Performance Management at the National Institute of Management The Central India Campus is a university established in the 1980 by the National Capital Region of India. The university is operated independently as a business school alongside the North India Campus. The campus started a top quality management institute with the core aim of upgrading the educational infrastructure of the Indian economy. The NIM (CI) campus's mission is to become the premier technology and management institution and focused student-learning community recognized globally for teaching and research. The mission of the Central India Campus is to enhance excellence in the management and technology fields of education alongside shaping the students to become better leaders to shape the future of the country.

Therefore, this essay will analyze some of the perspective of the NIM (CI Campus) including the advantages and disadvantages associated with the current system of management as compared to the intended one. It will also allow evaluation of the stakeholders on the perspective of eliminating the current system of management and summary of the performance management cycle of organizational development to identify stages exclude by in the campus (Nambudiri & Jayasima, 2008).

Benefits and risks of the current work management system

It is appreciable that, the current system of management has both advantages and disadvantages to the campus and the employees. The variability of the benefits and disadvantages arise from the varied perspective of the employees and the management of the campus. The presented case shows that, the employees consider the current system beneficial to them as it bases its performance of work measuring their contribution to the campus and providing incentives. The case shows that the current system supports transparency and takes into consideration individual contribution of the employee rather than collective performance. The work measurement system specified the minimum and maximum number of units the staff received monetary compensation for teaching them. This provides the staff with the desired flexibility to plan for various activities for the entire year depending on the area of their expertise and the workload as stated in the work performance (Nambudiri & Jayasima, 2008).

The staff work performance also indicated that, the staff would receive additional remuneration at the end of each year for their contribution. As such, this acted as a major source of motivation to the staff members contributing to their performance. The system-eliminated anxiety among the staff as it did not have pay variability thereby, safeguarding their expectations and that of the management. In addition, the work performance system used currently in the campus addressed quality performance issues by maintaining it above the required standards. The system met the needs of the students as the survey conducted using the student community showed their satisfaction to the system of management applied in the campus. The campus received rewards internationally, which showed the success of the current system of management.

The nervousness among the staff members indicates the fear and inefficiencies associated with the current system. The incentive system used by the approach makes the employee become incentive oriented rather than excellent/goal oriented. This makes the realization of the core aims of the campus a difficult process. Two of the three campuses use this system of work management. This presents a significant challenge to the management due to high risk of lack of equal treatments of the employees across the three campuses. This increases the risk of complaints from the employees concerning their unequal treatment across the campuses. The current system has inefficiencies such as some staff earning more units than the required. This implies unequal distribution of responsibilities in the campus.

Introducing a new system is likely to lead to a high rate of staff turnover. This proves expensive to the campus as it will need to employ and train new staff to fill the vacant positions. The opinion provided by the academic management shows that, the current system does not emphasize on quality of the output and does not take into consideration the qualitative dimensions of assessment. The few rewards received by the campus nationally attest the weaknesses of the current system of work management (Nambudiri & Jayasima, 2008).

The current system has failed to address organizational objectives satisfactorily. The system only takes into consideration the needs of the staff. It fails to consider the objectives of the campus as the key to ensuring the realization of the core objectives of the campus. The current system fails to allow the campus, meet its desired standards of quality performance. The system does not provide the quantitative dimension of measuring the performance...

This makes evaluation of the effectiveness of its operations management a difficult process. One of the short-term implications of the system of management used by the campus is that, the campus will run at a loss as it has channeled most of its resources to meet the needs of the staff. This leaves most of the core activities of the campus unattended. The long-term implication of the system is that, the quality of education and services will decrease. The public image of the campus will decrease due to decrease in its performance. Consequently, the overall performance of the campus will decrease, leading to its inability to meet the stated goals and objectives.
Comparison of the perspectives of the stakeholders (directors and faculty)

The stakeholders like the management team and faculty have different perspectives towards the adoption of the new system of management in the campus. Some of the stakeholders and the staff feel that, the current system should not be replaced while; others including the director feel the need for the replacement of the current work system of management. Part of the staffs' reasons for supporting the topic include the perceived benefits such as the motivation of the staff, provision with a flexible working plan, and provision with the compensation on a yearly basis. On the other hand, the director and some of the top management feel that, the system should be replaced owing to the facts that, the current system does not recognize the value of quality of output or provide directions for quantity assessment, and used only in two out of the three campuses. Therefore, this team aims to introduce change and ensure equality across the campuses.

The difference in perspectives requires adoption of strategies aiming at aligning the perspectives of the parties to enhance the achievement of a common goal. Aligning the perspectives of the stakeholders, faculty, and the staff is achievable by the adoption of a multidimensional strategy that includes all the participants and allows dialogue, reflection, and agreement among them. Therefore, it is important for the key players, including the director to clarify the intentions, desired outcomes, and actions required to ensure success of the new strategy. The management of the campus should provide the key players with opportunities to learn about the perspectives of the campus by comparing them with those of the other campuses that have realized the success of the strategy.

The pyramid building approach proves applicable in aligning the key stakeholder perspectives in the campus. The approach aligns the strategies, processes, and employees explicitly to allow the campus to clarify its intentions, actions, and its importance in enabling the campus to realize its objectives. In specific, the approach reveals the relationships between different variables and implications of adopting a strategy in the campus. As a result, it provides the stakeholders with a social context that enables the management of the campus to discover the values, beliefs, and assumptions about the desired strategy to be introduced to the campus. The approach aligns the perspectives by creating an interrelationship in ideas as shown below (Hopkins, Hopkins, & Mallette, 2005).

In addition, adopting strategies that will reduce resistance to the adoption of the desired change proves to be effective in aligning the perspectives of different stakeholders in the campus. This includes providing training opportunities to the stakeholders to equip them with knowledge and create awareness on the importance of adopting the new strategy. In some cases, the management of the campus should consider conducting a pilot test in the company to determine the effectiveness of the strategy in ensuring the adoption of the strategy.

Summary of the performance management stages an organization undergoes

Organizations often go through some stages to realize their full development. As organizations grow, they face numerous successes and failures that help them acquire the necessary knowledge and skills for effective organizational management. Organizations go through different stages the include birth, growth, maturity, decline and death. In addition, other scholars view organizational growth as comprising of entrepreneurial, collective formalization, and elaboration stage. The birth stage refers to the initial stage of the organizational growth characterized by the assembling of the necessary resources and initiating the process of organizational development.

Growth stage refers to a process whereby the organization begins to realize the desired market stability in its performance and productivity. Maturity refers to the process characterized by the realization of the full potential of the organizations. Decline refers to the stage when the organizations fail to adjust to the environmental conditions that hinder the…