人力资源管理绩效管理外文翻译文献

人力资源管理绩效管理外文翻译文献人力资源管理绩效管理外文翻译文献(文档含中英文对照即英文原文和中文翻译) 原文：PerformanceManagement:ReconcilingCompetingPrioritiesIanZiskinFourHRthoughtleadersfromacademia—JohnBoudreauoftheUSCCenterforEffectiveOrganizations,ChrisCollinsoftheCornellCenterforAdvancedHRStudies,PatWrightoftheMooreCollegeofBusinessattheUniversityofSouthCarolina,andDaveUlrichofUniversityofMichiganandtheRBLGroup—engagedindiscussionsonPerformanceManagementwithIanZiskin,President,EXecEXcelGroupLLCandBoardmember,HRPeople&Strategy.IanaskedJohn,Chris,Pat,andDavetosharetheirperspectivesontopicsincluding:•WhatPerformanceManagementis?•Whatmakesthebiggestdifferencetoeffectivevs.ineffectivePerformanceManagement?•WhatthebiggestsourcesofdebateanddisagreementhavebeenregardingPerformanceManagementovertheyears,andwhetherwehavemadeanyprogressinresolvingtheseissues？•IftheyweregoingtofixorkillanythingaboutPerformanceManagement,whatitwouldbeandwhy？•WhatbigimplicationsthereareforfuturerequiredchangestoPerformanceManagementinlightoffuturework,workforceandworkplacetrends？Ziskin:ThereisalotoftalkinorganizationsaboutwhetherPerformanceManagementisworkingeffectivelyoreverhas.WhatdoyouthinkPerformanceManagementis?Collins:Thismaybethequestionoftheyear.PerformanceManagementhasbecomeeverythingandthereforenothing.Itservessomanypurposes—compensation,feedback,talentdevelopment,succession,etc.—thatitmaynotserveanypurposeverywell.Boudreau:It'sanongoingrelationshiptobalancetheneedtoevaluatepeoplewiththeneedtodevelopthem.It'snotaboutbromides,forms,scores,toolsorsystems.Wright:PerformanceManagementisaboutaligningbehaviorinawaythatincreasesorganizationaleffectiveness.Ulrich:IthinkweneedtolookatPerformanceManagementfromthreelevels:cultural,systemsandpersonal.Attheculturallevel,it'saboutwhethertheorganizationjudgespeoplebasedonmeritocracy(results),hierarchy(power)orrelationships(connections).Atthesystemslevel,it'saboutdeterminingwhetherpeoplemeetormissobjectives.Atthepersonallevel,it'saboutassessingtheindividual'sdedicationtodeliverbothfinancialandsocialresults.Ziskin:GivenyourpointofviewaboutPerformanceManagement,whatmakesthebiggestdifferencetowhetheritiseffectivevs.ineffective?Collins:Itstartswithhavingacultureofopenness,honestyandrealfeedback—andthenholdingpeopleaccountable.Thisprocessbeginsandendswithgoodleaders,andallofourmoneyshouldbeinvestedindevelopingleaderstolead,ratherthanspendingmoneyonnewPerformanceManagementsystemsandtools.Boudreau:Effectivenessrestsintheskillsandmotivationsofthepeopleinvolved,notinthePerformanceManagementsystemitself.Itisparticularlyimportanttocreateasharedframeworkandprioritiesbetweenmanagersandtheiremployees.Ulrich:ThefourgenericstepsofPerformanceManagementhaveremainedrelativelystableovertime:setstandards,assessagainstthosestandards,allocateconsequencesandprovidefeedback.ImprovementsintheeffectivenessofPerformanceManagementhavecomefromenablingexternalstakeholderstoprovideinputonstandardsandperformance,makingtheperformancediscussionmoreaboutthefuturethanthepast,usingtechnologytosimplifytheprocess,tailoringtheconsequencestobetterreflectindividualemployeecontributionsandvalue,andaccommodatingbothteamaswellasindividualfeedback.Wright:Badtools,badevaluations,badfeedbackandbadlinkstorewardsystemsleadtobadPerformanceManagement.Ziskin:IfyoulookbackovertheyearsofdebateaboutPerformanceManagement,whatoneortwothingsstandoutinyourmindasthebiggestsourcesofdebateanddisagreement?Boudreau:Thebiggestdebatehasbeenaboutwhatarewetryingtoachieve?It'salwaysbeenaboutdevelopmentofpeoplevs.evaluationoftheirperformance,andwhetherthesetwodifferentprioritiescanbereconciled.Collins:Doyouseparateperformancefeedbackfromcompensation,andhowdoyoudoboth?Wealsoneedtolearntoseparatethediscussionaboutcurrentperformancefromthefuture—futurerolesandfutureperformancerequirements.Wright:Thedebatecontinuesoversimplifyingtoolsvs.customizinguniquetoolstospecificjobs,roles,situationsandindividuals.Ulrich:Thereareanumberofolddebatesandsomenewdebates.TheolddebatesincludePerformanceManagementshouldbeusedfordiscussingfinancialresultsordevelopmentpotential(yestoboth),whetherweshouldmeasureresultsaswellasbehavior(yestoboth),whethermanagersshouldbeaccountabletodoperformancereviews(yes),andwhoshouldownPerformanceManagement—thelineorHR(thelineownsit,HRisthearchitect).Ziskin:Havewemadeanyprogressinresolvingthedebateovertheseissues?Boudreau:Wehavemadeprogressinsomething,suchasthegrowingrecognitionthateffectivePerformanceManagementismuchlessaboutformsandmuchmoreaboutrelationships.Collins:Iamgravelydisappointedintheprogresswe'vemadeinthepast20years,especiallyinaccommodatingnewwaysofworkingsuchasmoredistributed,virtualwork.Wealsohavenotmadeenoughprogressinaccountingforteamperformanceinsteadofjustindividualperformance.Wright:Wearemakingprogressinlinkingresults,behaviorsandrewards.I'dsaywearebeginningtoachievebestprinciplesinPerformanceManagement,butwehavenotyetachievedbestpractices.Ulrich:ThefollowingnewdebatesaremoreinterestingtomethantheolddebatesImentionedabove,andeventhoughwearebeginningtomakesomeprogress,weneedmuchmore:howwesimplifytheprocess,howwehavemeaningfulpersonalconversationsbetweenleadersandemployeesandhowwebuildaperformanceculturewheremeritocracyisexpected.Ziskin:InlightofthePerformanceManagementdebatesandrelatedmixedprogresswehavediscussed,ifyouweregoingtofixorkillonethingrelatedtoPerformanceManagement,whatitwoulditbyandwhy?Collins:IwouldfixPerformanceManagementbyinvestinginbetterleadersgivingbetterfeedback,ratherthantryingtofixPerformanceManagementbyinvestinginbettertools.Boudreau:IwouldkillthedebateaboutPerformanceManagementforms,toolsandtechnologyenhancements,andinsteadputmorethan80percentofourresourcesintoteachinganddevelopingleadersandemployeestogetthemostoutoftheperformancefeedbackdiscussion.Ulrich:IwouldkillPerformanceManagementcomplexity,andsimplifytheprocess.Sometimes,theprocessbecomestheenditself,andthereismeans/endinversion.Wright:Iwouldkilltheparochialismthatcomesfrommyway,mytoolandmyprocess.ThereisalottobelearnedfromhowothersaredoingPerformanceManagement.Ziskin:Whenyouconsiderthefutureofwork,theworkplaceandtheworkforce—andhowallthesethingsarechangingandaffectingbusinessperformance—whatoneortwobigimplicationsarethereforrequiredchangestoPerformanceManagementinthefuture?Ulrich:ThebiggestimplicationsforthefutureIseearesimplificationofthePerformanceManagementprocessandmoreoutside/inperspectivewherebyPerformanceManagementismoreconnectedtoinputfromexternalstakeholders.Wright:Wewillseeagreateremphasisonevaluatingresults,theendproduct,ratherthanbehavior,becauseglobaldispersionofworkwillmakeitmuchmoredifficulttodirectlyobservebehavior.Boudreau:Asaresultofincreasinglyvirtual,remote,temporaryandindependentwork,performanceassessmentcannolongeronlybedonebyleaders—itwillalsobedonebyothersincludingpeersandemployeesthemselves.PerformanceManagementwillnolongerbetheprovinceofleaders.Collins:PerformanceManagementisgoinginthedirectionofmorefrequent,moretransparent,morevirtual,moreratersandmoreteam-based.Ziskin:Basedoninsightsfromouracademicexperts,aswellasfrommyownexperience,ifyouareworkingtoreconcilethecompetingprioritiesassociatedwithPerformanceManagement,thinkaboutthefollowingguidelines:•Simplifyandde-emphasizeformsandprocessinfavorofimprovingthequalityofrelationshipsandconversationbetweenleadersandemployees•AccommodatetrendstowardmorevirtualandflexibleworkandchangingdemographicsthoroughPerformanceManagementapproachesthatemphasizetransparency,frequencyandinputfromabroaderrangeofinternalandexternalconstituents•MovefromarelativelynarrowfocusonPerformanceManagementtoabroaderemphasisonPerformanceCulture\o"SearchforPeople&Strategy"People&Strategy.2013,Vol.36Issue2,p24-25.2p.

