nhsbt management consultancy report 14035613

MBA Management consultancy projectNHS Blood and Transplant

Word count: 9961/152114035613

Abstract1.

The design and implementation of an Innovation Lab to identify FLM support requirement.2. An exploration of an effective way to measure manager’s performance and behavior in the

NHSBT.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................................2

NHS BLOOD & TRANSPLANT BACKGROUND..........................................................................................................3

Table 1: Core values, behaviours and expectations...........................................................................................5

Figure 1: UK Health & Care system map.............................................................................................................7

Project Background................................................................................................................................................8

Figure 2: Summary outcome of survey................................................................................................................8

Figure 3: Engagement Scores across the NHSBT directorates..........................................................................9

Figure 4: Survey response rate by directorate.......................................................................................................10

Figure 5: Your Voice (YV) results corporate focus action areas.....................................................................11

My Project Objectives...........................................................................................................................................12

Figure 6: YVOA project plan phases...................................................................................................................12

The role of Line Managers...................................................................................................................................14

Figure 7: The people management-performance causal chain (Purcell and Hutchinson, 2007a)........................15

Figure 8: Expected Line management (LM) activities within the NHSBT......................................................16

Data Collection Method........................................................................................................................................16

PROJECT OBJECTIVE 1: THE INNOVATION LAB EVENT (ILE)...........................................................................19

Innovation Lab Agenda design...........................................................................................................................19

Figure 9: Innovation Lab Event Agenda............................................................................................................19

Implementation Plan............................................................................................................................................22

Challenges to the Implementation of the ILE..................................................................................................23

Outcomes of the Innovation Lab Event.............................................................................................................23

Figure 10: Stages of a typical performance management system (Torrington et al, 2010).........................24

MBA Management consultancy project | NHS Blood and Transplant

Figure 11: NHS Leadership Qualities Framework............................................................................................26

Recommendations on the support required by middle managers.............................................................27

Recommendations to the other parts of the YVOA Project plan areas.......................................................28

The Innovation Lab: Future benefits................................................................................................................30

PROJECT OBJECTIVE 2: EXPLORATION ON HOW TO EFFECTIVELY MEASURE MANAGER’S

PERFORMANCE AND BEHAVIOUR..........................................................................................................................31

The Idea...................................................................................................................................................................32

Template recommendation................................................................................................................................33

Table 2: Recommended template for Appraisal...............................................................................................33

Table 3: Rating scale numerical equivalent......................................................................................................34

Table 4: Sample template for senior manager..................................................................................................35

Table 5: Comparison between current and proposed appraisal system........................................................36

Expected benefits..................................................................................................................................................36

Possible Challenges..............................................................................................................................................37

Implementation suggestions: Next steps.........................................................................................................37

BENEFITS OF LINE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS BETWEEN SENIOR MANAGERS AND FLM WITHIN

THE NHSBT.................................................................................................................................................................38

CONCLUSION...............................................................................................................................................................39

APPENDIX...................................................................................................................................................................41

Reflections on Management Consultation engagement with the NHS Blood and Transplant...................41

Reading List.................................................................................................................................................................45


INTRODUCTIONThis report was prepared by a MBA student of the University of the West of England under the

management consultancy dissertation project route which sits within the partnership between the

University and organisations targeted at producing better prepared students into the Labour

market by exposing them to real life business cases.

This report was prepared for the Organisation Workforce Development team of the NHS Blood and

Transplant with two main objectives:

Project objective 1: Focuses on the design and implementation of an Innovation Lab Event

for middle managers within the NHSBT with the aim of identifying the middle managers

concern and requirement for support on a day to day basis.

Project objective 2: Focuses on an exploration on how to effectively measure manager’s

performance and behaviour within the NHSBT.

The consultancy project was for a duration of four months (June –September 2015).


NHS BLOOD & TRANSPLANT BACKGROUND

In 2005, NHS Blood and Transplant was established following the merger of NBS and UK Transplant

also including Bio Products Laboratory (BPL). The NHSBT comprises of nine directorates and

fourteen local blood and transplant offices across the UK. Four of the directorates represent the

core services that the NHSBT renders.

Blood supply directorate

Clinical Directorate

Diagnostics and therapeutic services directorate

Organ donation and transplantation Directorate

The other five units are support shared resources for the whole organisation

Workforce Directorate

Business transformation services Directorate

Communications Directorate

Finance Directorate

Logistics Directorate

In the most recent 5 years, the NHSBT has undergone a number of organisational changes which

include:

Change in leadership and work styles of the senior management

Restructuring of the Organisation Development team and logistics team

Frontline employees work process redesign

Cost reduction initiatives

These organisational changes were aimed at improving the performance and effectiveness of the

NHSBT as a whole. The NHSBT, is a part of the health and care system in the UK and acts as a

service provider to the NHS. This status requires the NHSBT to align its ‘Core competence’ and

‘leadership framework’ to that of the larger NHS of which it is a constituent.

One of the recent continuous change is the Agenda for Change system that allocates posts to set pay

bands, using the Job Evaluation Scheme. The pay system is designed to:

deliver fair pay for non-medical staff based on the principle of 'equal pay for work of equal

value'

provide better links between pay and career progression using the Knowledge and Skills

Framework


Harmonise terms and conditions of service such as annual leave, hours and sick pay, and

work done in 'unsocial hours.

For the NHSBT this meant job consolidation and redefining of the roles of the employees. It also led

to changes in the policies to create a harmonised outlook across the NHS.

The NHSBT has identified its core values as centred on the following three value statements:

Caring about our donors, their families, our staff and the patients we serve

Being expert in meeting the needs of our customers and partners

Providing quality products, services and experiences for donors, staff and patients

The core behavioural guide framework, details the behaviours expected of each employee based on

their hierarchy within the organisation and integrates it with the three values of the NHSBT. The

hierarchy within the NHSBT is categorised into

Service deliverer: someone who delivers a service, but has no people management

responsibilities. This will include those who are providing supervisory support.

Manager: A Manager is someone with people management responsibilities such as those

responsible for Personal Development and Performance Reviews (PDPRs).

Senior leader: A Senior Leader is someone who is a Director or Assistant Director.

This framework connects the values of the NHSBT to the behavioural expectations from every

employee based on the categorisation above.

Table 1: Core values, behaviours and expectations

Our values: We live these

values through

our behaviour, by:

This means:

Caring

We care about our

donors, their families,

our staff and the patients

we serve

Communicating We personalise our messages, being honest

and engaging in the way we communicate, and

use technology to help us deliver our messages

most effectively.

Collaborating We listen to everyone and work together to

resolve problems. We understand our role in


saving and improving lives and take collective

responsibility for our vision.

Expert

We are expert in meeting

the needs of our external

and internal customers

and partners

Leading We lead by example, trusting others to lead,

holding each other to account and making the

right decisions based on insight.

Being customer

focused

We truly understand our customer and meet

their specific requirements. We work in

partnership with them maintaining a

professional approach towards all customers.

Quality

We provide quality of

service, product and

experience

Performing We provide opportunities for development,

continuously measuring and improving

performance while finding time to celebrate

high performance.

Innovating We encourage new suggestions and calculated

risks, working at the right pace to deliver the

right ideas while learning from and improving

on less successful ideas.

Because the NHSBT is part of the Health care system, it is also heavily regulated to ensure that it

follows laid down regulations strictly, in all its production processes.

Although the NHSBT is not part of the civil service, it gets a partial grant from the Department of

Health. The rest of its budget is funded by revenue generated from the sale of the blood, tissue and

organ products it provides to its customers (majorly the NHS Hospitals). Its responsibilities include:

Promoting blood, tissue and organ donation to the public

Managing the supply of blood to hospitals in England and North Wales

Managing organ transplantation in the UK

Managing the British Bone Marrow Register

Working with hospital colleagues to promote the safe and appropriate use of blood

Providing a range of tissues and other services to hospitals

Provision of a wide range of diagnostic services


Figure 1: UK Health & Care system map

The current staff-strength within the NHSBT is about 6000 employees and about 800 of these are

middle managers (Front Line managers FLM), the current employee management system does not

accurately capture the actual number hence the estimations.

