CLEW'D IN June 2018

Abstract

Employee performance management (PM) has become increasingly popular in the last three decades. It supposedly improves individual attitudes, and then organizational performance. It does this through a continuous process of goal setting, feedback, communication, coaching and rewarding (Kinicki, Jacobson et al. 2013). Ideally, it differs from the traditional misery of annual performance appraisals by being more continuous, forward looking, developmental, job relevant and linked to rewards. Many countries have introduced employee PM in their public services, at least rhetorically. Ideally it is a management tool to promote result-driven cultures, accountability, and transparency in order to improve public service delivery. This study of the Vietnamese public service outlines how performance management can work in public services. Some of the findings are probably very contextual and apply only to Vietnam. Others seem more global and likely apply here as well. Despite the strong theoretical case for performance management (think goal-setting, expectancy, equity, reinforcement and social exchange theories), getting it to work is still a global challenge. Even in the most developed countries, the failure rate has been estimated at 56 percent (Haines III and St-Onge 2012). Irrespective of efforts devoted to improve this practice, “the formula for effective performance management remains elusive” (Pulakos and O'leary 2011 p1) and negative outcomes are still repeated (Azzone and Palermo 2011). In reality, employees and supervisors often dislike employee PM and see it as a control mechanism or an unnecessary administrative burden, and are sceptical about whether employee PM actually improves employee experiences and organizational performance. In the public sector implementation is even more challenging because of problems regarding conflicting goals, the need for transparency, inadequate budgets for incentives, and so on. Performance management is also largely a product of western countries. In government it appeals mainly to those attracted to new public management theories. We know that contextual factors such as institution, capacity and culture can’t be overlooked in the implementation of PM. In order to provide a better understanding of if, and under what conditions employee PM in the public sector might work, this mixed method research investigated the implementation of five employee PM practices, including goal-based appraisal, feedback, reward for performance, addressing poor performers and employee participation. The data (interviews, survey and document analysis) was collected in 29 diverse public organizations within five central ministries and two provinces in Vietnam.