Organisations exist because of their successful performance in the market.
The organisational performance is in turn determined by the performance of its human resources. It is evident from the previous statement that employees are an integral part of every organisation’s sustainability and continued relevance in the market. Employees who perform their duties as expected massively contribute towards the overall positive performance of their organisation. However, the opposite can be said about employees who do not perform as expected, i.e. they aid in the downfall of their organisation.
There are various factors that affect employee performance in the workplace, and they include poor communication, lack of proper technical ability and knowledge, and unavailability of necessary resources. There is a false belief that an employee is solely to blame for their performance, more especially when it is unsatisfactory. But it is imperative to note that employers may unknowingly contribute to their employee’s poor performance, and we discuss how this happens below.
Recruitment & selection
Recruitment is one of the key functions that HR departments are commonly known for. This is a process that presents a vacant post to the labour market in its entirety. This is then followed by the selection process where candidates are narrowed down to a manageable number and the eventual identification of the best candidate for the role.
It is apparent the two processes determine the type of employees that an organisation would end up with. If an error is made at this level, then the ripples of this would be seen at a later stage. For example, if a candidate is hired for a position but does not possess the right qualifications, desired skills sets and technical knowledge, the chances of them performing successfully in future would be compromised. This then implies that their poor performance would partially lie in the employer’s hands. Had they made the correct hire, poor performance wouldn’t be any of their concerns.
Compatibility
I will use term “compatibility” to refer to the alignment of an employee to the organisational culture. This is what is considered acceptable in the organisation. This includes the behaviour, key values, and overall expectations. In simpler terms, organisational culture is the overall expected conduct in the organisation.
Coming to the performance aspect, employees can possess the relevant academic qualifications, skills and knowledge but turn out to be a bad fit where the organisational culture is concerned, i.e. incompatible. For example, an employee could have all the minimum requirements for a position apart from the ability to work in a fast-paced environment, relevant emotional intelligence to perform the role or the ability to keep confidential matters undisclosed. If an employer fails to ensure compatibility between their employees, organisational culture, and the role at hand, then they run the risk of future poor performance problems from the same employees.
The conclusion
Performance is an aspect that includes many elements, some directly influenced or heightened by the employee and some by the employer. The general expectation is that employees must always take ownership and accountability for their failure to reach performance standards or deliver as expected. However, the error that normally comes with poor employee performance is the failure of employers to acknowledge their contribution.
Despite everything, the fact remains that employers can avoid contributing to poor employee performance as highlighted above. The saying, “Prevention is better than cure,” comes in handy in this case. If employers can look out for these minor oversights as stated above and pay close attention to them, they would avoid the possibility of future poor performance by their employees, and as a result, their organisation at large.
Contacts
If you want to join our free HR WhatsApp group or to consult, contact us on +267 75 54 67 84, +267 393 9435 or info@aupracontax.co.bw.
