顶级人力资源咨询公司Hay Group《绩效管理体系方案》42页共42页文档
绩效管理体系设计方案
绩效管理体系设计方案篇1:绩效管理体系设计方案绩效管理体系设计方案目录第一部分总则一目的二释义三基本目标四基本原则五适用范围六考核者七被考核者八绩效管理内容九绩效考核时间和频次十绩效管理程序十一绩效评价等级标准第二部分公司绩效管理一释义二公司绩效管理内容及考核频次三个人绩效与组织绩效挂钩方式第三部分部门绩效管理一释义二部门绩效管理内容及考核频次三月度绩效管理实施四季度度绩效管理实施五年度绩效管理实施第四部分管理人员绩效管理一释义二绩效管理内容及考核频次三季度绩效管理实施及结果整合四年度绩效管理实施及结果整合第五部分非管理人员绩效管理一释义二绩效管理内容及考核频次三月度绩效考核实施及结果整合四季度绩效管理实施及考核结果整合 8五年度绩效管理实施及考核结果整合 8第六部分绩效管理结果应用8一释义8二考核结果与绩效工资8三绩效改进计划9四薪资调整9五员工发展档案9六降/免职9第七部分KPI指标的设定9一销售体系9二技术体系10三生产体系10四管理支持体系第一部分总则一目的为了建立和优化某某公司的绩效管理体系，使绩效管理成为管理者有效的管理和控制手段，提高公司运行效率；保证薪酬管理体系的动态、持续发展，成为员工激励的有效方式；为构筑系统、高效的人力资源管理体系打下良好基础，保证某某公司事业的可持续发展，特制订本规程。
二释义绩效管理是通过对某某公司核心价值理念与价值驱动因素的判断，依据一定的程序、规则和方法，对某某公司各部门、员工和管理者的工作过程和工作产出进行综合管理与评价。
三基本目标1.1.通过绩效管理体系实施目标管理，保证员工行动与核心价值取向和整体战略目标相一致，提高在市场竞争环境中的核心竞争能力与整体运作能力。
2.2.通过对部门工作业绩的评估，促进其实现整体业绩的改善与提升及人员的团队合作精神。
3.3.依靠制度性的规范与约束，建立起自我激励、自我约束、促进优秀人才脱颖而出的人力资源管理体制。
4.4.通过绩效管理帮助每个员工提升工作绩效与工作胜任力，实现员工个人职业生涯的发展与辉煌，同时建立适应企业发展战略的人力资源队伍。
Hay Group合益集团绩效分析
Hay GroupⅠ简介：合益集团Hay Group是一家全球性的管理咨询公司，我们帮助领导者将战略转化为现实并帮助个人和组织发挥他们的潜力。
我们是一家全球性的管理咨询公司帮助组织将他们的营运模式、组织架构、文化、领导团队、岗位以及人员素质结合在一起，从而实施他们的商业计划并将战略转化成卓越的成果。
1.愿景：将战略转化为现实。
2.收购：美国时间2015年9月24日，全球领先的高层猎头公司光辉国际（Korn Ferry）宣布签署收购合益集团（Hay Group）最终协议。
根据协议，光辉国际同意以约4.52亿美元的总购买价收购合益集团，合益集团首席执行官史蒂芬·凯伊将仍然负责该部门工作。
经过此次交易，光辉国际的领导力和人才咨询部门将并入合益集团（Hay Group）当中，成为一个新的业务部分，这也意味着，合益集团（Hay Group）的核心业务继续被保留下来。
在过去70多年内，合益集团（Hay Group）在组织架构和岗位设计、流程优化、人岗匹配、企业文化、领导力选拔与发展、人才管理、薪酬激励等领域进行了大量开创性的研究，而此次交易也将成为人力资源咨询领域又一次强强联合的动作。
收购本身我们不予置评，被光辉国际收购后，Hay并没有关门停业，就如同Mercer被威达信，Hewitt被Aon，Watson wyatt和Towers perrin合并一样。
除了必须要做的高管调整之外，咨询业务在短期内不会有重大变化。
3.业务和产品状况：合益集团于1943年在美国费城成立，是一家全球性管理咨询公司，在全球47个国家设有86个办事处。
包括IBM、联合利华等众多“世界500强”在内的全球知名正在使用合益的服务。
其中，全球最受推崇的50家企业中，有35家是合益的客户；全球前十名的企业中，有9家在使用合益的体系。
从成立至今，合益已为全球近万家客户提供咨询服务，是世界最有影响力的咨询公司之一，也是全球历史最为悠久的管理咨询公司之一。
人力资源管理的绩效管理方案
调整措施：根据评估结果，对 绩效管理方案进行调整和完善
方案调整与优化建议
定期评估：定期对绩效管理方案进行评估，发现问题及时调整 目标设定：根据实际情况调整目标，确保目标合理、可实现 激励机制：优化激励机制，提高员工积极性和参与度
沟通反馈：加强与员工的沟通和反馈，了解员工需求和意见，及时调整方案
持续改进与完善绩效管理体系
绩效管理中的沟通与反馈机制
沟通内容：工作进展、目标 达成情况、问题与挑战等
反馈方式：正面反馈、负面 反馈、建议性反馈等
沟通方式：定期会议、一对 一沟通、电子邮件等
反馈频率：根据实际情况， 定期或不定期进行反馈
实施步骤与时间安排
制定绩效目标：明确绩效指标，设定目标值
制定绩效计划：制定具体的绩效计划，包括时间、任务、责任 人等
绩效评估与面谈
绩效评估：定期对员工 的工作表现进行评估， 包括工作成果、工作态 度、团队合作等方面
面谈：在绩效评估后， 与员工进行面对面的 沟通，了解员工的工 作状况、遇到的问题 和需要改进的地方
反馈：在面谈中，向 员工提供具体的反馈 ，包括优点和不足， 以及改进的建议
