The Performance Management Quandary - Research Paper Example

?PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT AND MILLENNIALS The Performance Management Quandary I. What is Performance Management? a. Definition of performance management Performance management is therefore the current relevant discussion due to the need for companies to stand the stiff competition and attain market leadership. Performance management is a wide concept within the HR department given its wide coverage area of joint goal setting of an organization, continuous progress review and frequent communication, feedback and coaching for improved services and organizational performance, they also conduct the implementation of employee development plans as well as rewarding achievements (Brudan, 2010). This process in most organizations begins when one joins a new incumbent and ends when they quit the organization. Performance management can in other words be referred to as any systematic process by which the overall performance of an organization can be improved through the improvement of the individuals within a team organization. It is one of the ways of promoting superior performance through constant communication of the desired expectations, defining roles within required competence dimensions and the achievements of closer benchmarks (Pulakos, 2004). The roles played by the HR in organizations keep evolving and the focus of such is to enable the successful implementation of successful functional strategies which are directed to a successful implementation of an organization’s corporate strategies. This is because the HR and the corporate strategies more or less function in the same direction. The HR department of any organization in the workplace today is striving towards the facilitation and the improvement of the employees performance through building a conducive environment of work while providing maximum opportunities for the free participation of the employees in the planning and the decision making process (Pulakos, 2004). The activities of any HR department of an organization today is geared towards the development of a high performing leaders and fuel employee motivation which are great attributes of employee performance management (Brudan, 2010). Other players like Armstrong and Baron of 1998 view the concept of performance management as both strategic and integrated geared towards the delivery of successful results in the organization through ensuring an improvement in the performance and the capabilities development of the teams and individuals in an organization. This term found its way in the 1980’s when the total quality management programs found their way in helping achieve high standards and quality performance. Performance management can hence be said to be an ongoing communication process that takes place between supervisors and employees. Therefore Armstrong and Baron present the aspect of performance management as a concept which contributes to the effective management of an organizations individual and groups for the achievement of the high organizational performance. It does this by identifying within the organization what is to be achieved and directs people into actually achieving such set objectives (Piper, 2008). b. Types of performance management systems Because of the diverse nature of most organizations and the objectives for improved performance by most organizations, one single form of performance management systems would not be appropriate hence from research we have several to be applied in an organization depending on the uniqueness of the organization. The available most frequently used types of management systems will include: - Ranking, Forced distribution, 360 degree feedback, competency based, management by objectives, Graphic Rating scales, Behavioral Anchored Rating Scales and many others. The types of performance management systems as stipulated below are all relevant systems which are geared towards enabling any given organization to bust their performance strategies as appropriate as possible. As a matter of fact, this forms of systems need to be applied appropriately for them to function effectively and lead to a high performing organization (Huselid, 1995). c. High Performing Organization A high performing organization otherwise called an HPO directs its efforts in bringing out the best of performance out of the people (Piper, 2008). Any organization that is hell-bent on becoming an HPO designs itself towards the realization of sustainable outcomes in all the aspects of the organization’s operations. The characteristics of any form of an HPO would therefore revolve around viewing its employees as its assets as opposed to looking at them as mere company expenses as viewed by most companies (Brudan, 2010). HPOs will not buy such retrogressive ideologies as they have the perception that their employees are their assets making their employees happier, more productive and with the urge to want to succeed in their jobs. Such organizations will give employees the tools to empower themselves and make valuable contributions to the organization; they also encourage diversity at the work place apart from merely respecting it. They view diversity as assets to the company due to the innovation, creativity and value addition which can be brought about by the differences in backgrounds (Papalexandris & Galanaki, 2009). High Performing Organizations acts to mobilize teams since teamwork and cohesiveness are the fundamental hearts of such organizations. This is because such acts create an enabling environment where teams are able to collaborate and work on the same level grounds hence achievement of corporate objectives. Such organizations integrate the newest technologies which has the impact of enhancing productivity most so when the employees focus on important tasks after training. Through learning and advancement, HPOs are able to focus on growth and development (Huselid, 1995). The learning and advancement takes place through trainings and