carry out. There is need to determine the input by a worker into the organization. The management officials should measure the behavior of the workers and then compare their performance with requirements to find out who has complied or not. On a number of instances, these requirements are illustrated only as guidelines. The guidelines are necessary requirements and those requirements are for the purposes of control. The measurement of conformity with these requirements is the instrument of control.
Budgets are basic tools for the improvement of performance. On a number of situations, an increase in budget could be the solution to improve the performance of the organization, like buying improved technology when the present ones are obsolete and are harming the processes of operation. Effectiveness is determined by scrutinizing performance- output and the outcome that is attained taking into consideration the number of individuals who are involved in the process and the cost-data. Performance budgeting, results oriented budgeting and performance-based budgeting are some of the names that are frequently given to the use of performance evaluation in the budgetary course (Thompson 1994; Holt 1995-96; Joyce 1996, 1997; Melkers and Willoughby 1998, 2001; Thompson and Johansen 1999; Lehan 1996; Jordan and Hackbart, 1999)
Motivation involves giving individuals important goals to accomplish and thereafter applying performance measures which includes interim objectives to focus individual's thinking and work to offer intermittent sense of achievements. Performance aims may also support creativity in coming up with enhanced ways to accomplish the goal (Behn, 2003). Therefore organizational performance assessment not only motivates improvements but it also motivates learning. The overriding reason behind the measurement ought to be the output. The managers are not capable of motivating the employees to affect anything which they are having little or no control over. Once the management of an organization has motivated important improvements by the use of output targets, they are capable of creating some outcomes targets.
Organizations should commemorate their achievements. Such commemorations bring the workers together. It also provides them with a sense of individual and communal relevance. Similarly, by accomplishing given goals, individuals will gain sense of individual achievement and self-worth (Edwin & Gary, 1984).
Celebrations also help in the improvement of performance due to the fact that it carries attention to the organization thereby promoting its competence thereby attracting resources. The celebration will attract dedicated employees who will be willing to work for successful firms. Potential collaborating firms can also be attracted.Targets could also be used to motivate. In order for celebration to be a success and benefits to be a reality, managers need to ensure that celebration creates motivation and thus improvements.
Organizational performance assessment measures can be applied in the validation of success and justification of additional resources. It can also make the organization to get consumers, stakeholders, and also staff loyalty by letting people see the results. The organization will win recognition both from inside and outside the firm.
An organization is capable of learning from organizational performance assessment. Through the analysis of the information that is provided by this evaluation, an organization is capable of learning the reasons behind its good or poor performances. It can hence rectify the poor methods to achieve success. Benchmarking is a conventional performance measurement form which makes the progress of learning easy by providing evaluation of the performance of the organization and categorizing potential solutions for developments. It is capable of facilitating the transfer of expertise from the benchmarked firms (Kouzmin et al. 1999). Discovering the key process in the organization and evaluating their performance is essential for benchmarking. Those actions will possibly provide solutions to the concern presented in the section of purpose of the learning. Learning always occurs when firms counter problems in business or during failures. Firms can improve by critically analyzing the mistakes and then searching for solutions to the problems. In the public sectors, failure is usually penalized severely; hence corporations and individuals will hide it.
For a firm to measure where it wants to have improvements, first of all there is need for it to identify what it wants to improve on and thereafter come up with processes to achieve that. The firm also needs to have a response loop to gain compliance with procedures to accomplish improvements and to establish if the processes that are created forecasted improvements. The process of improvement is also related to the process of learning in discovering places that are in dire need for improvements.
Starbucks Performance Assessment
Overview of the company
Starbucks is a private company. It commenced business in Seattle's Pike Place Markets in the year1971 having the aim of supplying coffee to the restaurants and bars. With the employment of Howard Schultz as the leader of marketing and retail duties of Starbucks in the year 1982, the firm changed direction through the ideas of Schultz, who after having visited Italy endeavored to apply similar principles in a bid to form a strong bar culture. Schultz later made use of Starbucks ability to supply coffee beans of quality and came up with a new store that was called Il Giornale. By the year1987, Il Giornale took over the Starbucks' assets and changed name to Starbucks Corporation. By the year end, Starbucks had improved stores' numbers to 17. It also furthered location span, entering Chicago and Vancouver.
In the year1990, the firm expanded the Seattle headquarters. It also increased it resources through the opening of another roasting plant. By the year 1995, the firm had established its name by opening the 676th store .In 1996, the firm continued to stretch its reach by entering Japan, Hawaii and Singapore. By 2000, the company had moved so far that 3,300 stores had been opened. The firm had also ventured into nations ranging from Australia to England.
The Performance of the Company.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Marketing and Sales
The main strength of Starbucks in the past years has been their unwavering effort to make their product to lift up other individual's daily lives. Its strategy for enlarging its operations is to get to consumers at their place of work, shop, travel and dine by making relationships with famous individuals who share their commitment and values to quality. The firm has conducted its strategy by moving delivery into grocery store, department stores, convenience stores, movie theatres, airports, businesses, homes and schools. There is evidence that the company does not use traditional advertising. On the contrary, it relies on image advertising like television and movie placement to promote the business.
One of the company's sole objectives is to ensure that there is a great level of customer service. Their guiding principle in the mission statement affirms, "Develop enthusiastically satisfied customers all of the time." In enhancing…