FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2334786645> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2334786645 abstract "Individual Performance Management in Higher Education Institutions Higher education institutions in Europe are undergoing a process of reform. Performance Management has been a core theme in this reform process in higher education institutions. This article looks at the meaning of Performance Management as a HRM instrument in higher education institutions. The purpose of our research is to investigate to what extent and why a faculty of a higher education institution in Flanders implemented individual performance management (IPM). We present a detailed in-case study where we examine whether a faculty in a higher education institution uses some form of role definition, goal setting, developmental goal setting, monitoring, evaluation and/or appraisal in order to manage individual Finally, we investigate if the actual implementation of these IPM activities are influenced by factors addressed by the rationales of adoption from a Resource Based View and a NeoInstitutional approach. Individual Performance Management in Higher Education Institutions 1. Why this article? The genesis of our argument Higher Education is undergoing considerable change. These changes are in response to a multiplicity of factors: the development of information and communication technologies, globalisation, internationalisation and regionalisation, an advancing network society (e.g. rise of consortia, strategic alliances, etc.), an advancing knowledge society, socio-cultural trends, demographical trends and the marketization in higher education, including the changing roles of governments (Farnham, 1999; de Boer et al, 2002; Sporn, 1999; Gumport, 2000). ‘Marketization’ within universities and colleges is a prominent feature of the contemporary wave of accountability. Higher education organizations are being asked to solve problems of costs, quality, effectiveness, and access. Responsiveness to society has become a key element in assessing the quality and the raison d’etre of higher education institutions. Furthermore, the daily routine of the academic world is undergoing continuous change. New expectations about academic employment are influencing academic workload, job tenure, salary, career and promotion considerations, and creating challenges for faculty (Mackay, 1995, OECD 1995, 2006). More than ever, higher education institutions are asked to justify themselves, their objectives, and methods of attaining these objectives, the allocation of their resources, priorities and responsibilities to society. Students, businesses, industry and the public want to see evidence of the efficiency and effectiveness of these institutions (Gillie, 1999). Higher education institutions must be able to demonstrate their value to be able to continue the competition for funding and to gain the support of their customers. Consequently, the quality of academic staff and how they are trained, recruited, rewarded, utilized and motivated are crucial to the effectiveness of a higher education institution. These demands for increased accountability, efficiency and effectiveness keep enhancing the pressure on the adoption of performance management in higher education (Lapsley and Mitchel, 1996). Demands for management reform, including mandates to apply business-like strategies, are evident in higher education across a wide range of national systems and institutions throughout Europe and the United States (Sporn, 1999). On the one hand, we see that higher education traditionally has refused to adopt modern management and planning techniques. On the other hand, an increasing number of educational leaders are now exhibiting awareness that the status quo is no longer a viable option for higher education (Alexander, 2000). Those who run higher education institutions are expected to ensure that such value is provided and their role as academic leaders is being subsumed by a greater concern with the management of finance, staff, students, teaching and research (Deem, 1998). This leads us to the conclusion that higher education institutions are facing an unstable and confusing environment and that they are under pressures to manage their most expensive and important internal resources: their staff. The Performance Movement Not only higher education institutions, but the entire public sector has undergone several organizational reforms. The introduction of the New Public Management (NPM) paradigm in the early 1980’s with its clear emphasis on effectiveness, efficiency and accountability is often located at the offspring of these changes (Hood, 1991; Pollit, 1993; Osborne & Gaebler, 1993; Ferlie et al, 1996; Christensen & Laegreid, 2001). NPM introduced market and quasi-market mechanisms, the separation of purchasing and providing functions linked via contract, and attention is focused on outputs and performance rather than on inputs. Accountability is emphasized via the measurement of outputs and the creation of performance indicators (Hood, 1991, 1995; Lapsley, 1999; Townley, 2001). In addition, NPM refers to the adoption of private management tools in order to become more market oriented and able to compete for clients, funding and prestige, and to meet the growing pressure to cut costs (Scharitzer & Korunka, 2000; Christensen & Laegreid, 2001). Responding to increasing demands for performance and performance documentation, performance management has become a key component of the New Public Management reform (Osborne & Gaebler 1993; Hood 1995; Pollitt 1993; Hoggett 1996) and includes techniques from Human Resource Management (HRM), and Management Control & Accounting Systems (Butterfield et al, 2004; Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000). The common goal is holding governments and publicand social profit organizations accountable for outcomes (Pollitt and Bouckaert, 2000). Reform of the public sector has been a major focus of researchers and performance management has played a central role in modernizing the public sector reform. Much of this research has been driven from the management accounting and public administration perspective rather than the HRM perspective. Performance based practices in public sector that are examined in literature are focussing on the allocation of resources, changing work processes and increasing efficiency, the formulation and monitoring of licensed or contracted privatized services and strategic planning and rewarding staff and performance (Van Dooren, 2006). Although the issue of performance is well known at the organizational and the individual level, most studies forget the mediating role of Human Resource Management (HRM) in the performance management process. To some extent, this can be explained by the limited relevance of HRM topics in public management reforms, particularly in the first decade of public management reforms (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000). Nevertheless, during the past two decades scholars have witnessed that OECD governments initiated bold public management reforms and that Human Resource Management (HRM) has been the key area of these reforms (Shim, 2001; OECD, 2002). Performance management: not only about numbers There is no element within the performance management process that is more important than the reliance on numbers and quantitative presentation of accomplishments. Our argument is that this is not the only way to think about these issues. This study argues that Performance Management refers on the one hand to outputs and outcomes but also states that performance is about doing the work as well as taking care about the results achieved. For this reason, we want to use a more comprehensive view of performance management. This implicates that when managing the performance of teams and individuals in organizations, both inputs (behaviour) and outputs (results) need to be considered and managed. We find these issues in the literature and research of Strategic Human