目标设定：在面谈中 ，与员工共同设定下 一阶段的工作目标和 计划，确保员工了解 公司的期望和要求
奖惩措施制定与执行
制定原则：公平、 公正、公开
奖励措施：奖金、 晋升、表扬等
惩罚措施：罚款、 降职、批评等
执行方式：定期 评估、及时反馈、 严格执行
员工职业发展规划与培训计划制定
职业发展规划：根据员工个人特点 和公司需求，制定个性化的职业发 展规划
激励机制：通过职业发展规划和培 训计划，激发员工的工作积极性和 创造力
绩效改进计划制定与执行
人力资源绩效考核体系设计方案PPT(共42页)
绩效反馈面谈的目的
q 对被考核者的表现达成双方一致的看法。 q 使员工人认识到自己的成就和优点。 q 指出员工有待改进的方面。 q 制订绩效改进计划。 q 协商下一个绩效周期的目标和绩效标准。
职能人员个人绩效——管理流程
绩效反馈面谈
活动：考核者就考核结果 与被考核者进行讨论。
时间：绩效期间结束时。
考 q管理流程
核 流
q工作流程
程 q争端解决
工作流程是实施绩效考核时的操作流程，应说明考核工 作在组织内部的流转及各自应承担的职责。
考核期初
q 制订本期考核的具体细则、 时间进度和考核量表（工 具）；
q 绩效考核实施的培训或沟 通。
q 考核双方制订绩效计划， 确定具体考核内容和标准。
操作部门 人力资源部
建立绩效考核的争端解决机制，不仅有利于保证直接上 级考核的公正性，同时可以使员工通过正当、合理的途径反 映对绩效考核的不同看法和意见。
争端解决机制
q管理者对员工进行考核及审核，人力资源部进行考 核备案
r员工向直管领导进行申述，人力资源部进行申述备 案
职能人员个人绩效——考核量表
绩 效 绩效 层 矩阵 次
绩效层次
高层管理类 中层管理类
专业类 业务类
任务 绩效
管理 绩效
任务 绩效
客户满 意度
工作 态度
绩效维度 任务绩效 客户满意度 管理绩效 工作态度
职能人员个人绩效——考核模式
考 核
q考核人
模 式
q考核时间
考核人：主要采用直接上级—直接下级的双向考核模 式，即由直接上级考核直接下级，并将考核 结果进行双向的讨论。
管理流程—告别传统的人事管理
传统人事管理
合益HayGroup海氏职位分析法介绍实践与评价
举例分析：打字员 VS 网络工程师
2020/11/7
合益HayGroup海氏职位分析法介绍 实践与评价
管理技巧
管理技巧指为达到要求绩效水平而具备的计划、组织、执行、控 制及评价的能力与技巧。
5 全面的 4 广博的 3 多样的 2 有关的 1 起码的
打分关键：一是目标的可分解性，完成一个 目标是只需要一个人就可以了还是一定要有 几个人来共同分担；二是责任的可推卸性， 出现了问题，能不能或者容易不容易把责任 推卸到别的人身上。通常职务越高对后果的 影响越大。
举例分析：行政助理 VS 人力资源部经理
2020/11/7
合益HayGroup海氏职位分析法介绍 实践与评价
2020/11/7
合益HayGroup海氏职位分析法介绍 实践与评价
一般方法存在的缺陷
n 在职务数量太多时难以一一比较 n 对于一些性质不同的职务，难以直接比较 n 对于众多的岗位，难以确定统一的比较标准和
权重。 n 其评价结果太过笼统，缺少细化、量化的表征。
2020/11/7
合益HayGroup海氏职位分析法介绍 实践与评价
n 海氏法却令人信服的解决了这个难题。因此这种方法已 经被数十个国家的近万家大企业采用。据统计，世界 500强的企业中有1/3以上的企业进行职位评估时都采 用了海氏分析法。
2020/11/7
合益HayGroup海氏职位分析法介绍 实践与评价
海氏分析法的思想
n 它是职务评分法的一种 n 抽象出三种职务评分要素（付酬要素）：
职位排序评分表
编号
职务名称
解决问题的能力评分表
人力资源 海尔集团绩效管理手册
地层层签订PBC，将海尔的战略目标逐步分解落实到 每个员工身上，将组织绩效和个人绩效有机联结在一 起，实现集团事业发展和个人发展的一致。
业务目标 (Business Goal)
员工管理目标 (People
Management Goal)
个人发展目标 (Individual
Development Goal)
培训与指导；汇总统计考核结果
主要职责包括：执行集团制定的 各项绩效管理政策；负责本部门 绩效管理的组织管理；指导、帮助员工确定绩效指标 和目标、制定工作计划，并为员工制定考核权重；负 责所属员工的绩效结果的评价；按照流程处理员工申 述 ；与员工共同进行月度的工作回顾并辅导员工制 定培育或改进计划
绩效管理支持机构：BU／FU HR Partners
价结果正相关时
结果负相关时
C=B-A
D=C÷A
D=(C÷A)×(－1)
E=1+D
6 绩效管理
绩效管理要素3－绩效评价周期
定期回顾辅导 ：
月度业绩回顾辅导：各级员工经理每月针对本部 门月度经营计划完成情况进行回顾总结，并对下 属员工工作中存在问题以非正式的方式进行辅 导，制定工作改进计划，提高工作绩效 (月度回 顾辅导不与员工工资发放挂钩)。
标的绩效得分：
定性指标得分计算：通过与定义的绩效等级的标准进 行比较（绩效水平）：
绩效目标值A
实际绩效值B
绩效差异值C 差异相对值D 目标达成率E
绩效水平
1.
远远超出绩效期望
2.
明显超出绩效期望
3.
基本达到绩效期望
4.
与绩效期望有一些差距
5.