译文：绩效管理：协调竞争的优先事项IanZiskin来自学术界的四位HR思想领袖：在南加州大学中心所研究有效组织的JohnBoudreau、在康奈尔大学高级人力资源研究中心工作的ChrisCollins、在南卡罗来纳大学摩尔商学院的PatWright以及在密歇根大学和RBL集团工作的DaveUlrich，与Ian总裁（掌管Excel集团有限责任公司、董事会成员、HR人员和策略）从事绩效管理事务。Ian就以下几个问题向他们提问，并让他们互相分享观点：绩效管理是什么？如何最大的区别有效的和无效的绩效管理？在过去的几年里，关于产生绩效管理的争论和分歧的最大原因是什么，我们在解决这些问题上是否取得进展？如果就绩效管理的事务来整顿或改变管理，那该怎么做，为什么？在未来的工作、劳动力和工作场所的情形中，什么是影响未来的绩效管理需求变化？Ziskin：“有很多关于绩效管理的工作有效性或曾经的工作的讨论。你们认为绩效管理是什么?”Collins：“这可能是当前所面临的问题。绩效管理似乎成为关乎一切的工作又像是一个独立的工作。它与很多的目标有联系—如补偿、反馈、人才发展、继承等，然而却不能周全。”Boudreau：“它是一种持续的平衡评估人员需求和开发人员需求的联系，它不是简单的固定架构、形式、数据、工具或系统。”Wright：“绩效管理是关于提高组织绩效的调整行为。”Ulrich：“我觉得我们需要从三个层次看待绩效管理：文化、系统和个人。在文化层面,关于是否基于组织的精英（成果）、层次结构(权力)或指导人员(关系)；在系统层面,关于是否确定人员达到或没有到达目标。在个人层面,它是关于为了创造金融和社会结果而评估个人的奉献。”Ziskin：“鉴于你们关于绩效管理的观点，如何最大的区别有效与无效的绩效管理？”Collin：“它开始于广阔的文化、诚实和真实的反馈，即人们要对自己的行为负责。这个过程开始和结束于优秀的领导人，即我们应该把所有的钱投资于开发中的领导者,而不是把钱花在新的绩效管理系统和工具上。”Boudreau:“效益取决于人的技能和动机，而不是在于绩效管理系统本身。创建一个在经理和员工之间的共享框架和优先项目是特别重要的。”Ulrich:“绩效管理的四个通用步骤随时保持相对稳定状态：设定标准，对这些标准进行评估，并提供反馈的结果。有效绩效管理的改进通过利益相关者提供的标准和绩效的设定，使得关于未来绩效商讨比过去更多，并利用技术来简化流程，更好地反映员工个人的贡献和价值的成果，以及容纳团队、个人的反馈。”Wright：“差的评估、链接、反馈和奖励系统工具会导致糟糕的绩效管理。”Ziskin:“如果你们回顾近几年来关于绩效管理的热议，你们认为最大的争论和分歧的来源的一个或两个观点是什么?”Boudreau:“‘我们希望达到的目标是什么?’一直是最大的争论。它是关于人员开发和人员绩效的评估这两个不同的优先事项是否能协调的问题。”Collins:“使绩效反馈脱离薪酬，怎么两全呢？我们也需要学会用未来（即未来的角色和未来的绩效需求）视角来看待现在的绩效工作。”Wright:“为了特殊工作、角色、情景和个人情况，争议一直围绕简化工具和定制独一无二两方面进行。”Ulrich:“有许多旧的论点和一些新的论点。旧的论点,包括绩效管理是否被用于财务业绩或发展潜力(都是肯定的)；我们是否应该对行为结果采取措施（都是肯定的）；管理者是否应该承担绩效评估责任（是的）；谁将负责整个绩效管理（是直线经理还是HR专员）。”Ziskin:“我们对这些问题的商讨有什么进展？”Boudreau:“我们在某些事情上取得了进展，如人们日益认识到，有效的绩效管理是不太关心的形式