seminars and this aspect is derived from success stories where employees with autonomy being able to perform better than those closed in a cage and micromanaged. Furthermore, HPOs are goals directed and they are always oriented to achieve such set goals. Such organizations have the urge to achieve the goals set and even aim for more higher goals targets that are arrived at through visions and shared values with all the stakeholders. They practice Total Quality Management aspects to foster continuous improvements and total dedication to achieve strong quality results (Brudan, 2010). Generally, any form of HPO is an organization with a model composed of the below components:- Strategic approach, customer approach, leadership approach. All these approaches will exist within well defined processes and structures with values and beliefs that support the thriving of the same. In essence, HPO strive to establish a workable contact between the organization and the modern workforce which is mostly the Millennia generation (Kloot & Martin, 2000). II. Performance Management Systems This part of the aims at highlighting the various types of Performance Management Systems and how they relate to the different forms of generations at the work place with more focus directed to the millennial generation. a. Management driven performance management style This is a form of performance management where there a clearly stated direction by the overall management of the organization and they are geared to seeing that it actually takes place as stipulated. Such a form of performance management style is fruitful to the organization depending on the management style in place (Papalexandris & Galanaki, 2009). When an organization practice this form of performance management to achieve a given purpose entailing components of direction, dialogue, inclusion or relevancy and mission, such organizations are likely to achieve rapid results. This is because most organizations today survive on consistent, positive and sustained performance among their employees which is a product as a result of this form of performance management style (Kloot & Martin, 2000). Secondly a company practicing this form of performance and aligns its goals to the skills of the employees will achieve great results in form of the ease by which they are able to achieve their corporate goals. This type of performance management helps organizations is in the position of identifying their weaknesses hence correct them before they deprive the organization from achievement of their objectives. In this way it keeps the company under check. The main demerit is a situation when the company is not able to identify the skills of the employees and match them with the requirement a state which would result into a total failure of the system (Brudan, 2010). b. Graphic Ratings Scale A graphic rating scale is a performance management style where the all the traits of each employee should have after which they rate the workers on a number scale for each trait. This is meant to separate the employees in levels depending on their performance. This form of performance management style can be used to determine promotions and salary adjustments. The graphic rating scales as compared to the other styles has the following advantages:- they are less time consuming to develop and use to determine performance. They as well allow for quantitative comparison as they are also less costly to develop and hence can be developed for use by the HR so quickly (Winograd, & Hais, 2008). Apart from the merits it exhibits, the style also has demerits which discourages its use by most organizations. The factors considered for rating may not be uniform and hence requiring compromise by the employers before using the mode. Secondly, there is the perception that makes the use of the scale irrelevant as such compliment mean more to employees as compared to the number ratings (Latimer, 2002). The style also has no path for feedback process which is very important for most employers for the sake of effective and efficient decision making. Some of the scores by the graphic scales may also be misleading as the halo effect may end up skewing the evaluation. This form of performance management may not therefore be applicable with the millennial group of employees (Kowske, Rasch & Wiley, 2010). c. Multi rater This is a style used by employers to identify the strengths and development needs of the employees. It is a flexible online feedback mechanism and at times it is used in the format of the 360. It has the characteristics of combining a variety of perspectives about an individual’s performance hence giving the employer a balanced overview of the strengths of their employees as well as identifying the areas on the employee that must be reinforced (Latimer, 2002). Some of the advantages of this form of performance evaluation include; its ability to facilitate candid discussions about work behavior while soliciting honest feedback. This aspect is much valuable in the current employment environment where the employee gets fed up fast and is often on the run for newer and fresher opportunities, the generation millennia. The style also has the tendency of inspiring employee’s self awareness and urge to learn while encouraging goal setting and skill development (Winograd, & Hais, 2008). This style also aids comparison as the employees are able to view their behavior with regards to the other employees a factor which facilitates an improvement when it calls for the same. This style gives an all round view of the employee’s performance as the employee makes assessment of the performance of the employee based on their direct interests on the duties of the employee. Finally, the style has the tendency of improving on the organizations open culture while helping to maintain the company values an admired aspect by most of the employees in the generation millennia (Lowe, Levitt, & Wilson, 2008). The only and main demerit experienced by using this form of employee evaluation is the