与绩效期望有明显差距
当实际绩效值与业绩评 当实际绩效值与业绩评价
Hay集团简介
[编辑]
独特的工作风格
所提供的不仅仅是咨询。合益的顾问亲自执行，为企业提供达成长期的、可持续的成效所需要的工具和管理方案。
在行动和思考上都是独立的——合益鼓励全球2000多位专业人员利用他们对当地的深刻理解和创造性来找到最适合你的需求的可能的解决方案。
薪酬信息服务：你是怎样回报你的员工的？这些决策又是怎样做出的？我们的标杆系统可以帮助你认识员工的真正价值。（基于我们的全球网站Hay（合益）集团PayNet数据库。）
雇员和客户调查:员工如何看待组织和他们的工作？他们工作得快乐吗？投入吗？不甚满意吗？已经准备离职了吗？这些都可以在Hay（合益）集团Insight数据库中找到答案：我们在该领域内是领导者之一。
Hay（合益）集团坚信，我们的客户值得我们用全球性资源和在地区市场上的丰富经验来为他们服务。由于我们的独立性，所有这些服务都会以客观的态度提供。
我们的顾问主要来自于当地，因此他们对于本地市场有着敏锐的洞察力以及深刻的理解。同时，我们对他们进行集中培训，让他们与国际性的团队一起工作，为他们提供一个全球性的视角。我们深信，团队式合作一定会为客户提供最高效的服务。
Hay集团为全球客户提供全面的人力资源管理和领导力的咨询服务，服务内容涉及人力资源管理体系的建立，企业文化的诊断和再造，领导才能的开发，公司高层的选拔和辅导，后备干部和职业发展规划，薪酬与激励体制的建立等等。在薪酬体系、绩效管理、岗位评估，企业文化及情商等方面，一直处于世界领先地位。
作为一家全球性的管理咨询公司，Hay（合益）集团致力于帮助组织的领导者将战略转化成现实。我们致力于培养优秀人才，帮助他们更加高效地工作，并激励他们实现最佳业绩。
海氏(HayGroup)三要素评估法
海氏（HayGroup）三要素评估法海氏(Hay Group)三要素评估法海氏三要素评估法是国际上使用最广泛的一种岗位评估方法。
据统计，世界500强的企业中有1/3以上的企业岗位评估时都采用了海氏三要素评估法。
它通过三个方面对岗位的价值进行评估，并且通过较为正确的分值计算确定岗位的等级。
为什么用这三个要素来评估一个岗位是科学的呢,该评估法认为，一个岗位之所以能够存在的理由是必须承担一定的责任，即该岗位的产出。
那么通过投入什么才能有相应的产出呢,即担任该岗位人员的知识和技能。
那么具备一定“知能” 的员工通过什么方式来取得产出呢,是通过在岗位中解决所面对的问题，即投入“知能”通过“解决问题”这一生产过程，来获得最终的产出“应负责任”。
海氏评估法对所评估的岗位按照以上三个要素及相应的标准进行评估打分，得出每个岗位评估分，即岗位评估分=知能得分+解决问题得分+应负责任得分。
其中知能得分和应负责任评估分和最后得分都是绝对分，而解决问题的评估分是相对分(百分值)，经过调整后为最后得分后才是绝对分。
利用海氏评估法在评估三种主要付酬因素方面不同的分数时，还必须考虑各岗位的“形状构成”，以确定该因素的权重，进而据此计算出各岗位相对价值的总分，完成岗位评价活动。
所谓职务的“形状”主要取决于知能和解决问题的能力两因素相对于岗位责任这一因素的影响力的对比与分配。
从这个角度去观察，企业中的岗位可分为三种类型:?“上山”型。
此岗位的责任比知能与解决问题的能力重要。
如公司总裁、销售经理、负责生产的干部等。
?“平路”型。
知能和解决问题能力在此类职务中与责任并重，平分秋色。
如会计、人事等职能干部。
? “下山”型。
此类岗位的职责不及知能与解决问题能力重要。
如科研开发、市场分析干部等。
通常要由职务薪酬设计专家分析各类岗位的形状构成，并据此给知能、解决问题的能力这两因素与责任因素各自分配不同的权重，即分别向前两者与后者指派代表其重要性的一个百分数，两个百分数之和应恰为100,。
关于Hay(合益)集团
今日的我们
研究问题 我们今天在服务的 7,000 多个客户遍布全球， 包括私营机构，公共组织以及非营利性组织等。我们 在以下领域为他们提供服务： ■ 应对全球化带来的挑战 ■ 实现成功的整合兼并 ■ 公共事业改革 ■ 解决领导力危机 ■ 打赢人才战 ■ 有效进行团队合作 ■ 提高组织绩效 ■ 激励员工 ■ 依据绩效结果进行奖励 丰富的行业经验 我们与所有行业中的组织都有过合作。我们了 解各个行业所面对的一些共性问题，同时也了解各行 业独特的文化及历史。 我们不仅提供广泛的行业知识，同时我们也针 对全球同一行业内不同客户所面临的特殊问题，提供 富有真知灼见的解决方案 ( 根据不同情况提供不同建 议 )，并能够根据该行业在不同地区的发展情况，提 出相应的解决方案。总之，我们为客户提供的是一种 更为丰富、也更为稳健的咨询服务。 我们的顾问以及全球客户来自不同的行业。这 样，任何客户都可以在世界的任何角落享用我们遍布 全球的顾问网络。不论是一个成熟行业还是新兴行 业，Hay( 合益 ) 集团都拥有专业知识和顾问团队来 为您提供帮助： ■ 化工业 ■ 快速消费品业 ■ 教育业 ■ 金融业 ■ 医疗保健业 ■ 制造业 ■ 传媒业 ■ 石油＆天然气业 ■ 制药业 ■ 公共产业 ■ 零售业 ■ 高科技业 ■ 通讯业 ■ 公用事业
我们怎样为您服务
Hay( 合益 ) 集团开发出一系列的服务组合以帮助组织获得成功。我们不相信某一特定 领域的专长就是所谓的“灵丹妙药”，我们与客户共同设计符合他们特定情况的方案。这可 能涉及多个领域的服务，具体要看我们是否确实感受到有这个需要，我们的客户是否真的 需要这样的服务来实现他们的战略。我们提供广泛的专业顾问服务。涵盖了现今企业可能 碰到的所有关于人才和组织的关键问题。
我们的客户包括
某HR咨询公司的绩效管理方法论(ppt 40页)
Resource Requirements
• People • Facilities
• Technology • Equipment and Machinery
Components of a Balanced Scorecard
(with sample metrics)
FINANCIAL RESULTS
Share Best Practices research
Review some of the basic planning and project steps
Performance Management
Translates business vision and strategy in an actionable way by cascading goals throughout the organization
Latin America
(Europe)
Industry
Objectives of the business unit
Objectives of departments and individuals
Bottom-up-approach: Derivation of segment and corporate strategic plans and operating objectives from business unit goals.
= What must the company be verow will progress and success be measured?
