The Challenge: Aligning Performance with Business Strategy
Sonoco sought to implement a performance management system to develop employees' understanding of their roles and align their performance with the company’s strategic business goals. The initiative aimed to use tools like 360-degree feedback and a focused competency model to support both organizational objectives and employee development.
Shortcomings of the Old System
The previous performance management system, which had been in place for 15 years, was no longer effective. Its primary weaknesses included:
- An Event, Not a Process: It was treated as a one-time activity rather than an ongoing cycle.
- Lacked Seriousness: The system was not viewed as a critical business initiative.
- Infrequent Training: Support and training for the system were not consistently provided.
- Manager-Driven: The process was top-down, with little involvement from employees.
- Meaningless Metrics: It relied on numerical scores that did not accurately evaluate past performance.
- Disconnected from Development: The system failed to connect performance reviews with future employee growth opportunities.
The New Approach: Sonoco’s Performance Management System (SPMS)
To address these issues, the new SPMS was designed with a different philosophy:
- A Process, Not an Event: It established an ongoing performance cycle.
- Increased Communication: The system promoted greater employee involvement at every stage.
- Focus on Future Success: It examined how results were achieved and how to improve future performance.
- Employee Accountability: It made employees responsible for the success of their own performance management.
Catalyst for Change
The decision to overhaul the system in 1995 was a response to a changing business environment. Sonoco had acquired several companies, leading to reengineering efforts within its divisions. Each division had been using its own uncoordinated performance management system. Furthermore, senior management was concerned about the quality of the workforce and recognized that the old system did not adequately support employee development.