Performance Evaluation: Controlling And Monitoring Strategies

Monitoring and controlling are essential components of performance evaluation and project management. They involve tracking, reviewing, and reporting on the progress of a project to ensure it remains aligned with its objectives, deadlines, and standards. Monitoring and controlling are not just limited to annual performance reviews but provide ongoing feedback and guidance to employees. This process includes setting performance standards, measuring actual performance, comparing it to the set standards, analysing deviations, and taking corrective actions. Effective monitoring and controlling require robust tools and techniques to collect and analyse data accurately, such as team meetings, performance management software, and work management platforms. These processes are crucial for keeping projects on track, addressing issues, and making necessary adjustments to achieve success.

Setting performance standards

Understanding Performance Standards

Performance standards are the benchmarks that guide a project's progress and help determine whether it is on the path to success. These standards can be defined as specific, measurable, attainable, and clear goals that the project team is expected to achieve. They provide a yardstick for project managers to assess the project's status and take corrective actions if needed.

Types of Performance Standards

Performance standards can be categorised into two types: tangible and intangible. Tangible standards are specific and measurable goals, such as deadlines, budgets, or quality metrics. They can be directly monitored and provide a quantitative assessment of the project's progress. On the other hand, intangible standards are more abstract and challenging to measure. These include aspects like managerial performance, team morale, and customer satisfaction. While they are more qualitative in nature, intangible standards are equally important and can significantly impact the overall project outcome.

Developing Performance Standards

When setting performance standards, it is crucial to involve both the project manager and the team members. The project manager's role is to establish clear and achievable goals, ensuring they align with the organisation's overall objectives. Team members, on the other hand, should provide input and have a say in defining the standards. This fosters a sense of ownership and commitment to achieving those standards. Additionally, stakeholders' input is essential to ensure that the performance standards address their expectations and requirements.

Communicating Performance Standards

Once the performance standards have been established, effective communication is key. The project team, stakeholders, and anyone else involved in the project should be made aware of these standards. This promotes a shared understanding of what success looks like and enables everyone to work towards a common goal. Regular communication also helps identify any potential issues or deviations from the standards early on, allowing for timely course corrections.

Reviewing and Adjusting Performance Standards

In conclusion, setting performance standards is a critical step in the controlling process of project management. It provides a foundation for measuring and improving performance, ensuring that projects stay aligned with their objectives. By involving the project team, stakeholders, and effective communication, performance standards can drive projects towards success and help identify and address potential issues early on.

Measuring actual performance

Data Collection and Analysis:

• Collecting relevant data: This includes information such as the status of the project budget, schedule, work completed, and any potential risks or issues. It's important to utilise appropriate tools and techniques to gather accurate data, especially in complex projects involving multiple stakeholders and locations.
• Performance metrics and key performance indicators (KPIs): These are quantifiable measures used to evaluate the success of a project. Examples include completion rates, production metrics, budget tracking, and quality-related KPIs.
• Reporting and dissemination: Creating reports that summarise the collected data is crucial for keeping all stakeholders informed. Reports can include status reports, progress reports, and forecast reports, providing insights into the current state, accomplishments, and expected future status of the project.

Comparison and Evaluation:

• Comparing actual performance to standards: This involves evaluating the gap between the planned performance and the actual results achieved. It helps identify both positive and negative deviations from the set standards.
• Assessing trends and process improvements: By analysing trends in performance data, managers can identify areas for improvement and make data-driven decisions to optimise processes.
• Evaluating alternatives and corrective actions: If there are deviations from the planned performance, it's important to assess possible alternatives and recommend appropriate corrective actions to get the project back on track.

Stakeholder Involvement and Communication:

• Stakeholder understanding: Measuring actual performance allows stakeholders to grasp the current state of the project, recognise actions taken to address performance issues, and anticipate the future status of the project.
• Communication and transparency: Regular meetings and effective communication with stakeholders, clients, and team members are essential to prevent misunderstandings and ensure everyone is aligned with the project's goals and progress.

Tools and Techniques:

• Performance management software: Off-the-shelf software solutions can be customised to meet the specific needs of an organisation. These tools help in collecting, analysing, and reporting performance data.
• Team meetings: Meetings are a collaborative way to share information, monitor progress, and make necessary adjustments. They are particularly useful in agile projects to ensure flexibility and timely interventions.
• Work management software: This software can automate status reports, manage change requests, and facilitate centralised request hubs, improving efficiency and transparency.

Comparing actual performance with standards

Performance standards are typically set by managers and defined as measurable goals that outline what successful project completion looks like. These standards provide a benchmark for evaluating the project's progress and identifying areas that require improvement. They serve as a yardstick for project managers to understand the project's status and take appropriate actions to address any deviations.

Measuring actual performance involves collecting and analyzing data to assess the current status of the project. This includes tracking key performance indicators (KPIs), such as production output, budget spending, and team morale. By comparing these KPIs with the set performance standards, project managers can identify any gaps or deviations from the expected outcomes.

Identifying deviations is crucial for project success. Deviations can be both positive, where the team exceeds standards, and negative, where the team fails to meet the defined goals. While positive deviations may not require immediate action, negative deviations demand further investigation to understand their severity and implement corrective measures.

For example, consider a software development team that sets a performance standard of delivering a new feature within two weeks. By comparing the actual performance, the project manager finds that the team took three weeks to deliver the feature. This negative deviation from the standard triggers further analysis and corrective actions, such as evaluating the causes for the delay and implementing measures to improve efficiency.

Analysing deviations

For instance, if a team is consistently failing to meet deadlines, managers should assess the specific nature of the gap between the intended deadline and the submission of the work. If the lag is steadily growing, it may indicate that the team lacks the skills, motivation, or manpower to accomplish the task within the allotted time. To better understand the root cause, managers should also consider tangentially related metrics, such as the number of overtime hours recorded by the team. If overtime is rarely recorded, the issue may lie in a lack of motivation or drive, whereas frequent overtime may point to insufficient manpower.

In some cases, deviations may be positive, indicating that the team is exceeding standards. In such cases, managers should avoid making changes until the project is complete, as these positive deviations provide a buffer for potential future delays or setbacks.

Overall, analysing deviations helps managers identify the necessary corrective actions to get the project back on track and ensure it reaches a successful conclusion.

Taking corrective action

Once the reasons for deviations from the plan have been determined, managers can develop solutions to address issues with meeting performance standards and make changes to processes or behaviours. This is the final step of the control process and is critical to the success of an organisation.

Corrective actions should be tailored to the size and severity of the deviation. For example, a team that is slightly behind schedule may only need a reminder of the project's importance, while a team that is significantly behind may need additional resources or mandatory overtime.

In the case of the XYZ Group, the corrective action taken was to institute a zero-tolerance policy for employee theft, with employees found stealing facing termination. This policy was communicated to all warehouse employees through an update to the employee handbook and a meeting.

Corrective actions should also be considered in the context of the project's key performance indicators (KPIs). For example, if production is falling behind, corrective actions may need to be taken to ensure the team meets its deadline for deliverables.

It is important to note that corrective actions may require additional monitoring to ensure they are effective. This is known as controlling, which may require more monitoring if sufficient information cannot be derived from the initial monitoring process.

Frequently asked questions