This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
Integrating social media into performance


With so many companies establishing themselves in external social networking sites, it raises the question: can or should the comments and feedback received on these sites be integrated in performance reviews and recognition? As a company, what do you do when


you receive comments or reviews that refer to an employee by name? Or where, with enough data mining, you can trace a situation back to a particular employee or team? Social feedback presents a whole new way of managing performance – and brings its own challenges.


“Part of becoming a social workplace means adapting internal and


external policies and processes to account for a growing social media presence,” says Elizabeth Lupfer (pictured), senior manager, employee experience and HR technology, global HR at global telco Verizon. “And when it comes to performance management, it is important to weigh the value of using social feedback in your performance management process against the impact this could have on how employees view themselves and their performance within your company.” Lupfer is an internationally recognised authority on applying social


technologies to drive engagement, collaboration and productivity. In 2009, she founded The Social Workplace, a blog that has become a leading resource for insights, research and thought leadership on


implementing social technologies within enterprises. “I love social media and I love my 5-inch heels,” Lupfer says. “And I’m passionate about how they both figuratively and literally allow for a higher-level perspective on engagement and communication.” Companies, Lupfer argues, should treat social feedback no differently


to other feedback channels – and apply the same policies. Consistent use of social feedback means highlighting both negative and positive feedback. Moreover, if feedback is collected from one social networking platform, then it should be collected from all social networking platforms in which the organisation has a digital presence – or there should be clear justification why one is preferred to another. “There aren’t too many organisations that have the technology or


processes necessary to incorporate social media feedback into their performance management process,” Lupfer says. “For organisations that have established themselves in social communities but aren’t quite ready to change how performance is managed, the best approach is to collect the social feedback and use it as a recognition tool for positive feedback and as a learning opportunity for negative feedback. “Have we reached a place within social media adoption where a


company can, or should, use solicited or unsolicited comments, remarks or feedback as a part of an employee’s performance plan? Only you can decide, but recognise there are benefits and risks and be prepared to modify and enhance as this area continues to develop,” adds Lupfer. Elizabeth Lupfer will be expanding on these ideas at The Social


Workplace Conference on 1 November, at the Cavendish Conference Centre in London (www.crexia.com/conferences/social-workplace).


not wonderful. I have been saying for some time that ‘good enough is no longer good enough’. With employees in possession of more rights – and therefore costing more – than they ever have in history, it is entirely appropriate to coach and guide them – and ultimately discipline them if necessary, to ensure they meet all of your reasonable standards.” There is a degree of confusion in some quarters as to the difference


between performance management and talent management. The latter has become so broad that people may use it in reference to anything from recruitment through to succession planning. One view is talent management is about proactively managing the attraction, development, deployment and retention of the organisation’s highest quality employees. This differs from performance management, which encompasses all employees within the organisation. The key is to identify the right high-calibre staff to participate in


talent management initiatives, using objective rather than subjective data. “Usually this involves making sure relevant competencies are in place to assess staff against set criteria and then implement a structured career development assessment procedure to objectively measure potential,” says Rachel Blackburn, director of management consultancy US2U Consulting. “This process involves psychometric assessment tools. Most clients have surprises when we complete this process and then we work with them to get the best from the talent they have, rather than over-promote employees, which usually results in stressful circumstances for all parties involved.” It should be noted that recent legal developments have contributed


to an increased focus on continuous assessment throughout employment. With the end of the default retirement age earlier this


hrmagazine.co.uk


challenge staff tend to have with performance reviews


is theydon’t think performance reviews


areuseful Mike Carden/Sonar6


year, it is no longer possible to let under-performing employees simply ‘drift’ to retirement. Kevin McCavish, partner and national head of employment at law


firm Shoosmiths, advises that older employees need to be performance-managed just like any other employee, because their employment can no longer be terminated simply when they reach a certain age. Where they cannot substantiate selection for redundancy with prior performance appraisals, an employer is likely to struggle to show they dismissed an employee fairly for redundancy, McCavish asserts. The pressure is on to heighten performance – but applying it


with all the subtlety of a thumbscrew is not the way to get the best results. HR


October 2011 HR 47 Certainly thebiggest


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68