• Expectations of Stakeholders • Company Performance
Business Plans are Developed by the Business Units
合益HayGroup薪酬方案
合益HayGroup薪酬方案在现代企业管理中，薪酬管理被视为一项十分重要的管理工作。
薪酬方案的制定不仅可以改善企业内部的人际关系和工作氛围，还可以增强员工对企业的归属感和工作积极性，进而提高企业的市场竞争力和经济效益。
而在众多薪酬方案的选择中，合益HayGroup薪酬方案则以其先进的理念和细致的操作而成为了广大企业的首选。
1. 合益HayGroup薪酬方案的概述及特点合益HayGroup薪酬方案是一种以绩效为导向、以市场为基准、以人为本的综合性薪酬方案，由来自20多个国家和地区的薪酬顾问共同设计开发而成。
该方案主张根据贡献而支付薪酬、关注员工的职业发展和个人成长、以及对员工的业务知识和技能进行量化评估，并将这些评估考量转化为薪酬管理的依据，以达到优化企业内部组织结构和提升员工绩效的核心目标。
作为一种市场导向型的薪酬方案，合益HayGroup薪酬方案始终关注市场上同行业、同性质的企业的薪酬标准和员工薪酬水平，并通过科学的薪酬调研，将该调研结果运用到企业实际的薪酬管理中，以确保员工薪酬的合理性和公平性。
除此之外，合益HayGroup薪酬方案还以强调员工个人的职业发展、给予员工业务知识和技能方面的激励、以及定期评估员工工作表现进行标准化薪酬管理为特点。
这种薪酬管理的方法可以促使员工的积极性和创造性，并增强员工对企业的认同感，既满足了企业的长期发展需求，也满足了员工个人发展的需求，可谓是一举多得。
2. 合益HayGroup薪酬方案的实施方法2.1 制定绩效管理计划实施合益HayGroup薪酬方案的第一步就是要制定一个完整和可行的绩效管理计划。
该计划重点考虑以下因素：任务分解和责任归集、常见绩效考评标准的制定、员工个人的职业目标和合同目标的设置、及团队绩效的量化指标等。
通过绩效管理计划，可以对整体的人力资源规划进行合理的调配，并将薪酬管理落地。
2.2 进行薪酬调查和调研在制定了绩效管理计划后，企业需要对市场上的薪酬标准和员工平均薪酬进行详细的调查和调研。
人力资源绩效管理方案
人力资源绩效管理方案1. 引言人力资源绩效管理是现代企业管理中的重要组成部分，它通过制定有效的管理方案，旨在提高员工的工作绩效和积极性，促进企业的发展与壮大。
本文将探讨一种有效的人力资源绩效管理方案，以帮助企业实现绩效目标。
2. 目标设定为了确保人力资源绩效管理方案的成功实施，首先需要明确目标。
通过与高层管理层的沟通与讨论，制定出下列目标：- 提高员工的工作绩效和生产力；- 激励员工保持良好的工作态度与行为；- 培养和发展人才，为企业的长期发展提供支持；- 促进员工的个人成长与职业发展。
3. 绩效评估与反馈绩效评估是人力资源绩效管理的核心环节之一。
在这一阶段，可以采用以下步骤：- 设定明确的绩效评估标准，并与员工进行充分沟通和解释；- 通过360度评估、绩效考核表和定期回顾等方式，对员工的绩效进行全面评估；- 提供正向的反馈以鼓励优秀绩效，并指出改进的方向和机会；- 记录评估结果，并与员工进行讨论和制定改进计划。
4. 激励机制激励机制是激发员工工作积极性和动力的重要手段。
以下是一些常见的激励措施：- 建立清晰的晋升通道和职业发展规划，帮助员工实现个人目标；- 设立绩效奖金，并将其与员工的绩效水平挂钩；- 提供各种培训和发展机会，提高员工的职业能力；- 建立团队合作奖励制度，鼓励员工共同努力和协作。
5. 人才培养与发展为了促进企业的长期发展，人才培养与发展不可或缺。
以下是一些有效的培养措施：- 为员工提供轮岗和交叉培训的机会，培养多岗位技能；- 发起内部导师计划，让高级员工指导和培养新人；- 提供外部培训和学习资源，帮助员工开拓视野和提升能力；- 建立岗位晋升计划，为优秀员工提供更高级别的机会。
6. 绩效改进与调整人力资源绩效管理方案是一个持续不断的过程，需要不断地改进和调整。
以下是一些改进措施：- 定期评估绩效管理方案的有效性，收集员工的反馈意见；- 根据评估结果，进行方案调整和改进，以确保其符合实际需求；- 关注市场的变化和行业的发展趋势，及时调整绩效管理策略；- 借鉴其他企业的成功经验，不断学习和创新。
最著名人力资源咨询公司HAYGROUP绩效管理工具
Steve SherrettaDecember 14, 2019Performance Management:Enhancing Execution Through a Culture of Dialogue Peter is Chief Executive Officer for a medical supply multinational that recentlycrafted a new strategy to counter competitive threats. The plan stressed the needto cut cycle time, concentrate sales on higher-margin products and develop newmarkets.Four months after circulating the plan, Peter did a “walkaround” to see how things were going. He was appalled. Everywhere Peter turned people, departments—whole business units—simply didn’t “get it.”First surprise: Engineering. The group had cut product design time 30%, meeting its goal to increase speed-to-market. Good. Then Peter asked how manufacturing would be affected. It turned out the new design would take much more time tomake. Total cycle time actually increased. “Our strategic plan message is notreally getting through,” Peter thought.Second surprise: Sales. The new strategy called for a shift—emphasize highmargin sales rather that pushing product down the pipeline as fast as possible.But just about every salesperson Peter spoke to was making transactional sales to high-volume customers; hardly anyone was building relationships with the mostprofitable prospects. Sales is doing just what it’s always done, Peter thought.Worst surprise: Even his top team, the people who’d helped him craft the strategy, was not sticking to plan. Peter asked a team member: “Why are you spending all your time making sure the new machinery is working instead of developing newmarkets?”“Because my unit’s chief goal was to improve on-time delivery,” he answered.“But what about company goals?” said Peter. “We came up with a good plan and communicated it very cle arly. But nowhere it isn’t being carried out. Why?”Many organizations create good strategies, but only the best execute them effectively. Fortune magazine estimates that when CEOs fail, 70% of the time it’s because of badexecution.1 Weak execution is pervasive in the business world, but the reasons for it are largely misunderstood. Why is it that no one in Peter’s organization was acting in sync with the strategy? Unless we understand the reasons, we can’t hope to solve the problem. Imagine someon e hitting a tennis ball. When the brain says “hit the ball,” it doesn’t automatically happen. The message travels through nerve pathways down the arm and crosses gaps between the nerve cells. These gaps, or “synapses,” are potential breaks in the connection. If neurotransmitters don’t carry the message across the gap, the message never gets through, or it gets distorted. When that happens, either the arm doesn’t move at all, or it moves the wrong way.Creating a “culture of dialogue”Just like a nervous system, organizations also have gaps that block and distort messages. The secret to effective strategy execution lies in crossing hierarchical and functional gaps with clear, consistent messages that relay the strategy throughout the organization. Soun d simple? It’s not. The reason is that the “neurotransmitters” in organizations are human beings—executive team members, senior managers, middle managers and supervisors—whose job it is to make sure that people’s behavior is aligned with the overall strategy. Doing what it takes to achieve alignment is very difficult. It is what Ram Charan calls, the “heavy lifting” of management, and it’s the key to executing strategy.As we’ll see later, there is an important difference between companies that succe ssfully align behavior with strategy and those that do not. Companies that effectively execute strategy create a “culture of dialogue.” A culture of dialogue encourages pervasive two-way communications where individuals and groups 1) question, challenge, interpret and ultimately clarify strategic objectives; and 2) engage in regular performance dialogue to monitor behavior and ensure it is aligned with strategy.Three keys to managing performanceA culture of dialogue doesn’t happen instantly, any more than a fluid tennis stroke does. It takes practice, persistence and hard work. So how exactly can leaders ensure that strategy messages go all the way down the line—that the tennis ball gets hit correctly? The three keys to managing performance effectively are:1.Achieving radical clarity by decoding strategy at the top. Many organizationsthink they send clear signals but don’t. In some cases, managers subordinate broad strategic goals to operational goals within their silos. That’s what happened withPeter’s top team. Elsewhere, top team members often have too many “top”priorities—we’ve seen as many as 100 in one case—which