In the most recent strategy report 2015-20, the NHSBT made the following comments to reinforce

its keenness to provide adequate support for its workforce.

‘How our people feel about working at NHSBT is very important to us. We believe that the care our

people give our donors and patients and the service our customers receive is driven by their personal

engagement and wellbeing at work. We measure how our people feel through our Your Voice survey

and follow it up with clearly communicated action plans.’ (NHS Blood and Transplant Strategic Plan

2015-20)


The CIPD also defined engagement as ‘a combination of commitment to the organisation and its

values plus a willingness to help out colleagues. (Organisational citizenship, CIPD 2009).

Project Background

For the first time in the history of the NHSBT it had successfully carried out a full-census survey of

employees on a national level with all its nine directorates taking part at the same time. Although

the NHSBT had carried out several surveys in batches and at different time within its different

directorates its goal to capture “the voice” of its employees nationally was achieved in December

2014 through the “Your Voice project”.

The survey covered all nine Directorates within the NHSBT with a response rate of 68% of the

workforce. The survey highlighted a number of negative results which were unsatisfactory to the

Directors of the NHSBT, which they seek to address and improve.

Positive Outcomes Negative Outcomes

91% of responses agreed their PDPR

helped to agree clear objectives for

their work

8% less of employees, compared to the collation

of the 2012 survey results, think that

communication between areas of NHSBT is

effective.

75% take part regularly in team

meetings

41% say immediate manager always asks their

opinion

90% would recommend being a blood

donor or joining the organ Donation

(ODR)

36% say that communication between senior

leaders is effective

76% agree that their manager takes a

positive interest in their wellbeing

A 9% increase in the number of people who have

experienced harassment, bullying or abuse

96% know the behaviour that is

expected of them at work

89% put themselves under pressure to come to

work when feeling unwell.

Figure 2: Summary outcome of survey

Although the survey showed a significantly high opinion (among the workforce) of the PDPR

helping to clear objectives and the presence of regular team meetings, the average engagement

level of the employees across all the nine directorates which was 3.56 (for the 68% that responded


to the survey) which was lower than the expectations of the CEO (Although no actual targets had

been communicated regarding this).

The range for the measurement of employee engagement was on a scale of 0 - 5 with zero being the

lowest and 5 the highest level of engagement. The engagement levels across the different

directorates are highlighted in Figure 4 below. The Workforce directorate had the highest

engagement of 4.06 while the Blood supply directorate and logistics directorate scored 3.29 which

were the lowest among all the directorates.

Figure 3: Engagement Scores across the NHSBT directorates

The scores indicated above, are average score computed over the total responses gotten from each

directorate. The survey response rate per directorate is shown below.

Directorate Score Approximate number

of employees

Blood Supply 62% 3,092

Business Transformation 75% 162

Clinical 80% 348

Communications 95% 58

Diagnostics and Therapeutic services 72% 785

Finance 79% 188

Logistics 54% 339


Organ Donation and Transplantation 84% 413

Workforce Directorate 98% 136

Figure 4: Survey response rate by directorate

In 2007, the NHS National Workforce Projects team defined engagement as: ‘a measure of how

people connect in their work and feel committed to their organisation and its goals. People who are

highly engaged in an activity feel excited and enthusiastic about their role, say time passes quickly at

work, devote extra effort to the activity, identify with the task and describe themselves to others in the

context of their task (doctor, nurse, NHS manager), think about the questions or challenges posed by

the activity during their spare moments (for example when travelling to and from work), resist

distractions, find it easy to stay focused and invite others into the activity or organisation (their

enthusiasm is contagious)’. (NHS National Workforce Projects 2007).

The overall indicator of staff engagement was calculated using the responses to nine individual

questions which made up three key findings related to staff engagement. The questions used to

calculate the scores are:

1. ‘Staff ability to contribute towards improvement at work’

I am able to make suggestions to improve my area of work

There are frequent opportunities for me to show initiative in my role

I am able to make improvements happen in my area of work

2. ‘Staff recommendation of the trust as a place to work or receive treatment’

Care of patients / donors / service users is NHSBT’s top priority

I would recommend NHSBT as a place to work

If a friend of relative needed to use the service, I would be happy with the service

provided by NHSBT

3. ‘Staff motivation at work’

I look forward to going to work

I feel enthusiastic about my job

Time passes quickly when I am working

Firstly, three scale summary scores were calculated by assigning numbers to a series of responses,

and calculating the average score.


For example, for Question 2, staff were asked the extent to which they agreed with the following

three statements:

“Care of patients / donors / service users is NHSBT’s top priority”,

“I would recommend NHSBT as a place to work”, and

“If a friend of relative needed to use the service, I would be happy with the service provided

by NHSBT”.

If they answered “strongly disagree”, they would score 1; if they answered, “disagree”, they would

score 2; if they answered, “neither agree nor disagree”, they would score 3; if they answered

“agree”, they would score 4; and if they answered “strongly agree”, they would score 5. If a

respondent were to score 4, 3 and 5 for the three statements then their average score would be (4 +

3 + 5) = 12 / 3 = 4.00.

The analysis of the survey results, carried out by the Organisation Workforce Development (OWD)

team, was captured under three corporate areas of focus, which are:

Improving communication between the different parts of the NHSBT

Line manager capabilities and behaviour improvement

Reduction in the amount of employees experiencing Harassment, Bullying and Abuse (HBA)

from colleagues, team leaders or managers.

Figure 5: Your Voice (YV) results corporate focus action areas

Middle Manager

Capability

Line Managers capability

Harassment Bullying

and Abuse

Comm. between different

parts of the NHSBT


My Project ObjectivesIn response to the survey results and the analysis by the Organisation and Workforce Development

(OWD) team a project team was formed to handle the survey fallouts tagged “Your Voice Our

Action” which has a seven point agenda as shown below.

Figure 6: YVOA project plan phases

My assignment as a member of the team, Project objective 1, was to design and execute the

Innovation Lab event for middle managers. The primary aim of the event was to identify the middle

managers concerns and requirements for support on a day-today basis.

My project objective 2: is to conduct an exploration on how to effectively measure manager’s

performance and behaviour and make recommendations based on my findings.

Managing - the NHSBT Way, aim, to launch and integrate The NHSBT Way (CLEAR: Caring, Listening, Enthuse, Ask, Respond) into the Service and integrate it into managers’ PDPR. July '15

The Innovation Lab: aim to develop and hold an “Innovation lab event” for middle managers to identify their concerns and requirements for support on a day-to-day basis August '15.

The Managers Induction. To create and implement the Passport for Management – an induction tool for new managers and a development tool for existing managers. September

Eliminating HBA: To hold HBA Workshops (Forum Theatres) in all main NHSBT sites across the country. September '15

The Middle Managers Summit. To design and hold a national summit for middle managers centred around Management – The NHSBT Way and its constituent parts: Caring, Listening, Enthusing, Asking and Responding. October '15

Your Voice temperature checks. To identify suitable target groups for Your Voice temperature check surveys. November '15

E-learning toolkit for Middle Managers. , To develop a comprehensive e-learning toolkit to support middle managers in the workplace and publish it on The Shine Academy. November '15.


The ILE plan emanated from the ‘Line manager capabilities and behaviour improvement’ section of

the three corporate areas of action from the results of the Your Voice survey.

The survey results for the question relating to line managers capability according to staff group is

shown below.