fact that the control of the organization is limited as most of the freedom is allowed to the employee. When this is corrected, it becomes among the best ways of ensuring employee performance is up to the required standards (Pavlov & Bourne, 2010). d. 360 Feedback It is also called the upward feedback and it is used by organizations to focus on how managers and their teams are able to work together and take actions geared towards improving. The process takes the mode of an employer, staff and peers taking a questionnaire and then the feedback is debriefed given the underlying purpose of this feedback is learning and development (Lowe, Levitt, & Wilson, 2008). One of the merits is that the program is organized hence enables organizations be in the position of developing more training programs to strengthen their employee’s weaknesses. The other advantage is the fact that it aids in the development of individual growth as it gives the employees a clear view of the consistency in the progress of their development (Pavlov & Bourne, 2010). The demerits are also quite a number with the first one being dishonest feedback by the program as the employees are normally quite uncomfortable providing honest feedbacks to their supervisors. Another demerit is consistent interpretation; this is derived from the interpretation of the former interpreter (Meier & Crocker, 2010). This is due to the fact that each rater has the ability of observing a different behavior causing a dilemma on the basis upon which the ratings are observed. e. Management By Objectives (MBO) This style is derived from the fact that organizations normally set objectives to motivate their employees hence help the growth of their companies. The goals are set throughout the organization and at all levels making it effective with the only challenge of consistent monitoring and updating (Moynihan, Pandey & Wright, 2011). One benefit of this is that it retrieves the objectives from the hands of the executives and upper level management hence involving all the employees in the achievements of the company objectives; this is because the employees are motivated about the whole of the planning process most so the most current workforce, the millennial. This method also calls for consistent monitoring of objectives and revision of plans to support the objectives an act which is highly commendable for the achievement of company goals (Winograd, & Hais, 2008). The detriments include the difficulty in determining when any part of the plan is not working well; this is because not a single person is involved in the setting of the objectives. Secondly, constantly updating the plans of management leaves the organization without clear goals and objectives which is quite of a blow to a modern organization (Moynihan, Pandey & Wright, 2011). If performance appraisal are conducted without using a well-planned system of performance management; a lot of frustration and confusion results. This therefore calls for the thorough understanding of the performance management system. Through the other styles not covered, managers are given the opportunity to encourage and support excellent performance for their employees and this includes the millennia employees. This is the part of the discrepancy that takes place as not most organizations are in agreement with this form of performance management systems (Winograd, & Hais, 2008). Most of the organizations tend to stick to the old ways of doing business an act that is discouraged from the discussion presented on the evolution of the employees through generations. Organizations must therefore strive to adopt the modern modes handling their employees and hence they must strive to always remain relevant. III. Perceptions of Performance Feedback a. perception Perception on performance as well as the same concept on performance has been an elaborate topic for most scholars as they embark on the studies of how people or the employers evaluate the performance of others called employees in their organizations. Perceptions exists from one party to the other party and in this case we will look at what the perception of the organization will be before we look at the same concept on managers and finally on the employees. Their impacts on the organization and most so on the generational employees will be a matter of fact to us. In an attempt to understand in a better way the factors which affect job attitudes and the way in which an employee behaves, researchers have devised ways into finding out how organizational factors and individuals factors in terms of perceptions have an influence in such relationships (Pavlov & Bourne, 2010). i. Organizational perceptions This is a product of such research because how the organization perceives its employees and how the employee views the organization will impacts in the output by the individuals. This may be beneficial or detrimental to the organization (Winograd, & Hais, 2008). Such perceptions will have an effect in the relationship that will exist between job attitudes and how the employee behaves in the organization. Organizational perception is therefore the study of how the organization and its leadership will impact on the behaviors within the organization hence the outcomes in terms of job performance and the various national cultures (Pulakos, Mueller-Hanson, O’Leary & Meyrowitz, 2012). The organization perception will influence how the employees behave depending on the kind or the generation of the employees. The millennial will not tolerate a stagnating kind of organization hence the faster the organization realizes such employees in the organization, the better for them to grow. Therefore, how we view the organization as well as how the organization views us is crucial for both the personal development of the individual employee as well as the achievement of the organization’s goals. ii. Managers perception This entails how the management of the organization views the organization plus all the resources including human resource upon which