results in mixed signals and blurred focus. Strategy decode requires winnowing priorities down to amanageable number—as little as five.2.Setting up systems and processes to ensure clarity. Once strategy is clear,organizations must create processes to ensure that the right strategy messages cascade 1“Why CEOs Fail,” by Ram Charan and Geoffrey Colvin, Fortune magazine, June 21, 1999.down the organization. These include: strategy-centered budget and planningsessions; staff and team meetings to discuss goals; performance managementmeetings; and talent review sessions. Dialogue drives all these processes. Eachrepresents a “transmitter opportunity,” where strategic messages are conveyed and behavior is aligned with goals.3.Aligning and differentiating rewards.Leaders must make sure rewards encouragebehaviors consistent with strategy, which sounds easy but isn’t. Differentiation is about making sure that stars get significantly more than poor performers. But almost everywhere managers distribute rewards more or less evenly. As we’ll see, lack of effective performance dialogue is a key contributor to dysfunctional reward schemes. We list these three items separately but they are, of course, interconnected. Systems and processes depend on clarity from the top. Differentiation and alignment of rewards depend on managers using performance systems effectively. Dialogue is the glue that holds it all together. But not just any dialogue will do. It must be dialogue with purpose, focused on performance.Link to company valuationCompanies that manage performance well—General Electric comes to mind—have higher market valuations. Why? Because, more and more, institutional investors view strategy execution as a vital factor influencing stock prices.Just a few years ago institutional investors relied almost exclusively on financial measures for company valuations. Now 35% of a market valuation is influenced by non-financial, intangible factors, according to a study by Ernst & Young.2 The study showed that “execution of corporate strategy” and “management credibility” ranked number one and number two in importance to institutional investors out of 22 non-financial measures. John Inch, a managing director and analyst at Bear Stearns notes that in some sectors, such as diversified industrial companies, intangibles account for even more—up to half a company’s value. “You can take even a mundane asset and inject good management and have something pretty strong,” says Inch.2 Based on a study conducted by Sarah Mavrinac and Tony Siesfeld for the Ernst & Young Center for Business Innovation.1. Achieve Radical Clarity by decoding strategy at the topThe first step in successfully executing strategy is achieving clarity on the top team, which is frequently the source of garbled signals.Lack of Clarity at the TopA recent Hay Group study3 shows a disturbing lack of clarity on top teams (organizational clarity measures the extent to which employees understand what is expected of them and how those expectations connect with the organization’s larger goals). The chart below shows dramatically higher levels of clarity on outstanding vs. average teams. In fact the biggest single difference between great and average top teams and typical ones was in the level of internal clarity. See Figure 1.Figure 1: Organizational Climate and Teams[Change Hay/McBer to “Source: Hay Group, Inc.” in final version]And a Lack of Clarity BelowWorkers at lower levels strongly feel this lack of clarity. Figure 2 looks at satisfaction levels for workers planning to leave their organizations within two years versus those planning to stay longer. This study showed that a key reason people leave their jobs is that they feel their companies lack direction. Even among employees planning to stay more than two years at their companies, only 57% felt their organizations had a clear sense of direction.Figure 2: Key reasons why employees leave their companies3 Hay Group partnered with Richard Hackman of Harvard University and Ruth Wageman of Dartmouth College to identify the dynamics of top executive teams and their impact on performance. From an initial group of 48 teams, the researchers narrowed their study to 14 teams, many from large global organizations. Each team member represented the head of an organization, a major business division, or a major geography.4Source: Hay Group, Inc. The results are from our Employee Attitude Survey, which sampled some 300 companies representing more than 1 million workers. Our survey queried management, professionals, salespeople, information technologists, and clerical and hourly workers. The “gap” referred to in the table is the “satisfaction gap” between workers planning to leave within two years and those planning to stay longer.[NOTE; HIGHLIGHT SECTION 3; MAKE IT POP GRAPHICALLY]Clarity mattersWhy do employees crave clarity? Think about it. What could be more demoralizing than the realization that your hard work is not contributing to overall company goals? Employees want to do the “right” thing, but they can only do so if they know what the right things are.Unfor tunately, as we saw in our opening vignette, companies often don’t communicate strategic goals effectively. An oil refinery client, for example, set a strategic goal to cut costs. To see how well the message had gotten through, an operations team leader held a strategy decode session where he quizzed his team members on what they felt was the chief priority. Ten team members produced four different “top” objectives, including cost-cutting, safety, environmental compliance and reducing sales processing time. The message hadn’t got through. The team leader called his team together and created a “transmitter opportunity.”“Don’t you guys realize that if we can’t cut our refining costs by three cents a gallon, they’re going to shut us down?” he said.“Is that all you need us to do?” replied the team members, taken aback. United by a clear direction and shared ownership of the cause, team members enthusiastically cut costs by five cents per gallon over the following year while continuing to maintain good safety and environmental records.Narrowing prioritiesHaving too many priorities can lead to lack of clarity. AeroMexico, for example, had worked with a strategy consulting firm that delivered a 249-page report listing key performance indicators (KPIs) for measuring progress by the enterprise. The good news was that the KPIs gave the top team metrics for measuring success. The bad news was that there were 100 of them, and they weren’t prioritized.