Formula: ((“% strongly agree” x 2) + (“% agree” x 1)) - ((“% strongly disagree” x 2) + (“%

disagree” x 1))

This formula produces a score which indicates the opinions of the workforce within the categorised

functions in the tables. A score of 200 indicates that all respondents strongly agree with the

statement and -200 that all respondents strongly disagree with the statement. Positive scores

indicate that respondents (as a group) are, generally, agreeing with the statement. Negative scores

indicate that respondents (as a group) are, generally, not agreeing with the statement. Functions

where more than 15% of the respondents “strongly disagree” with a statement may find this a

significant barrier when attempting to implement changes within that function.

My immediate manager encourages team work

Rank Staff Group ScorePercentage agreeing with the Question

-- - +/- + ++

3 Admin & Clerical and Managers 83 3 8 25 31 33

6 Ancillary & Maintenance -35 26 20 24 21 8

1 Medical 114 0 0 26 32 41

2 Nursing 101 2 5 20 34 38

4 Other Collection Staff 52 8 11 26 31 24

5 Scientific & Technical 47 7 13 26 32 21

My immediate manager gives me clear feedback about my work


-- - +/- + ++

2= Admin & Clerical and Managers 60 4 14 28 26 28


2= Medical 60 0 9 47 21 24

1 Nursing 78 3 9 28 27 33




My immediate manager asks for my opinion before they make a decision that affects my

work


-- - +/- + ++



1 Medical 84 3 12 15 38 32

3 Nursing 47 5 17 30 24 25

5 Other Collection Staff -48 27 25 26 13 9

4 Scientific & Technical -3 16 21 26 22 14

My immediate manager is supportive


-- - +/- + ++



1 Medical 138 0 0 6 50 44

2 Nursing 110 2 5 20 27 46



The groups with the lowest scores (highlighted in yellow) are the more operational roles and the

assumption was that the ‘immediate line managers’ being referred to within these operational roles

were mainly middle managers as they interface more with the operational staff (Assumption 1).

The role of Line ManagersThe manager role within the NHSBT hierarchy refers to two levels of managers, the Middle

managers (FLM) who manage the larger portion of the workforce and senior managers, who

manage the middle managers. For the purpose of this report the term middle managers and Front

Line Manager (FLM) would be used interchangeably.


Line management behaviour is fundamental to delivering the performance benefits of good HR

policies as line managers can significantly influence employee job satisfaction, commitment and

discretionary behaviour by the way in which they implement and enact HR policies and show

leadership. (Truss, 2001; Purcell et al, 2009).

The causal chain suggests that it is the enactment that the line managers give to intended practices

that determines the experiences that the employees have which determines the employees attitude

behaviour at the workplace.

A positive experience with the line manager’s enactment of the HR practices is therefore expected

to produce positive employee attitude which in turn leads to positive employee behaviour which

has a positive impact on performance outcomes and vice versa.

Figure 7: The people management-performance causal chain (Purcell and Hutchinson, 2007a)

It is based on the causal chain that the assumption that poorly designed or inadequate HR policies

can be positively enhanced by good line management in the same way as good HR practices can be

negated by poor line management (Purcell and Hutchinson 2007).

It was necessary to clarify however if the ‘assumption 1’, encompassed the whole picture regarding

the line manager’s capabilities. One of the limitations notice regarding the Your Voice survey was

the inability to sort the responses based on hierarchy (service deliverer, middle manager, senior

Intended HR Practices

Actual HR Practices

(Line manager

enactment)

Experienced practices

Employee attitudes (affective

commitnebt)

Employee behavior

(discretion)

Performance Outcomes


manager and senior leader), hence I could not ascertain what the middle manager respondents felt

about their own manager. Also it was unclear the number of employees from each hierarchy group

that participated in the survey and also who employees considered to be their immediate line

manager.

To moderate the effect of this limitation and help the interpretation of the survey, the Innovation

Lab was designed to run interactive session which were intended to allow discussions around how

managers experienced the role and the support (which include their line mangers role modelling,

mentoring and coaching support) available.

Another assumption among the senior leaders of the NHSBT (as communicated by the OWD NHSBT

and interview sessions) was that a good percentage of the three corporate areas of action related

directly to poor line management by the middle-managers.

Figure 8: Expected Line management (LM) activities within the NHSBT

Data Collection Method

For the purpose of this project data was gathered from June 01 –August 21 ’25 using different

methods.

No questionnaires were administered in the data collection phase as the just concluded ‘Your Voice’

Survey 2014 results, which was the foundation from which the project emanated, encompassed

enough scope of data required for my analysis on

employee engagement results and

Results on the immediate line manager.

A review of the relevant section within the survey was however done to understand the results on

which the project was based.

CEO

SENIOR LEADERS

SENIOR MANAGERS

MIDDLE MANAGERS

SERVICE DELIVERERS

LM

LM

LM

LM


One-on-one Interviews: The interviews were used to collate information on what the OWD, felt were

the main challenges of the middle managers. A total of 6 interviews were held with three senior

leaders, one senior manager and two middle managers within the Workforce directorate.

The Workforce team directly supports the workforce on human resource related activities and it

was important to get better understanding of the reasons behind the assumptions of the three

corporate areas of focus. The information collected from the interviews were also useful in helping

to gain a better understanding of the challenges faced by middle managers from the OWD point of

view.

Focus group – The Innovation Lab event was used as a forum to gather information from the middle

managers on their day to day experiences as line managers and their experience with the

performance management process with their line manager.

The aim of this was to clarify the existence and level of effectiveness of the line management

relationship between the FLM and the senior manager. This clarification confirmed (little or no in

most circumstance) performance management process going on. This provided evidence for the

need to widen the focus on middle manager to also encompass senior managers in the line

management ineffectiveness discuss.

A total of forty-three invites were sent to managers across the NHSBT, thirty-eight from the Filton

office and five from other locations. Eleven managers attended while twelve others showed interest

in attending but were unavailable on the date. Ten others responded with their unavailability due

to leave or other scheduled meetings while the others were already on leave.

The limitation to the Filton office was as a result of the resourcing challenge experienced in August

across the different directorates. A significant number of employees had their leave scheduled for

August and this put a strain on the number of employees that could be released for the event.

Online research - This method was used to gain better understanding of the NHSBT and its

responsibility as a constituent of the NHS and other bodies such as NHS Employers. Public

documents were reviewed to gain better insights into the external expectations from its external

stakeholders.


A review of internal documents, policies and resources provided information on the vast support

already made available to all employees by the workforce directorate. This review was particularly

useful as it provided insight into the volume of resources available and its use by the employees.

Literature review around performance management, the causal chain effect, leadership and

management, HR managing from the outside-in, devolution of HRM to the line and articles on

current trends in performance management was carried out to support my recommendations. This

was required to guide my interpretations, observations and reviews to ensure that the

recommendations made are appropriate and evidenced based.


PROJECT OBJECTIVE 1: THE INNOVATION LAB EVENT (ILE)

The Innovation Lab event was planned as a five hour event to take place at the Filton Bristol office

of the NHSBT. The number of hours allocated allowed for the aim of the event to incorporate

gathering middle managers opinions, real experiences and suggestions on topics designed to feed

into other aspects of the YVOA project plan. It also allowed information gathering for my project

objective 2 (how to effectively measure the performance and behaviour of managers).

In order to incorporate the other outcome goals, four interactive sessions were designed to collect

information from the middle managers with the intention of incorporating the findings as

recommendations to feedback into

The other six points project plan of the YVOA.

My second project objective

The Innovation Lab Event was portrayed to participants as a forum for developing Employee

thoughts-led initiatives. The expectation was that the finding would feed directly into the initiative

currently in the pipeline to be deployed to make it more relevant to the workforce.

