As I've been in education a while, it doesn't seem like that long ago that we were introduced to Performance Related Pay back in 2000. However, unions are now urging schools to ditch the approach.
I've thought for a long time now that PRP is not very effective. There's lots of reasons for this:
❓ Does it really make a difference to performance when we're paid to achieve aspirational targets? Every teacher I've ever worked with has always done their best for their pupils regardless of targets set.
❓ The strategy feels like a stick rather than a carrot - an additional accountability method which can increase stress rather than performance.
However my main reason for this view is actually informed by how we engage, develop and motivate our team members. I feel the whole traditional performance management process is flawed. Setting annual targets with very occasional reviews doesn't work in my opinion.
I believe the best way to boost performance is to use a coaching approach, and to meet with colleagues regularly to review their progress towards current priorities. In this way, employees can receive support and coaching toward their very real, immediate goals, and when these are achieved, relevant priorities can then be targeted for the next period.
Using a coaching approach motivates and engages staff, building ownership and empowerment. Surely a far better motivator than performance related pay?
Join in the conversation and share your thoughts. I'd love to hear from you.
😃 If you'd like support with your performance management policies, or are looking for an external advisor for leadership appraisal, please contact me at info@claireplattcoaching.co.uk
PS: Hello, I'm Claire, an experienced headteacher, executive and trust leader, coach, inspector and educational consultant. I help leaders to create high performing cultures where all can thrive.
Subscribe to my newsletter http://eepurl.com/i5nHIg
Subscribe to my blog: https://www.claireplattcoaching.co.uk/news-updates
Comments