they are accorded custody by the shareholders. Their perception will lead to the success in running the organization or the failure of the firm. Perception is what they develop and hence it is advisable that they have a positive perception if not in all then on the human resource. They are required to understand how to incorporate all the organization’s resources to help in the achievement of the overall goals of the organization. Managers should always act to motivate the employees to work towards the overall achievement of the organization’s goals. They should be sensitive on how they handle the millennial in the organizations given that they are quite a sensitive lot in the organization and if handled wrongly, they are likely to lose those (Pulakos, Mueller-Hanson, O’Leary & Meyrowitz, 2012). iii. Employee perception This is now very important because it is the employees who are the drivers towards the achievement of the organizational goals. They input their physical energies and skills to help in the overall achievement of the organizational objectives. In the earlier years the lot of employees falling in the category of the baby boomers used to stick to the organization for longer even persevering the hard times (Pavlov & Bourne, 2010). This is different with the current crop of employees since they would leave immediately if the conditions of work do not appeal them any longer. The organization must therefore strive to provide the employee with aspects which will make their perception be positive of the organization. This in a way will ensure that the organization is able to reap the full benefits of the employees they hire at a given time. The cost of hiring an employee is enormous and hence the need to recoup such a cost before the employee decides to quit to a different organization for any reason whatsoever (Rao, 2006). iv. Perception and their impacts on the organization Perception is a way in which an individual will arrange and interpret their sensory thought to give meaning of their surrounding and it has a critical role in any form of organization as it guides the actions of each and every individual in the organization (Winograd, & Hais, 2008). Perception can hence affect the organization when the employees are not in the position of perceiving the organization’s objectives and goals well. This will ensure that they are not working towards the achievement of the same hence the organization will experience a gap of what should be done and what is actually done. Another scenario is during the enacting of any change in the organization (Pulakos, Mueller-Hanson, O’Leary & Meyrowitz, 2012). At such times the employees must be made to be aware of such changes so that they are able to perceive and internalize such transformations since without this the organization is likely to suffer from the impacts of the resistance to such changes. The impacts that perception can have or the organization depend on the kinds of individuals that the organization is dealing with hence the operations of the company can either be smooth or difficult (Rao, 2006). b. Performance Management in a high performing culture Performance management is the “Achilles’ heel” of human capital management; often viewed as ineffective by employees and managers alike. Despite the time, effort and resources devoted to it, performance management rarely achieves its intended purpose; improving performance (SHRM. 2011). The management of employees is the key part of effective leadership and research has it those managers who engage in effective performance management produce extraordinary results as compared to those who do not conduct the same. This is a sure fact that performance management of the employees can surely lead to the formation of high performing organizations (Winograd, & Hais, 2008). From research we have been able to witness organizations who record 50% less staff turnover, about 30% customer satisfaction and 40% employee commitment hence doubling the net profits. This is mainly as a result of the performance management by the organization. When asked what purpose performance management should serve in organizations, employees (Myers & Sadaghiani, 2010), managers and HR professionals alike cite important outcomes such as improving performance effectiveness and results, developing employees, and facilitating communication and information exchange between employees and managers. In order to build high performing culture in organizations, performance management acts to motivates change, lay foundations for success while sustaining employee behavior (Gruman & Saks, 2011). Finally, they act to monitor and improve on the progress made by the employees in an organization intended to be a high performing organization. When it comes to performance management not everyone in an organizational context is able to present unbiased opinion of what their view is. While some people will say that it impacts on improvement of the organization as a whole some will say it is a mere administrative function in the organization which merely helps the managers in decision making. This hence calls for the leveraging of the concept with regards to performance in the organization. These arguments are all meant to strengthen the culture of high performance which is quite of a virtue in any high performing organization (SHRM. 2011). According to the Society for Human Resource Management (2011), performance management is not and should never be an afterthought in any form of organizational context. Just like the management of any organizational resource, performance of any employees must be managed. In this way we are able to know the areas within the employee workforce which would need rectification, those in need of motivation to perform hence such functions are among the important functions that ought to be undertaken by any manager hence must never be disregarded (Myers & Sadaghiani, 2010). The argument that performance management is not important and should be disregarded is a lie and must never be