Innovation Lab Agenda design

In designing the agenda for the Lab event it was essential to note that the aim was not to train the

middle managers but to gather their experiences and to identify and best practices that are

currently being used within the operational workforce with the aim of spreading the same among

the participants.

Figure 9: Innovation Lab Event Agenda

Interactive session 1: Areas or aspect of your work

responsibility where you experience challenges

Interactive session 2: Your experience with the PDPR process, as an appraisee

and/or an appraiser

Interactive session 3: Employee’ acts and action, what would you rather it

were?

Interactive session 4: Your awareness, use and

the impact of resources provided by the Workforce

team (for TLD purposes)

Guest Speaker: The role of Front Line Managers in HRM


The content of the agenda were

Guest speaker presentation on the role of FLM in delivering effective people management

Four interactive discussion sessions.

Guest Speaker: The role of Front Line Mangers in delivering effective people management.

Aim: To stimulate the minds of the participants to the role they should play in ensuring effective

people management within the NHSBT.

There had been several concerns raised during my interviews of the lack of understanding of the

middle managers responsibility regarding the line management responsibility. The presentation by

the guest speaker was incorporated into the agenda in response to this.

Interactive Session 1: Areas or aspect of your work responsibility where you experience

challenges.

Probing questions

o What was your experience moving into a managerial role within the NHSBT?

o Is leadership required in your role as a manager?

o Do you feel well equipped to handle the people responsibilities within your role?

These questions was asked to get the participants talking about their different job role in order to

highlight the area were they faced the most challenges and to collect information about their

experience of the organisational support (including line manager support) that might have been

useful to their role. The responses to this question was designed to feedback into the primary aim

of the event, the support requirement for middle managers on a day-to-day basis.

Interactive session 2: Your experience with the PDPR process, as an appraisee and/or an

appraiser.

o Poll: in your opinion has your PDPR been a tool that encourages you to improve

your performance or behaviour? Example of experiences.

Probing Questions

o What is the usual content of your yearly objectives

o What happens between one Appraisal and the next based on your experience as an

appraiser or an appraisee?


o Would it make any difference to you if your team members had an input in your

Appraisal? And if you had an input in your managers appraisal?

This question was designed to feedback into my project objective 2 (An exploration on an effective

way to measure manager’s performance and behaviour). The poll question was to test the opinion

of the managers on the PDPR process to compare with the positive outlook of the PDPR from the

survey results.

The first probing question was designed to collect information on what type of targets were set at

appraisal meetings, this was to ascertain if the if all the strategic objectives of the NHSBT

(Performance, behaviour and people) were covered.

The second probing question was designed to collect information about any ongoing performance

management activities between two appraisal periods.

The third probing question was to gather information on the participant’s opinion and response to

the idea of upward appraisals.

Interactive session 3: Employee’ acts and action, what would you rather it were?

Probing questions

o How do your colleagues (peers, superiors and junior staff) come across? Good or

bad experiences

o Develop phrases that suggests the simple attitudes that each employee should have

and exhibit.

o …think about the simple things you might want to see exhibited by your colleagues

These questions were designed to feedback into the first task of the YVOA project plan. It was

designed in consultation with the project team in charge of the implementation of ‘Managing: the

NHSBT Way’.

The aim was to collect ideas of the behaviours and values the participants had experienced and had

come to expect based on the feeling of motivation those attitudes triggered in them.

Interactive session 4: Your awareness, use and the impact of resources provided by the

Workforce team


o Core behavioural guide framework

o The NHS Leadership framework

o Shine Academy

o AIM leadership training

o Coaching and Mentoring resources

o Training opportunities

o HR consultants

o HR Business partners

o HR Direct (e-HRM) etc.

What are your experiences with each resource?

This question was also designed to feedback into the day-to day support requirements of the

participants. It was particularly structured to show the level of awareness and use of resources

already provided by the organization to support the workforce.

Implementation Plan

The date scheduled for the event was August 21, 2015 and the duration was from 10:30am -

3:30pm. Preparations were made to accommodate twenty employees based on the confirmation of

attendance gotten before the day from twelve middle managers.

The introduction to the event explained the need to record the participants’ comments to aid

accurate analysis of the comments. Participants were encouraged not to hold back on comments

because of the recording.

The guest speaker’s presentation was the first activity for the group and this was to ensure that the

right tone was set for the day by introducing the participants to what the role of FLM was in

effective people management and to discuss the challenges they face with that responsibility.

The participants were divided into two groups of 5 and 6 for all the interactive session to ensure

enough time for each participants to make their contributions, A moderator was assigned to each

group to help maintain the balance in contribution from the different participants, ensuring that

there was a fair share of time among the participants.


The group were reshuffled for each of the events to ensure a different mix of people were gotten

each time. In other to facilitate the attendance of middle managers the OWD team issued certificates

to each participant for attending.

The recordings were collated transcribed and analysed.

Challenges to the Implementation of the ILEThe major challenge experienced was that the month assigned to the implementation of the ILE

coincided with the month where the highest number of employee leave and holiday is recorded.

This had an effect on the number of participants available for the ILE.

Outcomes of the Innovation Lab EventThere was exchanging of ideas on “what works for my team” that other participants made

commitments to try in their teams.

Ideas that resonated positively among the teams include:

Asking for feedback from team members on their opinion of what the manager can improve

on in managing them.

Use of the behavioural core competency as a critical reflection tool that would run all year

round and be discussed at the more regular one-to-ones with team members.

Running more regular one-to-ones to ensure that team members are following up on the

achievement of their goals.

Interactive session findings.

Interactive session 1: The Workforce directorate team within the NHSBT are in charge of

developing and amending policies, initiating initiatives to address human resource issues and

implementing and creating the drive for such initiatives among the workforce.

There has been the devolution of other HRM duties like absence management, interviewing, conflict

resolution, performance appraisal, under-performance to line, a practice supported by research in

the ever increasing role line-managers need to play in HRM.

There however needs to be more clarity of what function are solely the responsibility of line

managers and what functions are shared with HR.


Facts gathered from the interviews held showed that a significant amount of managers were

internally promoted based on their technical abilities, and they were expected into people

management roles without proper induction and guidance into their new roles.

There is a need for staff to have (or consistently keep in focus) their updated job description to set

as a reminder of responsibility and area of accountability to the organisation.

Strategically integrated HR function’s makes greater efforts to engage line managers in HR activities

(Brandl et al., 2009), suggesting an increased use of job design approaches that reduce role

ambiguity via clearly specified standards of performance.

Interactive session 2: The poll taking corroborated the survey results, all the participants agreed

that the PDPR encourages them but there was a contradiction observed in the discussion on the

content of the PDPR, there were several comments on how difficult it was to define behavioural

goals.

There needs to be clarifications on what the Performance management process should be and what

its relevance is to each employee.

A development and performance monitoring tool for the employee

A performance monitoring tool for the organisation

A knowledge building and people management tool for the appraisers and team leaders.

There were significant amounts of experiences that suggested that the understanding of most of the

participants was that the performance management process was equal to the appraisal review and

nothing more.


Figure 10: Stages of a typical performance management system (Torrington et al, 2010)

From my findings, the performance management process between two appraisals (where existing)

was based on the choice of the appraisee, which is sometimes required as everyone should take

responsibility for their development but the appraisees line manager should also share some

responsibility for creating an enabling, supportive and encouraging environment for the

achievements of the goals and objective set and for regular ne-to-one meetings as required.

Various comments from participants of the interviews and ILE suggested that senior managers that

exhibited positive role modelling and mentoring have a more positive impact on their direct report,

from the participant’s perspective and experience.

I also observed from comments made that actions carried out by line mangers are more likely to be

emulated by their direct reports than the ones prescribed externally to the team.

‘This year I am asking my appraisees what they think of me and if there is anything they would like me

to change. I got the idea from my current line manager because my previous managers never did that.’

