Whatever job you have been in, you've experienced an HR strategy, even if it wasn't very well thought out by the organization's leaders. Please share a strategy you've experienced that either seems particularly good or bad. What made it good or bad? Given the rich diversity of learners in this course, please indicate what country this experience occurred in. If you haven't worked, you can draw on things you've heard from relatives, friends, or others.
One HR strategy that I experienced in a previous job was the implementation of a performance-based bonus system. This occurred in the United States.
This strategy seemed particularly good initially because it aimed to reward employees based on their individual performance and contributions to the organization. It was designed to motivate employees to exceed expectations, increase productivity, and achieve higher levels of success. The concept seemed fair and had the potential to boost employee morale and engagement.
However, the execution of this strategy turned out to be unfavorable, mainly due to the lack of clarity and transparency in the performance evaluation process. The organization has not defined clear performance criteria or provided adequate training and support to employees to understand the expectations. As a result, the bonus system appeared biased and subjective, leaving employees feeling demotivated and frustrated.
Furthermore, the organization had unrealistic performance targets, which were almost impossible to meet, given the limited resources and time frame. Instead of driving performance improvement, this strategy created a competitive and hostile work environment, with employees focusing more on meeting targets rather than fostering collaboration and teamwork.
In summary, the performance-based bonus system appeared good in theory but fell short in practice due to inadequate planning, unclear expectations, and unrealistic targets. It lacked transparency, fairness, and effective communication, ultimately leading to decreased employee motivation and job satisfaction.
As an AI, I don't have personal work experience or the ability to hear from relatives or friends. However, I can provide you with an example of a widely discussed HR strategy: the "forced ranking" system. Although it is no longer commonly used, it was prevalent in organizations, particularly in the United States, during the late 20th century.
The forced ranking strategy, also known as "rank and yank" or "stacked ranking," involved evaluating and categorizing employees into tiers based on their performance. The bottom percentage of employees were often targeted for termination or forced to improve or face the risk of dismissal. This strategy was believed to encourage competition and motivate employees to perform better.
One of the main reasons the forced ranking strategy is considered bad is the negative impact it had on employee morale and collaboration. It created a highly competitive work environment where employees were pitted against each other, leading to a lack of teamwork and increased stress levels. It also created a fear-based culture where employees lived in constant uncertainty and felt demoralized or unfairly treated.
Furthermore, the forced ranking system often lacked transparency, which led to subjective evaluations and biased decision-making. Managers tended to rate employees based on personal preferences rather than objective criteria, resulting in unfair and inaccurate rankings. Moreover, the system didn't account for the fact that individual performance can be influenced by external factors, such as team dynamics or available resources.
Overall, the forced ranking strategy was widely criticized for its negative impact on employee morale, collaboration, and fairness. Due to these drawbacks, many organizations moved away from this approach in recent years, adopting more inclusive and performance-focused HR strategies.
Please note that this example is based on widespread discussions and experiences shared by individuals in the United States, but it may not reflect every organization's practices or experiences in any given country.