given an ear. This is because apart from the act being a way of developing a performing organization, they also give the employees a way of progressing in their careers in terms of provided growth paths. This act well conducted will make the millennial generation of employees experience a motivation in how they conduct and consider retaining their jobs in cases where such jobs hold more goodies for them (Espinoza, 2012). c. High Performing Culture Organizations From the interview excerpt by the Google HR, it is obvious that Google become a high performing organization by using people analytics to reinvent their HR. this give Google the title of the only organization in the planet which uses people analytics to manage itself and achieve the title of a High Performance Organization (Gruman & Saks, 2011). This is also derived from the fact that continuous innovation requires a new kind of people management and as well firms need to shift to data-based people management decisions among other strategies employed by Google (Espinoza, 2012). From excerpts from interview with Microsoft HR, we realize that for it to achieve the status of a high performing organization, they had to make the HR as their strategic partner. This makes it easy to fill the gaps between the top leadership and the employees who are the key to achievement of the organization’s goals. All the high performing organizations among them Deltek and Nike all take a strategic approach when it comes to their HR. as opposed to the low performing organizations the high performers lays much effort on measuring the performances of the workforces hence making the Human Resource as a strategic partner in the achievement of their goals (Rao, 2006). In Google for example, the HR function is branded as the people operations since the management of the company has learned to demand from the employees data driven decisions in all the departments of the company. In this sense, the HR is endowed with leadership and management roles (Pulakos, Mueller-Hanson, O’Leary & Meyrowitz, 2012). A retention algorithm is employed to determine which among the employees are likely to bring to the organization a retention problem while at the same time embracing the predictive modeling approach. These improve diversity to the organization making ease in innovation due to a conglomeration of a group of talent in the same place (Espinoza, 2012). Active performance management systems have an integrated approach to ensure that low performers are systematically displaced out of the system. This to a large extent go in handy with the perceptions of the performance feedback since it is through the feedbacks from the performance tools like the 360 feedback that the management is well advised on how to conduct a way of weeding out employees who have consistently not indicated improvement on their performance. Effective performance ensures this role by first, aligning individual performance objectives in align with the business goals (Gruman & Saks, 2011). This is due to the costs of acquiring, inducting, managing and training the employees hence the need to ensure that the efforts of performance of any given individual are directed towards the goals of the company. Lack of such alignments cots the organization by not enabling it in achieving its goals optimally and hence employees causing such costs are automatically weeded out (de Waal, 2002). Apart from the above mentioned mode, the organizations also check the performance vs. the strategic goals and see if they are suitable to realizing such strategic objectives. This makes the organization to find out the categories of the goals and those which are more suitable than the others. Those whose performances are not in any way relevant to the strategic goals are taken out of the system logically. After the alignment with the objectives the next step becomes the differentiation of the different categories and how they are managed and supported to achieve the business objectives (Myers & Sadaghiani, 2010). Then the way to manage efficiently the identified performers is determined through the laid down procedures. The resources used here are normally considered a waste for many organizations but it is necessary that this function is conducted for the sake of the motivation of the solid performers to continue their performance even more without undue constraint. The poor performers identified are also accorded a good send off as their costs may be less severe than their retention costs as their retention costs will extend to acts such as customer disrespect, poor team spirit and extra management time on them (de Waal, 2002). IV. Aligning performance management with the needs of the millennial generation Millennial generation, a generation that is born between the 1970s and 2000 are a generation with the characteristic of wanting to challenge the status quo. They are exposed to technology more that the pregenerational counterparts and they are much more focused on work life balance than any another generation witnessed in the past. This causes a rift at the workplace most so with the HR which is mainly still composed of the old generation and hence they find it quite hard to actively reduce the intergenerational conflicts (Gruman & Saks, 2011). This if not handled well is likely to lead to massive employee turnover of the current generations looking for greener pastures. The attributes of the millennial such as the need to always receive information immediately has to be respected always; therefore, the lag of information sharing and communication calls for active performance management through the development, implementation and evaluation of the performance management systems. This procedure will ensure that the frequency upon which performance management is conducted is increased and the preferences of the millennial generation of instant communication, gratification are all met in good time to help in minimization of time wastage. The procedures above are the building blocks of effective