‘The core competency framework is our own bespoke little ‘what can we do’ booklet. Sometimes we

look at it and say well my manager doesn’t do that, that and that as well so I’m not too worried. Maybe

what we should do fill it out for each other’.

Definition of role Job descriptionObjective of directorate or subgroup

Planning performanceIndividual performance (including behaiviour)Development plans

Delivering and monitoringOngoing line managers supportOngoing review

Formal Assessment and rewardAnnual assessmentLink to pay


Interactive session 3: Communicating and clarifying the leadership responsibilities of a line

manager. There were significant comments on managers not understanding their leadership

responsibilities.

Leadership ought to be communicated throughout the hierarchy of the NHSBT at the least the

employee would be leading self and making sure to take responsibility for the things assigned.

Taking initiative and contributing to solutions development is also every employee’s responsibility.

The NHS leadership framework clearly sets out the leadership qualities required from all

employees within the NHS as a whole.

Figure 11: NHS Leadership Qualities Framework

Interactive session 4: There are several support and developmental resources available to the

managers but most of them are not being used. The awareness level among the ILE participants was

quite low, there were a number of delegates that had no idea of some of the resources made

available by the OWD team (though some had been with the organisation for over 7years). Some

others that were aware did not engage with it, a few others (mostly from the OWD) engaged with it

and thought they were very useful.


The perception around the significance and authenticity, there were comments by some delegates

about the behavioural guide being imported from ‘Airbus’. Lack of ownership from managers.

There were a number of concerns on the available trainings for staff not being sufficient, it is

therefore important to develop ways to carry out effective informal trainings within the manager’s

team to avoid negative discretionary behaviour due to broken employee psychological contract.

Anderson and Schalk (1998) noted that psychological contracting is an important determinant of

the behaviour and attitudes of employees. A good performance management system could have an

impact on maintaining employees’ positive psychological contract.

Recommendations on the support required by middle managers

Front-line managers have the potential to have the greatest impact on employees since they tend to

have the bigger teams to manage and because of their proximity and regular interaction with

employees (Becker et al, 1996) and this is why they need to be supported by strong organisational

values that show clearly the behaviours expected and those not tolerated (CIPD 2014).

Within the NHSBT FLM manage about two-thirds of the workforce which is approximately 4000

employees. The HR can provide support in various ways (Gilbert et al, 2011b; Hutchinson and

Purcell, 2007, 2010) but the recommended ways based on my study on the support required by

middle managers within the NHSBT are as follows:

A recognition that there are particular HR policies and practices which mangers respond to

and which create positive discretionary behaviour as suggested by the ideas of HR

architecture (Lepak and Snell, 1999). A particular mix of HR practices are necessary to

support FLM, as researched by Purcell el al (2003), these include (prioritised based on my

observation of its relevance to NHSBT)

o Ensuring good working relationships with their line managers

o Allowing managers to participate and feel involved in decisions

o Having and open culture which enables managers to discuss matters of concern

o Providing career opportunities

o Supporting work-life balance

o A sense of job security


Providing and communicating available HR advice and support, particularly on specialist

and more complex issues that involve the law, training and managing under-performers.

This will be very useful as managers raised concerns about having to apply discretion to

policies and still ensure consistency in implementation of policies.

Co-develop (with managers) a top tips tool of the alternatives to training based on the idea

of the 70:20:10 rule of learning, currently being promoted within the NHSBT, which

managers can apply for the development of the people they manage.

Developing and communicating the e-HRM resources available to support the Middle

manager.

My findings revealed that most middle managers are unaware of the resources made

available by the HR and OWD team and their application.

Clarifying Job expectation and the relationship between HR and the line in terms of what

activities line managers have sole responsibility for, which are shared and which are the

responsibility of the HR. Clarifying the boundaries of the HR responsibilities required within

the managerial role is essential as there were comments around having ‘too much’ HR and

recruitment duties grafted into the middle managers responsibility.

In addition, it is the role of the HR function to ensure that the organisational environment

supports people management responsibilities of line managers. This involves clarifying their

responsibilities through job descriptions, including people management activities in

performance appraisals, and communicating the importance and value of development-related

activities. (CIPD, 2014).

Recommendations to the other parts of the YVOA Project plan areas.One of the aims of the Innovation Lab was to make recommendations based on the findings from

the interactive sessions on useful inputs to the other parts of the YVOA project plan in other to

make them more relevant for the workforce.

The NHSBT Way, management charter: thought and contributions that could be linked to the

different words that form the acronym CLEAR. Comments made in the words of the participants


Care: incorporate, caring about the work you do, there is a need for people to be

approachable

Listen: Paying attention

Enthuse: motivate, exhibit passion about the organization and the work you do for it, the

willingness to join in

Ask: Clarify eliminate assumptions, ask the questions that need to be asked even when it

seems difficult.

Respond: Strive to help in a timely manner

The word ‘leadership’ could also be incorporated, to reinforce the idea that everyone is a leader, at

the least you are leading yourself by taking responsibility and being accountable for the work you

are assigned or expected to do.

Your voice temperature checks

Could use the innovation lab as an appreciative inquiry tool for the temperature checks,

were different target groups come together to discuss what has improved or not and what

best practices have been noticed that could be communicated to the other units.

The Middle Managers summit

From my gathering there is a need to communicate the rationale behind the NHSBT’s choice

of devolving HRM to the line, what the strategic relevance is for the organisation, the

manager and the individual employee. This should also include showing the middle

manager his role and responsibility in the HRM devolution plan.

Incorporate talks around, the manager as a mentor and coach for the team and learning

how to give and receive feedback

Manager’s induction: Passport for Management

Incorporate trainings on the role and responsibility of Line Managers with the HRM, it is

important to set and instil the expectation from the onset to avoid the possibility of a

broken psychological contract.

Should consider including a go to guide of top tips for managers, introducing a guideline

that could help manager with the first things to do in a complex HR situation.

An introduction to the performance measuring tools available within the NHSBT and their

uses

o Appraisal: Job performance and behavioural targets monitoring and measuring.


o Behavioural guide: behavioural expectation for every individual employee within

the NHSBT

o Your voice survey: The employee voice to measure their engagement and

satisfaction.

The e-learning toolkit for managers:

Should contain tips on how managers can increase the awareness and use of developmental

resources like the leadership framework, behavioural guide, capability guide etc. within

their team.

Should contain a document detailing the HR support structure available to managers

Training on development plans suggestions that could be recommended to team members

considering the 70:20:10 model of learning and the limit of actual trainings available on

offer.

Trainings on the Manager’s time management, Coaching and mentoring on the job, could

include pointers to where to find relevant resources for the manager’s development.

Training on the relevant behavioural goals and how to set them for the several functions

within the different directorates.

Eliminating Harassment Bullying and Abuse:

Communicating every employee responsibility for the NHSBT policy awareness.

Publicise tips on clarifying occurrences that might be misconstrued as HBA.

Publishing common policy meanings to the workforce e.g. Special leave is not a right and it

is not guaranteed.

The Innovation Lab: Future benefits

Creating effective and appropriate solutions requires that the users of this solution feel involved

with the solution and one way to incorporate this is to engage them early in generating the right

solutions to the day to day challenges they face. The Innovation Lab can be adapted as a tool for

gathering real experiences within the NHSBT to help improve the workplace environment.

The innovation Lab should be about identifying what practise is working within the NHSBT and

replicating it to create wider positive impact. It’s not necessarily seeking to do ‘new things’ but to

do things in a better way (Learning others best practices).

There might be a seeming overlap between the OIP events and the Innovation Lab but the

Innovation Lab has a greater scope of flexibility to cover not just operations but behavioural


challenges and experiences and is aimed to function as an Appreciative Inquiry tool, emphasising

sharing the good points of the inquiry topic.