“It was clear that execution would suffer unless we id entified the most important ones, says AeroMexico CEO Arturo Barahona. “So we discussed which ones connected most directly with our strategic priorities and where we were in the business cycle, and each team member settled on five chief goals.” By gainin g clarity on key objectives, the team greatly increased the odds that signals would transmit clearly down the line.Getting buy-in at the topHay research on teams has shown that it’s not uncommon for team members to nod their heads in agreement when new strategies are set in meetings, then go back to their division or department and carry on exactly as they had before. In effect, they end up sabotaging the plan. That’s why gaining buy-in is essential to effective execution, and dialogue is what makes it happen.IBM created an executive team consisting of six Ph.D-level technical leaders at an applied research unit. Their mission: build strong relationships with top research universities so that IBM could recruit innovative scientists capable of developing breakthrough products. The problem was that the Ph.Ds, all world-class scientists, were used to competing for research dollars and dismissing each other's ideas to advance their own. Getting them to work jointly and be held accountable for business results was going to be very difficult.In the first group meeting, the vice president simply assigned accountabilities to the various team members. "I could see the scientists digging in their heels, says Harris Ginsberg, an internal leadership consultant who attended the meeting. "No one was going to dictate to them what they should do." Even if they'd said yes to the VP's directives, adds Ginsberg, they would never have followed through.Ginsberg, who helps IBM business units clarify and execute strategy, knew the key was to get the scientists talking to each other. So he coached the vice president to change her behaviors. Rather than hand out directives, he suggested ways she could stimulate team dialogue about how to meet objectives. Ginsberg also counseled other team members about the need for a "consensus process" on an interdependent team.They all "got" it. At the next meeting the VP said, "Our mandate is to create breakthrough products. Without access to talent at the top universities, we won't succeed. How are we going to get it?" At first, Ginsberg recalls, she met silence. Finally one team member raised her hand. She was willing to "get out there to the universities, and be more visible, go out with the recruiter and the senior human resources people," said Ginsberg. She also agreed to help some up-and-coming scientists learn how to develop relationships with universities.A second team member said he would "help her make some calls." The ice wasbroken and all the team members eventually took on group responsibilities. "Itwas all about dialogue," says Ginsberg. "Until the individual leaders embraced the unifying elements of the strategy for the good of the enterprise, they only attended to their own mission. The dialogue helped them buy-in, agree to some shared activities, and begin to work more collaboratively."2. Set up systems and processes to create clarityWhy is executing strategy so difficult, even when the plan is clear? Because good execution only happens when employee behavior is aligned with strategy. And many managers can’t, won’t or don’t create the “transmitter opportunities” required to get people to do the right things. Managers: can’t because they don’t know how to talk with their subordinates about change and/or poor performance; won’t, because they find it uncomfortable to give candid feedback; or, simply don’t realize that successful strategy execution will never happen without ongoing performance dialogue.Part of the solution to this problem is creating systems and processes that force performance dialogue. General Dynamics Defense Systems (GDDS) in Pittsfield, MA, is one company where creating such systems has contributed to dramatic results. From 1999 to 2001, attrition among its valued software engineers dropped from 20 percent to 2.4 percent. Union grievances dropped from 57 to zero, saving hundreds of thousands of dollars. And, best of all, earnings and profit margins doubled.What GDDS didIn 1999 the $200 million plus defense contractor challenged its employees to improve the company’s negotiating leverage on bids, and thereby increase margins and profitability. To accomplish this goal, senior management directed all departments to chase out costs, and created numerous processes to transmit the cost-cutting strategy down the managerial ranks right to the shop floor, which is where they felt many of the best cost-cutting ideas would come fromCarmen Simonelli, director of facilities and security, says his department’s goal was to push labor costs 5 percent below budget, with a “stretch” goal of 6 percent. That was ambitious given that direct applied labor costs had been running 10-15 percent over budget. But Simonelli’s team slashed applied labor hours to an unthinkable 20 percent below budget. Annual savings amounted to about $440,000 on a $2 million budget, or nearly $10,000 per worker.How did they do it? The key, Simonelli says, was the processes the company put in place to enhance dialogue and carry the message to the shop floor. For example:The Learning MapThe company made it easy for employees to understand its broad goals by creating a “learning map,” which graphically outlined how each department and team linked directly to core objectives. All employees saw at a glance how their jobs fit in. Supervisors and assemblers in Simonelli’s group, for example, could readily see that by reducing applied labor hours in a project, GDDS could increase margins, shorten delivery schedules and raise the chances for winning new contracts.The ScorecardManagers and direct reports at GDDS meet one on one to create Scorecards, which set out five to seven personal annual goals. For example, the goals for shipping and receiving supervisor Tom Molleurs included plans to capture all incentive payments for early delivery and to cut direct costs 5%. Once a manager and subordinate reach agreement goals, they both sign the Scorecard as if it were a contract. From the worker’s perspective, this was a dramatic shift, says Newell “Tom” Skinner, at the time d irector of product delivery. “In the