Performance management systems at National Institute of Management India

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 of the staff members. 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.

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 realization of the planned goals and objectives. The death stage refers to the end stage where organizational performance decline to the extent of inability to maintain its normal productivity and market competitiveness. On the other hand, entrepreneurial stage is characterized by the need for effective leadership, collectivity (delegation), formalization (beginning of organizational decline in productivity) and elaboration stage requires organizational revitalization (Hopkins, Hopkins, & Mallette, 2005).

From the case study, it seems that the case excludes the maturity stage and growth stage. The analysis does not consider the growth stages undergone by the campus. The analysis also does not consider the maturity stage of the organization. This has significant impacts on the performance and the growth of the company. Growth stage provides management of the campus with insights into the nature of its current and future performance. It provides the basis for developing the desired strategies for exploiting the prevailing opportunities. They are also essential in evaluating strategies required when respond to anticipatory challenges that may hinder the growth and development of the campus. On the other hand, the maturity stage enables organizations to evaluate their stability and competitiveness in the marketplace. It provides organizations with theoretical approaches required for understanding and identifying new opportunities prevailing in the marketplace (Hopkins, Hopkins, & Mallette, 2005).

In addition, the stage allows the management team to determine the efficacy of their actions and predict the future outcomes of their strategic plans. The other impact associated with the exclusion stage includes the failure to evaluate its market share and effective market segmentation to allow effective exploitation of the target market. Conclusively, designing a strategic plan in an organization requires active participation of all the stakeholders to ensure its success.