A lot of initiatives are constantly being run concurrently and the voice of the lower level workforce

seems to be the least heard, only being measured once a year or less by the Your Voice survey. The

Innovation Lab can be used as a tool to minimize this effect.

It could be used as a tool for senior managers within the different directorates to gather actual

experiences within and without their departments, this would equip them with information to

better handle their departments and ensure the right things are focused on for strategic purposes.

Next steps

A publication or communication should be made via the internal communications channel, on how

the just concluded event was used to improve initiatives (addressing the ‘Your voice’ survey

fallouts) to be rolled out. Publications on how the tool can also be used within teams and

directorate should be done.

PROJECT OBJECTIVE 2: EXPLORATION ON HOW TO EFFECTIVELY MEASURE MANAGER’S

PERFORMANCE AND BEHAVIOUR.

The contrast developed between the high positive experience of the PDPR and team meetings

against the below expectation employee engagement level gave rise to the question ‘How can the

NHSBT effectively measure the performance and behaviour of its managers? From some of the

interviews held with senior leaders, the concern of whether the appraisal system was measuring

the right things was raised.

The summary of the strategic goals communicated by the CEO of the NHSBT in its Strategic Plan

2015-2020 were developed around three deduced core objectives

Performance: How efficiently the NHSBT production process is, to improve value to its

customers

Behaviour: living our values of Caring Expert and Quality

Employee Engagement: How our people feel about working at NHSBT is very important to us.

We believe that the care our people give our donors and patients and the service our

customers receive is driven by their personal engagement and wellbeing at work


As a first point, it is therefore important to define the measurement criteria by which each objective

is to be measured. According to Armstrong (2009), ‘If you can’t define it, you can’t measure it.

The CIPD considers that there are five main elements of the formal appraisal process (CIPD. 2011a)

Measurement: assessing performance against agreed targets, objectives and behaviour

Feedback: Providing individuals with information and on what is required to perform well

in future

Positive reinforcement: emphasizing what has been done well, making constructive

comments on what might be improved, drawing out importance of how the job is done and

what needs to be done and ensuring that effort is directed at value adding activities

An exchange of views: an open exchange of views about what has happened, how

appraisees can improve performance, any support needed and future career aspirations.

Agreement: All parties jointly coming to an understanding about what needs to be done to

improve and sustain performance and to overcome any issues raised during the course of

the discussion.

The current NHSBT appraisal system uses the same template for all its employees across the

different hierarchy and directorates and concerns were raised from the interviews held with some

senior leaders on the effectiveness of this.

The template measures

Performance: Job function targets set for the year

Behavioural targets: Behavioural targets set for the year

Development: Agree development needs and target

The task of developing a more effective way to measure manager’s performance and behaviour

therefore requires designing measuring criteria’s to cover the expectations of the board regarding

behaviour and employee engagement.

The Idea

My recommendation based on my understanding of the NHSBT context is the introduction of a

weighted appraisal scoring template for the yearly appraisal based on staff hierarchy within the

organization, this would incorporate both downward and upward appraisal.

This incorporates elements of:


• 360 degrees appraisal (180 degrees): Appraisals would have inputs from line manager,

direct report and self.

• Upward Appraisal: when direct reports comment on their managers performance usually

anonymous.

Downward appraisal would be carried out by line manager and moderated by the individual’s self-

appraisal (allowing discussion and agreement) based on the performance targets and people

targets set and reviewed through regular one-on-one meetings expected to happen all through the

year.

Upward review would be done by direct report to any people manager and by peer (team member)

review for employees with no people management responsibilities. Just as it is acceptable to receive

feedback from the customers on the products being produced it is also essential to receive feedback

from the staff on behaviours that may or may not be encouraging and motivating to them.

The goal setting theory (Locke, 1990} is a useful way of creating awareness on and engagement of

employees by clearly stating the criteria for their total performance.

Template recommendation

My findings from the interviews and ILE, highlighted that there are concerns about the measuring

criteria used for the PDPR appraisals and this acts as evidence to support the disjoint observed

between the engagement scores and the feedback on the PDPR process from the Your Voice survey

(2014) results.

Table 1: Recommended template for Appraisal

Appraisal criteria

Senior

manager

Middle

manager

Service

deliverer

Performance targets quota :

Job specific 40% of TAR 60% of

TAR

80% of

TAR

Behavioural targets quota:

Behavioural guide or the NHSBT


Way Acronym. 30% of

TAR

20% of

TAR

15% of

TAR

People targets quota:

employee engagement etc. 30% of

TAR

20% of

TAR

5% of TAR

Total Appraisal rating (TAR) 100% 100% 100%

The three recommended areas of focus for appraisal are:

1. Performance target: this would be determined by the directorate objectives

2. Behavioural targets to be determined by behavioural guide or NHSBT way acronym, as they

define the behaviour expectations of each employee within the NHSBT.

a. Reviewees to fill out behavioural guide pertaining to reviewer

b. Results to be used a compare to self and line manager assessment or averaged over

all the respondents.

3. People targets to be determined by components of the ‘Your Voice’ questionnaire. The

target criteria is to be decided on based on areas like, engagement with the job and

workplace.

a. Ratings would be given based on the level of target achieved. E.g. if a goal of 4 was

set for employee engagement and the actual survey records 3, the rating achieved is

Achieving as only 75% of the goal was achieved.

Service deliverers in the NHSBT are employees with no direct reports, they are the junior level staff

whose job function is basically to deliver a particular defined service. The inclusion of people

related targets for service deliverers is apparently not based on the people they are responsible for

but to create a sense of responsibility to the leadership culture being implemented within the

organisation. This should ensure that everyone has a basic knowledge of what leadership qualities

are required of them as an NHSBT employee.


Table 2: Rating scale numerical equivalent

Developing Consolidating Achieving Excelling

Numerical Value 1 2 3 4

% value 0-25% 21-50% 51-75% 76-100%

The ratings to be used begin at ‘Developing’ for the lowest level and progresses through

Consolidating to Achieving and the Excelling as the highest level. The ratings are extracts from the

behavioural guide framework and current appraisal and the guidelines for their current use is

highlighted below.

Developing: This rating should be used for new employees OR for those who are working

towards demonstrating the majority of the ‘developing’ expectations. Note: There may also be a

number of consolidating/achieving and/or excelling expectations being demonstrated.

Consolidating: This rating should be used for those who are demonstrating less than 50% of the

‘consolidating/ achieving’ expectations. The majority of the developing expectations should be

complete and there may also be a minority number of excelling expectations being

demonstrated.

Achieving: This rating should be used for those who are demonstrating the majority (i.e. 50% or

more) of the ‘consolidating/achieving’ expectations. There may also be a minority number of

excelling expectations being demonstrated. Note: The ‘Achieving’ rating is the required

standard for all employees who have completed their induction plan fully.

Excelling: This rating should be used for those who are consistently demonstrating the majority

of the ‘excelling’ expectations. Note: The ‘Excelling’ rating is for those who consistently

demonstrate knowledge, skills and behaviours above and beyond the expectation of their role

and therefore only a few ‘high potential’ employees will fall within this development stage.

Sample: Let’s take an example of a senior manager with a team of five direct reports. The appraisal

content ratings by the different participants are shown below.

Downward appraisal by line manager and self

rated excelling in performance target

rated Achieving on people targets

Self-rating on behaviour : Excelling


Upward appraisal by direct reports

team of five direct reports ratings on behaviour

o 2 Consolidating (C) rating

o 2 Achieving (A) rating

o 1 Excelling (E) rating

Table 4: Sample template for senior manager

Appraisal criteria

Senior

manager

Workings

Performance targets: Job specific 40% (40% *100%)

Behavioural targets: Behavioural

guide or the NHSBT Way Acronym.