Resource Management. A key feature of New Public Management style HRM is the focus on individual performance in all aspects of personnel management, primarily through such NPM instruments as individual contracting and pay for performance. Individual Performance Management (IPM) is generally a small part of a broader ‘plan’ that encompasses strategic goals and objectives for the division or organization. The existence of a seamless link between wider organizational objectives and individual performance is a key assumption that underlies a systems approach to performance management (Osborne & Gaebler, 1993; Hood, 1991, 1995; Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000; Behn, 1995; Wholey and Hatry, 1992). In HRM, key practices for the so called “Individual Performance Management system” (IPM) include a clear job description; linking individual to organizational goals through clear performance expectations, formulated in observable and measurable terms; the planning of individual training and competency development; coaching practices; and regular performance evaluation and appraisal (Graham, 2004; Armstrong, 2004). The monitoring and evaluation of individual performances takes place on a regular basis, and fits in a general approach of regular communication with the employees. Why should an organization use IPM? Scholars indicate this as the ‘promise of performance’ and assume that individuals or groups are held accountable for their behaviour and results with a general aim to perform better. The claim is that organizations must learn that, through the effective management of their human resources, they can develop core competencies, and improve the flexibility and innovativeness of their operations (Locke & Latham, 1980; Bolton 2003; Forsythe 2001; Halachmi 2002; Ingraham, Selden, & Moynihan 2000; Roberts 1997). The adoption of IPM by higher education institutions has been modest at best, perhaps even low (OECD, 1998)." @default.
• W2334786645 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2334786645 creator A5002216089 @default.
• W2334786645 creator A5019826307 @default.
• W2334786645 creator A5032226572 @default.
• W2334786645 date "2007-01-01" @default.
• W2334786645 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2334786645 title "Individual Performance Management in higher education institutions" @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1505769937 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1516931381 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1546075183 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1566447476 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1574517605 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1580475076 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1595880849 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1597650029 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1605547715 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W161973669 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1773382657 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1926203416 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1964562325 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1965278510 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1966603115 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1966884896 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1969224625 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1971078295 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1974441925 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1980228511 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1980406593 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1985707021 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1989654535 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1993663609 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W1994493476 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2002098899 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2020506440 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2020661866 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2021476424 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2025476000 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2032473616 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2036262779 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2039958286 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2040028915 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2042301535 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2055261268 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2057374793 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2057428103 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2087909587 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2092992004 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2096911248 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2116502186 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2117942482 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2121848940 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2125983205 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2125994737 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2128080108 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2128524596 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2132912892 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2133535665 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2145179822 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2162574719 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2168082447 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2172157658 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W21865567 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2252491577 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2318498087 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W306420602 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W3121932720 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W563562979 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W82245104 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2006448367 @default.
• W2334786645 cites W2175860213 @default.
• W2334786645 hasPublicationYear "2007" @default.
• W2334786645 type Work @default.
• W2334786645 sameAs 2334786645 @default.
• W2334786645 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2334786645 countsByYear W23347866452016 @default.
• W2334786645 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2334786645 hasAuthorship W2334786645A5002216089 @default.
• W2334786645 hasAuthorship W2334786645A5019826307 @default.
• W2334786645 hasAuthorship W2334786645A5032226572 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConcept C120912362 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConcept C121955636 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConcept C195094911 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConcept C21547014 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConcept C39549134 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConceptScore W2334786645C120912362 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConceptScore W2334786645C121955636 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConceptScore W2334786645C144133560 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConceptScore W2334786645C162324750 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConceptScore W2334786645C17744445 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConceptScore W2334786645C195094911 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConceptScore W2334786645C199539241 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConceptScore W2334786645C21547014 @default.
• W2334786645 hasConceptScore W2334786645C39549134 @default.
• W2334786645 hasLocation W23347866451 @default.
• W2334786645 hasOpenAccess W2334786645 @default.

• next