From annual ritual to daily routine: continuous performance management and its consequences for employment security

Abstract

Management control in the workplace ultimately rests on the power to dismiss employees who are deemed to be underperforming. This article examines a more recent trend away from annual appraisal and towards continual monitoring and review. Based on a study of specialist proprietary performance management (PM) software packages and interviews with the consultants who market them, the contention is that these developments are driven by the need to control dismissal. In the case of the UK, we argue that the adoption of PM systems needs to be understood as a means of ‘retiring’ older workers who might otherwise remain in employment. The systems studied here draw on a range of data, allowing managers considerable discretion in how this evidence is used. Specifically, by dispensing with explicit ranking methods, these systems suggest a new employer confidence in the use of subjective evidence.

Women’s experiences of menopause at work and performance management

“…Set-piece annual appraisals are being replaced with ongoing review processes which establish appraisals and feedback as permanent and routine aspects of human resource management (HRM) (Williams and Beck, 2018). If performance is assessed on an ongoing basis, for example, through regular ‘one-to-ones’, ‘catch-up meetings’ or through an Uber-style 360-degree rating system (Williams and Beck, 2018), having ‘bad days’ is problematic because these will generate low scores. The effect on overall assessment of performance is similar to the Bradford Factor calculations in which repeated short absences are more damaging than a long-term illness.…”

Targets and overwork: Neoliberalism and the maximisation of profitability from the workplace

“…Like Carter et al (2014), Moore & Joyce (2020) and Mulholland & Stewart (2013), Lloyd (2018) suggests that employees who work long and unsociable hours often experience psychological discomfort including stress. Likewise, Bloodworth (2019) and Williams (2018) note that targets are prevalent at the lower end of the labour market. The former temporarily worked at Amazon and claimed performance indicators sped up the production process, negatively impacted on workers' wellbeing, and provided data for managers to discipline the workforce.…”

“…Although employee control has been a managerial concern throughout capitalism (Beynon 1973; Braverman 1974; Fleming & Sturdy 2011; Moore & Joyce 2020; Mulholland & Stewart 2013; Thompson & Brock 2010), the emphasis on performance management and maximising profitability has recently intensified and this negatively impacts on the working environment (Lloyd 2020; Moore 2018; Whitehead 2015; Williams & Beck 2018). Indeed, ‘overworking’, that is, where workers are working longer hours for no additional pay, has also increased in recent years (Aronson & Keister 2019; McBride & Lucio 2021) and is considered to be an international issue (Shafer et al 2018).…”

‘Customers were not objects to suck blood from’: Social relations in UK retail banks under changing performance management systems

“…A testimonial of this is the development and centrality of PMS in organisations (Cushen, ; Findlay and Thompson, ). Performance management has evolved in the last two decades in many sectors of the economy from annual performance appraisal practices towards a systematic and ongoing managerial control system (Laaser, ; Taylor, ; Williams and Beck, ). While PMS expresses continuity with, and indeed combine, traditional managerial control techniques, critical employment and management scholarship point towards the greater scope for managerial control that PMS enables featuring methodical collection, storage, analysis and display of information of workers' effort via the utilisation of sophisticated Information and Communications Technology (Carter et al ., ; Jeske and Santuzzi, ; Laaser, ; Laaser and Bolton, ; Newsome et al ., ).…”