Performance Management and Improvement Training Course

Participants can define proficiency expectations and identify credible evidence of individual performance.

• Task analysis separates critical tasks, enabling tasks and contextual knowledge
• Competency models distinguish technical, behavioural and leadership requirements
• Proficiency scales describe novice-to-expert performance using observable behavioural anchors
• Behaviourally anchored rating scales reduce ambiguity in performance conversations
• Evidence sources combine work samples, observation, records and stakeholder input
• RACI mapping clarifies ownership where interdependent work affects individual results

Participants can select useful measures and establish a review rhythm that supports timely action.

• Leading and lagging indicators selected for controllability and decision usefulness
• Operational dashboards separate activity volumes, quality rates, timeliness and outcomes
• Data-quality checks identify missing records, inconsistent definitions and reporting bias
• Trend charts distinguish normal variation from meaningful performance deterioration
• Performance review cadence aligns weekly check-ins with monthly and quarterly decisions
• Confidentiality boundaries govern access to individual performance records and notes

Participants can conduct direct, respectful feedback and coaching conversations anchored in evidence.

• SBI feedback structures observations around situation, behaviour and impact
• Feedforward questions convert past performance issues into specific future actions
• Active listening techniques test assumptions before proposing corrective action
• Coaching contracts establish purpose, confidentiality, roles and follow-through
• GROW conversations move from performance goal to committed action
• Difficult feedback addresses defensiveness, emotion, denial and disputed facts

Participants can distinguish individual capability issues from environmental and operational performance barriers.

• Performance diagnosis separates skill, will, resource, process and role causes
• Gilbert's Behavior Engineering Model identifies environmental and individual performance barriers
• Five Whys traces recurring errors beyond the immediate visible failure
• Fishbone diagrams test people, methods, materials, machines, measures and environment
• Observation sampling compares stated procedures with actual work execution
• Cause-and-effect evidence prevents training from becoming the default remedy

Participants can select and plan interventions that address diagnosed causes of poor performance.

• Intervention selection matches root causes to coaching, redesign, tools or training
• 70-20-10 development plans combine experience, feedback and formal learning
• Job aids reduce memory demands for infrequent, high-consequence tasks
• Deliberate practice plans specify repetitions, feedback sources and mastery criteria
• Workload and resource adjustments remove barriers outside employee control
• Success measures define expected change, review dates and evidence sources

Participants can support fairer appraisal decisions through evidence, calibration and sound documentation.

• Rating scales and behavioural anchors support consistent manager judgments
• Calibration meetings compare evidence, standards and rating rationales
• Recency, halo and similarity bias identified through rating-pattern review
• Performance documentation records expectations, evidence, support and employee response
• Procedural justice principles strengthen perceived fairness and acceptance
• Data privacy and equal-treatment obligations shape appraisal record handling

Participants can prepare and manage structured performance improvement processes with appropriate support and follow-up.

• Underperformance conversations state the gap, standard, evidence and required improvement
• Performance improvement plans specify milestones, support, review dates and consequences
• SMART recovery goals distinguish immediate correction from sustained proficiency
• Weekly review records capture progress, barriers, commitments and manager support
• Escalation decisions use documented evidence and applicable organisational policy
• Employee wellbeing concerns are referred through appropriate support channels

Participants can use performance evidence appropriately in talent, mobility and succession discussions.

• Nine-box matrices combine current performance evidence with future potential indicators
• Talent reviews separate readiness, aspiration, mobility and development needs
• Critical-role pipelines identify successor pools, exposure gaps and readiness risks
• Performance data informs internal mobility, project assignments and succession decisions
• Potential assessments avoid conflating current technical expertise with leadership capacity
• Development sponsorship assigns accountable advocates for priority talent

Participants can establish governance, manager routines and a focused action plan for improved performance management.

• Manager operating rhythms combine check-ins, data reviews, calibration and development discussions
• Stakeholder maps identify sponsors, managers, employees, HR and data owners
• Communication plans explain standards, review cycles, responsibilities and escalation routes
• Adoption measures track completion quality, conversation frequency and employee sentiment
• Performance governance assigns decision rights for standards, ratings and interventions
• Personal application plans prioritise one performance-management improvement within ninety days