past we just set the goals and beat up employees to try to make them, but they probably didn’t even know why we had that goal in the first place.” Scorecards are “transmitter opportunities ” that clarify expectations and link day-to-day activity to company goals. And they work. Molleur’s group ended up cutting direct costs by 50 percent—not just 5 percent. What was the key thing that made it happen?Molleurs points to his weekly progress meetings. When they were behind schedule, Molleurs used the meetings to make sure the workers understood, through the Learning Map and Scorecards and other processes, how meeting or beating delivery schedules could increase competitiveness and win more contracts.Top management did simple things to make sure strategy messages were getting through. For example the president held monthly “pizza meetings” with everyone whose birthday fell that month. At these “transmitter opportunities,” he would ask attendees people tolist their top three goals, and their boss’ top three goals. Within months, everyone could answer the questions.When effective dialogue pushes strategic imperatives downward in an organization, extraordinary things happen. Skinner extended an open invitation to any employee who wanted to attend his weekly budget meeting with his supervisors. One day an assembler showed up and said a part design was forcing assemblers to work by hand with “dozens of tiny screws, lock washers and nuts.” Skinner had the assembler m eet with process control engineers for a redesign. The result: a job that had taken 12 hours was cut to four. “The best ideas come from the people doing the job,” says Skinner. Once the “conversation” got started, it took on momentum. Soon, people were coming into Skinner’s office without waiting for the weekly to discuss misalignment of strategy and behavior. Workers themselves were creating transmitter opportunities!It’s about behavior changeThe processes GDDS installed forced performance dialogue and ultimately changed behaviors. The message got through. But, like a tennis stroke, it didn’t happen quickly or automatically. It took coaching and practice.Sometimes you have to get it wrong, then make corrections through feedback and dialogue, before you get it right. One North American insurance company embarked on a new strategy to expand sales with existing customers. The president created nine core value statements and broadcast the ideas repeatedly organization-wide. Soon, every manager could recite them by heart. Employees even had cards with the core-value statements right at their desks.The message, however, wasn’t sinking in. An outside consultant saw one of the value statements on an underwriter’s desk that read “Never knowingly undersell a customer.” But the consultant listened to several of her calls and realized that she consistently failed to explore customer needs or try to up-sell. “The company had told her what to do, but didn’t follow through with the necessary rationale and appeals that would result in behavior change,” says the consultant. “As a result, her behavior was out of sync with the company strategy.”So the insurer put together a training session and coached its underwriters on ways to explore customer needs and broaden the sale. When the consultant visited the same underwriter a few months later, he noted that she was sending birthday cards to customers and calling during the year—not just at renewal time—to identify unfulfilledcustomer needs. “It was only after repeated dialogue, including feedback and coaching, that the underwriter’s behavior aligned with company goals,” explains the consultant. Figure 3: The coaching style on top teams[EDITOR’S NOTE: Vertical or “Y” axis needs to be labeled as “Percent indicating”Cutline: Teams that rely on a “coaching” managerial style get better performance— percentage of team members who observed the team leader using aCreating opportunities to transmit strategy downOrganizations committed to executing strategy devise innovative ways to make connections and circulate key messages. Alberto-Culver North America, the $600 million division of a $2.5 billion company whose profits tripled in 1994-2000, chose 70 “growth development leaders” (GDLs) from all levels of the company to create clarity about strategy.One strategic goal was to recruit better talent. The GDLs moved through the organization to see what people were actually doing to meet the recruitment objectives. They found serious disalignment between goals and behaviors, says Jim Chickarello, group vice president of worldwide operations and one of the GDLs. For example, when job candidates came in for interviews, nobody gave them a basic overview of the business, Sometimes candidates would be left standing around because hand-offs between various interviewers were poorly coordinated. And no one had consolidated interviewer evaluations, so there was no central location where Alberto-Culver managers seeking new people could get a snapshot of all candidates the company had interviewed. The top team and the GDLs devised a plan and created simple systems to carry it out. For example they created forms outlining an “agenda” for candidates that specified where hand-offs took place. No more waiting around. The GDLs developed take-home materials so that every candidate now gets a thorough company overview. Finally, the group created interviewer-report forms that must be sent to the manager who might ultimately work with the candidate. As a result, Chickarello says the company slashed its open-job rate in half, from 10 percent to 5 percent.“Hand’s-off” management means not being “on-message”For years experts have emphasized the importance of dialogue in performance management. But too many managers avoid it. One veteran says annual performance appraisals “are like delivering a newspaper to a house with a growling dog. You throw the paper on the porch and get away as fast as possible.”