News flash: In terms of workplace performance, employees aren’t all the same.  Yup…bet you had no idea.

Of course, it would be nice if they were all the same – preferably awesome. Unfortunately, we have all seen the employee who has been with the company for ten years but really doesn’t have ten years experience, he just has one year of experience ten times.

Sure, it’s an old joke, but the reason it’s been around so long is it contains a lot of truth.

Extensive research in a wide range of fields shows that many people not only fail to become outstandingly good at what they do, no matter how many years they spend doing it, they frequently don’t even get any better than they were when they started. (From Talent is Overrated, by Geoffrey Colvin, Portfolio – Penguin Group, 2008)

“Performance management” is one of the buzz words associated with management (although it originates as an HR function), but ask managers what it is and you will get a variety of (sometimes quite interesting) answers. Here’s a look at what Wikipedia has to offer on the subject:

Performance Management (PM) as described here refers to a term coined by Dr. Aubrey C. Daniels in the late 1970s to describe a technology (i.e., science imbedded in applications methods) for managing both behavior and results, the two critical elements of what is known as performance. Performance is the sum of behavior and results, and cannot be viewed as independent of either component. It is an outcome of effective management.

In the context of Human Resources, performance management refers to the ongoing process of setting goals, self-assessment, manager assessment, peer-assessment (also called 360 assessment), coaching, development planning, and evaluation. Research has shown that this process, which is widely used in business (but often called performance appraisal), has two forms: competitive assessment (where employees are rigorously compared against each other), and coaching & development (where employees are evaluated against their own goals and capabilities).

Managing behavior and results. This probably calls for a definition of behavior as well (we’re not talking about managing all behavior, are we?), but I suspect this explanation of performance management means that effective managers train employees in certain behaviors (workplace tasks) that inevitably lead to a predictable set of results.

The second part of the Wikipedia definition reveals more detail. Here, performance management includes things like goal-setting, assessments, coaching, development planning, and evaluation. The interesting thing about all of this is that, while managers are generally required to “manage performance” – by some definition -  that definition is rarely crystal clear to the manager. Further, the manager is almost never provided with the necessary training to be competent in “performance management,” at least in terms of using all of those tools effectively. Quite often, it is simply assumed that, once promoted to management, a manager somehow just knows how to manage performance.

Evidently, the assumption that managers just know how to manage performance isn’t working out that well – at least from anecdotal evidence. Talking to managers from a number of industries and different company sizes, it is interesting to hear their ideas (definitions) about performance management: they range from telling employees what to do, to completing an annual performance evaluation, to correcting mistakes and/or failures, to documenting inappropriate behavior, to providing job skills training, to letting HR do it. Oddly enough, the concept of “coaching and development” almost never arises…

At the same time, the vast majority of those managers feel they are poorly prepared and inadequately trained to effectively manage their employees performance.  How about you? How effective are you at managing performance?

The foundation of 1-on-1 Management™ philosophy is people development; hire talented employees with good character, work hard to develop their capabilities, and empower them to maximize their potential. There is, of course, a lot that goes into those three simple steps and it does not happen overnight – the great manager must invest a lot of time into his/her employees.

It doesn’t really matter what type of employee you manager – operations, administrative, sales – one of the keys to people development is good coaching. I was reminded of that in an article from the Selling Power sales management newsletter:

World-class managers do two things you should emulate in 2009, says Andrew Plunkett, a director with SPI. First, they make one-on-one coaching a priority. And second, they spend most of their coaching time on their middle performers because it’s those reps who can most impact your results. In short, world-class managers manage performance instead of non-performance. The difference is crucial because when you identify and coach the right people, it can impact your turnover by as much as 9 percent and increase the number of sales that occur in one to three months by 15 percent, according to SPI.

So why aren’t more managers using this powerful tool? According to Nathan Jamail, president of Jamail Development Group and author of The Sales Leader’s Playbook (Scooter, 2008), there are two big reasons sales managers don’t coach as often as they should – or even at all.

Reason #1: “I talk to my employees every day. I don’t need to schedule one-on-ones.” This is the most common reason managers cite for not coaching. It’s often followed by, “I have an open door policy so my employees can come see me any time they need me.”

Reason #2: “I’m busy! I don’t have time to coach people one-on-one.” The fact is, you’ll be less busy if you coach individually because performance will improve and turnover will drop. Coaching can help you get control of all those little fires you spend your days putting out.

The bottom line: Make coaching a priority in 2009… “Coaching is a process – not a one-shot deal,” concludes Jamail. “Successful coaching sessions with employees take time to develop. Be patient. The risk of trying something new is definitely worth the potential profit.”

Interesting… It doesn’t seem to matter if you are managing sales performance or any of several different types of on-the-job performance, 1-on-1 Meetings™ are extremely effective for engaging and coaching employees. The problem is that most managers don’t know where to start when it comes to coaching. The natural inclination is to view coaching as correction, which, of course, it often is, but coaching is much more than simply correcting failure. Coaching also involves training, helping an individual to see their potential, helping him/her to develop confidence in themselves, and providing opportunities to grow and develop. However, the key to all of this is to develop a relationship of trust with the individual you are coaching. Without trust, coaching is more akin to conflict.

In 2009, make time for coaching….and make time to develop a culture of trust that will allow you to coach effectively.