22.5% (30%((2*2C)(2*2A)(2*2E)/6R))

People targets: employee

engagement

22.5% (30% *75)

Total Appraisal rating 85% Excelling

It is recommended that the templates be automated to reduce the likelihood of errors in the

calculations and tedious compilation of results to arrive at a final rating.

Table 5: Comparison between current and proposed appraisal system

Current NHSBT Appraisal system Proposed Weighted Appraisal system

Measures performance and behaviour Measures performance, behaviour and people

targets

Encourages input from only the line

manager about the performance and

behaviour of the employee.

Encourages involvement of direct reports in

their line manager’s appraisal. ( since they are

the one with first-hand experience of the LM

managerial behaviour)

Allows input from only two people Allows input from more than two people,


appraiser and appraisee. depending on the size of the appraisees team

Requires an agreement between the

appraiser and appraisee on the final

rating to be assigned.

Final rating is determined by target criteria

set across the three objectives of Performance,

behaviour and people

Martins (2007) suggests that performance appraisals that hold line managers accountable motivate

the line to behave in ways consistent with HR policies.

Expected benefits

It is expected that the recommended appraisal template would help to clarify the importance of the

three deduced strategic objectives (Performance, behaviour and people management) as outlined

in the NHSBT strategy plan 2015-2020.

The suggested ratings for senior leaders (40%Performance 30%Behaviour and 30%People

management) is expected to clarify the significance of their role to the process and also have a

positive impact on their AMO (Ability – Motivation - Opportunity) by setting relevant targets. The

impact of the goal setting theory (Locke, 1990) is expected to have a positive effect on the level of

motivation, involvement and ownership by the senior managers and middle managers.

It is expected that the accountability process for senior managers and middle managers would be

more clearly defined. Since HRM responsibilities are being devolved to the line the measurement of

the line manager’s performance should include the whole role (people, behaviour and job).

It is also expected that the HR and the OWD can help facilitate more effective initiative emanating

from the line managers. So line managers do not see the HR and OWD team as solution providers

but helpers in developing and achieving effective initiatives within their directorate.

The best HR people create value and value is not defined by the person creating it, but by the user.

(David Ulrich, 2012)

Possible Challenges

Upward appraisals are neither simple to adopt nor automatically popular with those being appraised,

nor are they a panacea for all manner of managerial problems. (Keith Grint, 1993).

It is expected that challenges might come up in the implementation or adoption of this idea along

the areas of:


• Process ownership by the senior leaders: People are always happier to support what they

help to create (Torrington et al, 2011). It would be very useful to involve the directorate

senior leaders and managers early. Possibly running an Innovative Lab Event to collect

contributions and real experiences with the current appraisal process and deliberating on

the idea of the new appraisal template.

• Team size: there might be challenges around teams that are significantly large as would be

found with the more operational roles. This could be mitigated by building sub teams to

ensure no employee has the responsibility of appraising more than five direct reports, this

is subject to the internal process flexibility within different directorates.

• Perception of subjectivity and bias of reviewees: Measuring behaviour in contrast to result-

based approach is less easy to capture and intrinsically judgemental, relying on human

observation and assessment of others (e.g. peers, managers, subordinate and other

stakeholders). (Torrington et al, 2010)

Implementation suggestions: Next steps

Idea approval from the senior leaders within the NHSBT.

Measurement criteria development by the Senior Managers across all the directorates and

the relevant departments. (Content realignment to suit the different directorate this process

should be championed by the senior managers with support from the middle managers in

the different directorate as this would help to build a sense of ownership for the idea.)

Development of the relevant resources and support required for implementation. Including

trainings of all relevant parties to support the process.

A phased implementation should be used. First deployed starting with senior managers

and/or the Middle managers before the service deliverer.

For service deliverer implementation, a peer review process would be used instead of the

upward appraisal for the behavioural targets. Members of the same team could feedback

into each other’s appraisal.

Monitoring and review of the implementation process to ensure effectiveness.


BENEFITS OF LINE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS BETWEEN SENIOR MANAGERS AND FLM WITHIN THE NHSBT.The most important support I recommend for the middle managers within the NHSBT is not

another initiative or provision of resource but the strengthening of positive line manager

relationship between the middle manager and the ‘middle-manager’s’ manager (senior managers).

Improving the relationship between the senior managers and FLM can be compared to ensuring the

steering wheel of a 4WD automobile is well connected with the wheels. This connection would

enhance communication within the NHSBT as the middle managers who are closest to the

workforce and the senior managers who interpret senior leader’s requirements have a better

communication line.

It would provide the opportunity for the senior managers to better support and be more involved

with solving the various operational challenges faced by the middle manager. This would encourage

innovative thinking and a sense of involvement for the middle manager in building appropriate

solutions to solve the operational challenges within their department.

The CIPD (2009) defined the three main drivers of engagement as:

1. Having an opportunity to feed your views upward

2. Feeling well informed about what is happening in the organisation

3. Thinking that your manager is committed to the organisation

It would be easier to replicate engagement further down the line if middle managers have these

drivers enhanced by their relationship with their own line managers (senior manager).

CONCLUSIONThe assumption that the line managers ineffectiveness experienced within the NHSBT emanates

wholly from the middle managers was a rather narrow view of the problem. Looking at the scope of

line managers to consist of both the middle managers and senior managers gives a more complete

picture and provides a better interpretation of the ‘line management effectiveness’ improvements

required within the NHSBT.

The devolution of HRM to the line (Renwick, 2003) has meant that line managers need to see

themselves in their supplementary role as HR Agents. The HRM devolution trend has taken strong

roots in practice and theory but an aspect which has not been sufficiently explored is the contextual

rationale behind the devolution to the line and how these different rationales influence people

management effectiveness.


Hugh Bainbridge (2015) in his research on ‘How different rationales for devolution influence

people management effectiveness’, discusses six rationales for devolving HRM to the line and the

hypothetical effect they have on people management effectiveness.

The rationales discussed were increasing efficiency of people management in the organisation,

meeting employee demand for more line manager involvement, giving line managers more

ownership of people management issues, allowing HR to focus on strategic activities, centralising

HR and cost reduction/cutting.

An identical question among the middle managers that attended the ILE was, why they had to take

on HRM duties?

‘We are not recruitment specialists we are scientists, it is okay if we help with the shortlisting and

interviewing but we shouldn’t be doing paperwork. The flipside is that we don’t ask the HR specialists

to come and help out with our testing’.

My interpretation of these comments is that middle managers feel their workload is being

increased with someone else’s work (in this case HR). Until a mind shift happens from ‘someone

else’s work’ to ‘one of my core responsibilities’ the desired improved line management capability

might elude the NHSBT.

Perhaps the acknowledgement and communication by the CEO on the strategic rationale behind the

NHSBT’s adoption of devolving HRM to the line, coupled with a clear and concise outline of the

changing terrain of the line managers job function and responsibility in this process could have a

positive impact on people management effectiveness.

Research suggests that HR strategic integration influences HR’s interaction with line managers and

the standard of people management (Budhwar, 2000a; Ulrich, 1997).


APPENDIX

Reflections on Management Consultation engagement with the NHS Blood and Transplant.I chose the NHS Blood and Transplant because it gave me the platform to consult for an

organization (with a size of workforce) I had not been occasioned to work with in a Human

resource consulting engagement in all of my previous consulting experience. Plus working with the

UK public health sector that employs 29.5% of the total public sector employees was a good

motivating point for me and a significand addition to my CV.

The general expectation that big companies do not give as much experience as the small ones was a

concern for me as I was not just interested in completing my project but to make a valuable and

relevant contribution to the organisation. My experience however, was more inclined with what I

had hoped for, I was able to develop myself better in


Stakeholder management

Event/Project design and Implementation

Content design

Report writing and delivery and much more

The first challenge I encountered on the consultation was scoping the project, the goal of the project

team was to address the interpretations of the ‘Your Voice’ survey outcome, and there were three

changes made to the content of the plan, this changes affected the objectives of my project.