“Managers don’t want to deal with confrontation,” says Charlotte Merrell, senior vice president for Boston-based Jack Morton Company, a leader in event marketing. “Even when employees are not doing the right things, they’re usually working hard. Managers are concerned they might demoralize the employee or cause them to leave.”In fact, the exact opposite is true. Employees get demoralized when they don’t get candid performance feedback. When it comes to annual performance reviews, the issue is not what goes unsaid on the day of the review, but what goes unsaid the other 259 working days of the year. Ironically, with the right kind of performance-based dialogue, managers could eliminate the onerous annual performance review altogether. In a true culture of dialogue, feedback is given candidly and consistently in small doses—like an IV—and the annual review becomes a non-event.Don’t overlook the people factorIn sum, strong execution occurs when top management creates performance management systems and process (“transmitter opportunities”) and ensures that line managers are trained to use them. Companies often do a good job with the former, but underestimate the importance of the latter. Many managers got where they are through intellectual and technical abilities—not through their people skills—and need help to become effective performance managers. In particular, they need the skills to help make those tough performance review sessions go more smoothly. But the good news, according to Linda Johnston, vice president for human resources at Berkshire Bank in Massachusetts, is that “performance coaching is not rocket science. With practice, most managers can become quite adept at it.” (See sidebar on page xx for advice on what managers need to do to deliver performance messages effectively.)3. Making rewards countStrategy and execution signals get distorted when top teams lack clarity and when managers lack—or don’t use correctly—systems and processes to force performance dialogue. Wrong-headed reward policies complete the triple-whammy that cripples strategy execution.Aligning Rewards With StrategyIt sounds obvious that rewards have to be aligned with strategy. In fact the idea that a company would reward behavior that’s “out of sync” with the company strategy seems ludicrous. But it happens all the time. The reason is that creating reward systems is complex, and the critical importance of reward, which is just one piece of the strategic equation, is often overlooked.A health care insurance company, for instance, wanted to improve customer service, so it invested heavily in a program to train customer service representatives. The reps learned better voice technique, interviewing skills to ferret out customer needs, and upselling skills. But the company kept the same reward system as before, basing incentive pay on the number of calls completed. When management got its first set of customer satisfaction surveys, they were bleak reading. Customer widely agreed that although the staff was courteous, it was remarkably unhelpful in resolving problems. Why? Because, as one reps put it, “If we spend more than four minutes on a call we would never get our bonus.” The strategy required that reps engage in longer, more in-depth conversations with customers. But, as the rep pointed out, the dysfunctional reward system punished reps for doing so.Before AeroMexico had clarified its strategy, it had a reward scheme that unintentionally rewarded the wrong behavior. Pilots got merit pay based on on-time arrival records. This incentive helped give AeroMexico the best on-time record of any airline in North America. But this good outcome came with unintended consequences. Pilots sometimes left the gate before scheduled departure times to ensure their bonuses, leaving passengers stranded and angry. AeroMexico later changed the key goal to overall customer satisfaction, with on-time arrival as just one component. Continual dialogue prevents such missteps.Differentiating rewardsStandard management theory says high-performing workers should get higher rewards than average or below-average workers. But at many companies it rarely works that way. Figure 4 shows the narrow difference separating the merit pay of high-performers—stars—from the average in a Hay survey of 75 U.S. companies.Figure 4: Average Merit Increases: 20015(Cutline: Despite all the talk about the importance of differentitation in recent years, organizations still do not differente salary increases very muchA Hay Employee Attitude survey shows the tragic consequences of failing to differentiate rewards. In surveys conducted at 335 companies worldwide, only 35% of employees said they believed they’d earn more if they improved their performance.5Source: Hay Compensation Report, involving some 75 companies in the U.S.。
人力资源公司绩效管理方案全套
公司整体考核方案文件编号：版本修订：编制：审核：批准：日期：文件发放号：目录一、公司整体方案的说明二、公司整体考核规定三、公司整体考核办法四、公司整体考核管理流程图五、公司整体考核管理标准六、公司整体考核依据和细则一、关于整体方案的说明长期以来，绩效考核一直是困扰企业尤其是成长企业的难题。
如何做到使绩效考核与薪酬系统挂钩，最大限度的发挥各部门的积极性和创造性，及时解决工作中的问题，提高工作效率，并吸引到高层次的人才，是决策者首先需要考虑解决的。
本方案是在实际运行基础上，结合现代企业激励机制的原理设计而成。
旨在打破旱涝保收的心理惯性，解决工作积极性不高，推委扯皮，责任心不强等问题。
（一）考核是组织的系统行为。
具有以下性质：1、公开性。
考核结果按时公布，以加强监督。
2、公平性。
3、公正性。
真正作到奖优罚劣。
4、严肃性。
对考核结果，各部门应严格执行，不得打折扣。
5、权威性。
各部门应服从考核部门作出的最后决议。
6、包容性。
公司级的考核流程、标准、制度等应包容职能部门、生产基地以及各职能部门的考核流程、标准、和制度。
并能衔接一致，当有冲突时，以上层考核结果为准。
（二）本方案设计坚持以下原则：1、收入与绩效挂钩原则——做到人人头上有指标，人人头上有目标；2、个人效益与企业整体效益挂钩原则——人人都来关注企业整体效益，相互监督；3、动态浮动原则——人人都要关注企业的发展方向并为之努力；4、综合考核与专项考核相结合的原则——努力使考核个性化并具有针对性。
（三）该方案的基本原理是，各部门按分管职能归口考核并对问题提出纠正和预防措施监控整改，每月汇总报企管部。
企管部汇总各部门绩效完成情况并监督考核方案的执行情况，最后根据企业整体效益完成情况，对企业整体经济效益作出评价，算出企业综合经济效益指数，上述结果经主管总监认可，交人力资源部，根据核定标准动态工资乘以效益指数得出工资总额，经过分配，加减奖罚项目得出每位员工应得工资。
人力资源公司绩效管理方案全套
公司整体考核方案文件编号：版本修订：编制：审核：批准：日期：文件发放号：目录一、公司整体方案的说明二、公司整体考核规定三、公司整体考核办法四、公司整体考核管理流程图五、公司整体考核管理标准六、公司整体考核依据和细则2一、关于整体方案的说明长期以来，绩效考核一直是困扰企业尤其是成长企业的难题。
如何做到使绩效考核与薪酬系统挂钩，最大限度的发挥各部门的积极性和创造性，及时解决工作中的问题，提高工作效率，并吸引到高层次的人才，是决策者首先需要考虑解决的。
本方案是在实际运行基础上，结合现代企业激励机制的原理设计而成。
旨在打破旱涝保收的心理惯性，解决工作积极性不高，推委扯皮，责任心不强等问题。
（一）考核是组织的系统行为。
具有以下性质：1、公开性。
考核结果按时公布，以加强监督。
2、公平性。
3、公正性。
真正作到奖优罚劣。
4、严肃性。
对考核结果，各部门应严格执行，不得打折扣。
5、权威性。
各部门应服从考核部门作出的最后决议。
6、包容性。
公司级的考核流程、标准、制度等应包容职能部门、生产基地以及各职能部门的考核流程、标准、和制度。
并能衔接一致，当有冲突时，以上层考核结果为准。
第3 页共15 页（二）本方案设计坚持以下原则：1、收入与绩效挂钩原则——做到人人头上有指标，人人头上有目标；2、个人效益与企业整体效益挂钩原则——人人都来关注企业整体效益，相互监督；3、动态浮动原则——人人都要关注企业的发展方向并为之努力；4、综合考核与专项考核相结合的原则——努力使考核个性化并具有针对性。
（三）该方案的基本原理是，各部门按分管职能归口考核并对问题提出纠正和预防措施监控整改，每月汇总报企管部。
企管部汇总各部门绩效完成情况并监督考核方案的执行情况，最后根据企业整体效益完成情况，对企业整体经济效益作出评价，算出企业综合经济效益指数，上述结果经主管总监认可，交人力资源部，根据核定标准动态工资乘以效益指数得出工资总额，经过分配，加减奖罚项目得出每位员工应得工资。
HAYX公司绩效考核体系改进
HAYX公司绩效考核体系改进
随着市场竞争的加剧,人力资源管理成为了企业之间竞争的重中之重。
而有效的绩效考核,又是企业人力资源管理的核心组成部分。
因此,受到企业管理者的高度重视。
所谓绩效考核,是管理者在既定的战略目标之下,精心制定出系统的考核标准、考核指标以及权重系数,形成一整套的业绩考核方案,以激励和引导员工,推动员工与企业共同成长,从而最终实现企业战略目标的一种有效措施。
论文以淮安赢夏人力资源有限公司绩效考核的现行方案作为研究对象,采用访谈、问卷调查等多种方法,对现行方案进行诊断分析,发现该公司绩效考核存在考核只为发薪酬、过于注重财务指标、绩效考核主体单一、绩效考核结果运用不足、直线经理能力欠缺、群众满意率低等六个问题。
接着针对问题,对现行方案和考核流程等进行了改进设计,完善绩效考核评价指标体系。
同时,为确保改进方案的实施,还提出了包括人力资源保障、企业文化保障、制度层面保障、注重绩效考核的全程辅导、公司直线经理培训、强化绩效沟通等六项保障措施。
文章虽是个案研究,但企业绩效考核方面存在的问题,具有共性。
因此,该研究成果也可为相关类型企业的绩效考核提供参考。