and efficient management of building blocks giving the millennial employee room for career advancement through the established steps (Pavlov & Bourne, 2010). The millennial employee is quite a dynamic individual and needs the efforts of the whole organization to satisfy their needs and the organizational needs hence guarantee their continued existence or hinder their instant movement (Myers & Sadaghiani, 2010). This is because employee turnover is a concept which is normally costly to most organization if not all. Millennial urge to grow is much bigger than any other ambition and this is the main driver for the constant movement to organizations in the search for where their needs can be achieved hence if the need can all be met in the current organization. It is assured that they can stay in such an organization for some time before considering a move. The contrast of the group is that they would stay if their growth is evident in the current organization as opposed to when this fundamental aspect is ignored (Geddes & Linnehan, 1996). The millennial employee is a delicate individual and must be handled with great care for the sake of prosperity of the organization. The organizations will ensure this by shaping their functions if form of operations and the structures to accommodate such changes in the organization expected from either individuals whether millennial or any other. The way in which employees interact must also be tolerant to all the generations at the work place because this will make it possible for the smooth running of the activities in the organization for the achievement of the company goals (Gruman & Saks, 2011). Conclusion Performance Management takes on multiple shapes and sizes in differing organizations and they are indeed different. Additionally, the firms with a high performing culture as expected utilize performance management methodologies and tools to their benefit a case which is not evident with the firms which are lower performers (Geddes & Linnehan, 1996). However, performance management approaches must be appropriate for the firm’s size and business maturity. This is to ensure that the costs which would otherwise add onto the firm’s burden would be reduced drastically. Further, as Millennial enter and continue to dominate the mix of the workforce, organizations should prepare to modify their Performance Management strategy to accommodate the impatient parties (Gruman & Saks, 2011). The performance management process and systems should align with the needs/desires of millennial group to make sure they stay to help the firms realize their objectives. References Brudan, A. (2010). Rediscovering performance management: systems, learning and integration. Measuring Business Excellence, 109-123. de Waal, A. A. (2002). The Power of World Class Performance Management: Use It! Measuring Business Excellence, 9-19. Espinoza, C. (2012). Millennial integration challenges millennial face in the workplace and what they can do about them. Yellow Springs, Ohio: Antioch University. Geddes, D., & Linnehan, F. (1996). Exploring the Dimensionality of Positive and Negative Performance Feedback. Communication Quarterly, 326-344. Gruman, J. A., & Saks, A. M. (2011). Performance Management and Employee Engagement. Human Resource Management Review, 123-136. Huselid, M. A. (1995). The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Turnover, Productivity, and Corporate Financial Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 635-872. Kloot, L., & Martin, J. (2000). Strategic performance management: A balanced approach to performance management issues in local government. Management Accounting Research, 231-251. Kowske, B. J., Rasch, R., & Wiley, J. (2010). Millennials’ (Lack of) Attitude Problem: An Empirical Examination of Generational Effects on Work Attitudes. J Bus Psychol, 265-279. Latimer, D. (2002). The Cost of IT Staff Turnover: A Quantitative Approach. Boulder, CO: ECAR. Lowe, D., Levitt, K. J., & Wilson, T. (2008). Solutions for Retaining Generation Y in the Workplace. Business Renaissance Quarterly, 43-57. Meier, J., & Crocker, M. (2010). Generation Y in the Workforce: Managerial Challenges. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, 68-78. Moynihan, D. P., Pandey, S. K., & Wright, B. E. (2011). Setting the Table: How Transformational Leadership Fosters Performance Information Use. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 143-164. Myers, K. K., & Sadaghiani, K. (2010). Millennials in the Workplace: A Communication Perspective on Millennials’ Organizational Relationships and Performance. J Bus Psychol, 225-238. Papalexandris, N., & Galanaki, E. (2009). Leadership's impact on employee engagement: Differences among entrepreneurs and professional CEOs. Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, 365-385. Pavlov, A., & Bourne, M. (2010). Explaining the effects of performance measurement on performance: An organizational routines perspective. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 101-122. Piper, L. E. (2008). The Generation-Y Workforce in Health Care: The New Challenge for Leadership. The Health Care Manager, 98-103. Pulakos, E. D. (2004). Performance Management: A Roadmap for Developing, Implementing, and Evaluating Performance Management Systems. Alexandria, VA: SHRM. Pulakos, E. D., Mueller-Hanson, R. A., O’Leary, R. S., & Meyrowitz, M. M. (2012). Building a High-Performance Culture: A Fresh Look at Performance Management. Alexandria, VA: SHRM Foundation. Rao, M. P. (2006). A performance measurement system using a profit-linked multi-factor measurement model. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 362-379. SHRM. (2011). SHRM Poll: Intergenerational Conflict in the Workplace. Alexandria, VA: SHRM. Society for Human Resource Management. (2011). SHRM Poll: Intergenerational Conflict in the Workplace. Alexandria, VA: SHRM. Winograd, M., & Hais, M. D. (2008). Millennial Makeover MySpace, YouTube, & the Future of American Politics.. Piscataway: Rutgers University Press. Read More