The performance management process is beneficial when mutual respect and understanding are fostered between those who lead the process and those whose work is appraised. Their concluding meeting produces agreements about colleagues’ achievements and strengths, as well as decisions about their objectives and action plans.
What performance management can be
Performance management provides a point of periodic, usually annual, face-to-face contact, and, in the case of teachers, entails the person leading the process observing a colleague in action. In their turn, team leaders, mentors, managers and senior leaders are led through the process by individuals who manage, supervise or govern them. Governors observe headteachers at work on many occasions. Performance management can have a bearing on initial qualification, induction, threshold and payment awards, and promotion. It is separate from disciplinary procedures and inspections, and so leaves different protocols to take over if either party to the process decides that matters of health, safety or competence need to be addressed. Ultimately the aim is to combine the benefits of individuals’ professional development and whole-school improvement by promoting understanding of colleagues’ capabilities, potential and planning for continuing learning.
There are technologies which can assist. The key is for these to be directed or co-directed by the intended beneficiaries. Systems such as IRIS Connect (discreet audio video recording: www.irisconnect.co.uk) are designed to be a means for professionals to enhance their capabilities and performance. But it can happen that misguided managers subvert to their own purposes of surveillance and control processes that have the potential to support teachers’ and leaders’ motivation, effectiveness and satisfaction. If, as the colleague who should benefit from the process, you do not share responsibility for how media and procedures are used, you are unlikely to enjoy or gain from the experience.
Micklewright and colleagues showed in their research report for the Department of Education (2014) that the percentage of secondary school teachers in England agreeing or strongly agreeing with the positive statement ‘Feedback follows a thorough assessment of teaching’ was 55%. But 51% agreed or strongly agreed with the negative statement ‘Appraisal and feedback are largely done to fulfil administrative requirements’ in their school was 51% (p106), and 34% with the negative statement ‘Appraisal and feedback have little impact on teaching practices’ (p107). . This represents an equivocal estimation by teachers of the value of their performance management and other ways of being appraised and receiving feedback. It seems that a considerable proportion of teachers see performance management as falling short of being well conducted and helpful to their continuing professional learning and career development. How can you take up the challenges that this poses?
Day (1988) spelt out how easily the value of observation visits and appraisals can be diminished or wrecked if arrangements are imposed without consultation, if procedures are introduced that are unclear, unrewarding or unpleasant, or if there is a failure to take account of the time and commitment needed for reflection, discussion and development. Success depends, first, on both parties’ wanting to contribute to what the school provides for its pupils and, second, on their working thoughtfully together in common interest.