1. April 2015 (First meeting with the client): A Rapid improvement event for middle manages

aim at improving their performance.

2. June 2015: Innovation Lab event for middle managers aimed at rapidly improving line

management capabilities among middle managers

3. July 2015:

Innovation Lab event - design and implement. For middle managers to identify their

concerns and requirements for support on a day-to-day basis.

An exploration on how to effectively measure manager’s performance and behaviour

within the NHSBT. (emphasis on behaviour)

The Your Voice Our Action YVOA teams’ action plan was evolving as more analysis was being done

by the OWD (Organisation Workforce Development) team on the results of the ‘Your Voice’ survey,

the final confirmation and agreement of scope did not happen until July 2015. This put a lot

pressure on designing and implementing the Innovation Lab Event.

There was also another addition to the project objectives after the project plan had been delivered

which did not feature initially i.e. an exploration on how to effectively measure the performance

and behaviour of managers.

The preceding five weeks before the project plan receipt was however used to gather information

around what the project idea was, four out of the six interviews to clarify the senior leader’s

opinion of what the issues are and to gain better understanding of the organization was done. This I

felt was very useful investment of the time as I could then apply the knowledge to the final agreed

scope.


I learnt that not all projects are going to follow expectations and that the flexibility and adaptability

of a consultant to the complex nature of an organisation is very essential. Although there needs to

be some boundary on the flexibility.

Another challenge I faced was the feeling of the ambiguity of my NHSBT in-house project supervisor

and his slow response rate to some of my request. I was tempted to request another in-house

supervisor (as one of the other UWE student did) but then I thought the experience could be useful.

I assumed I didn’t have a choice in the matter and applied myself in making the relationship more

valuable. I however wondered if the unpaid nature of the consultancy or any perception of the

quality of the work I could deliver had any role to play in the slow pace and response rate of my in

house supervisor. I frequently had to make direct contact with my primary stakeholder (the

assistant director of the OWD) just to ensure my discussion with my in-house project manager

reflected her expectations (which was not always the case)

The availability of my UWE project supervisor to meet and discuss my challenges always helped to

douse my concerns and give directions on the way forward. This I found really helpful and

motivating.

Organizing face to face meetings with some of the senior leaders was a challenge as their

availability was not always guaranteed and this caused some delay in getting the necessary

information from them, I had to improvise to use the most suitable alternative means to

communicate (telecom). This limited the opportunity to observe their body language while gaining

information on the discussions had.

The delay in the final agreement of the final outcomes of my project put a strain on the time

available

Preparing my report was very tasking I had done a lot of work on different aspects of the NHSBT to

accommodate the changes as I discovered so many interconnected aspects which were contributing

to the expansion of the scope of my work.

Another useful experience was the opposition I experienced from one of the senior leaders based

on the similarity of the work she was handling and my project, although hers was to be on a much

bigger scale. I had made contact with her based on recommendation by the administration staff


assisting with internal admin operations. I setup the meeting to see how my event could be used a

prelude to hers and help gather information to better inform her project. She recounted to me all

the different reasons why my project could not work and I found this very demoralising.

I felt stressed, like I had wasted my time all the while and that I was not going to add any significant

impact to the organisation. This was three weeks to the scheduled date of my event, I somehow

pulled myself out of the pity party rot and renewed my commitment to ensure I add value to the

organisation. I sent her a soft well worded mail stating I had considered her opinion but would go

on with my original plan.

This experience reminded me that not everyone within the organisation would be on-board your

plan and if they are not the key stakeholders it is unfruitful trying to convince them especially when

you are on a time constraint. I had to exhibit my professionalism by not showing my disapproval of

her approach and keep the more important thing my focus. This was a very big learning point for

me.

I recall feeling some anxiety just before I had to present my report before the senior management

team of the Workforce directorate, I had hoped I had the right content and could hold up their

attention. Was I prepared enough?

After my presentation, I got very good feedback from the team as they applauded my idea and level

of innovative work, good words are indeed medicine to the soul. The feedback made all the

experiences I had so far worth it.

It dawned on me that research is in some regard way ahead of practice, or maybe research is a

reservoir of discoveries that have come to the fore at different times. I had wondered if upward

appraisal concept in performance appraisals was new enough to be recommended as a possible

solution. The literature and Keith Grint’s papers I read were dated as far back as 1993, yet the idea

was new to my audience and captured their interest greatly.

I learnt that one of the utmost goals of a consultant must be to provide an appropriate relevant

solution to her client and not necessarily the new trends in the subject area.


This experience has significantly improved me as a consultant and my passion to see organizations

thrive not only on their product and expertise but also as a result of how well their human resource

interact and collaborate has been further fuelled.

I had often wondered if this academic rigour would have significant enough benefits, I don’t wonder

anymore I have evidence it does. The knowledge bank I was privy to while presenting my report to

the team gave built my confidence in the recommendations I was making as being based on

evidence and not just assumptions. I intend to keep this in my career practice going forward.

Being able to innovate on how this ideas, theories and research can fit into the operational reality of

an organization somewhat defines the job of a consultant.

There are a number of development points for me, time management, thoughts coordination and

presentation in a clear and concise manner. I sometimes get my thoughts all mumbled up and

cannot effectively communicate what I have in my head to say.

Reflecting on this experience I am glad I chose the management consultancy route for my

dissertation and the NHS Blood and Transplant as the organisation, the experience is the perfect

culmination to my MBA course. It brought most of my learning, all through the year into practice.

On a last note, I was very satisfied I could meet the expectations of my primary client although that

led to an expansion of my scope of work, but it meant my project was relevant to the most relevant

stakeholder. In practice this would be monitored as it could be the difference between making a

profit of loss.

Reading List

Anderson, N. and Schalk, R (1998) The Psychological contract in retrospect and prospect. Journal of

Organizational Behaviour. Vol, 19, pp. 637-647.

Armstrong, M. (2009) Armstrongs’s Handbook of Performance Management: An evidence based guide to

delivering high performance. London: Kogan Page.


Armstrong, M, Baron, A. (2005) Managing Performance: Performance management in action. Wimbledon,

London: CIPD.

Bosleie, P Dietz, G. and Boon, C (2005) Commonalities and contradictions in HRM and performance

research, Human Resource management Journal, 15(3):67-94

Chartered Institute of Personnel Development (2014) The role of line managers in HR. CIPD factsheet

[online]. Available from http://www.cipd.co.uk/hr-resources/factsheets/role-line-managers-hr.aspx

[Accessed on 14 May 2015]

Gilmore, S. and Williams, S (2013) Human Resource Management. Oxford University Press, Chapter

11

Grint, K. (1993), ‘What’s wrong with performance appraisals: A critique and a suggestion’, Human

Resource Management Journal, 3(3) pp61-77.

Henderson, I (2011) Human Resource Management for MBA students, CIPD. Chapter 7

Hutchinson, S. (2013) Performance Management: Theory and Practice. Broadway, London: CIPD.

Hugh Bainbridge, (2015),"Devolving people management to the line", Personnel Review, Vol. 44 Iss 6 pp. 847 -

865

Locke, E.A., & Latham, G.P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice-Hall.

Marchington, M. and Wilkinson, A. (2012) Human Resource Management at Work: People

Management and Development London: CIPD, Chapters 3 ,4, 7 ,9 & 15.

Newton, T. & Findlay, P. (1996), ‘Playing God? The performance of appraisal’, Human Resource

Management Journal, 6(3), pp42-58

Perry, E.L and Kulik, C, T (2008), The devolution of HR to the line: Implication of perceptions of

people management effectiveness, The International Journal of Human Resource Management , 19: 2,

262-273

Purcell, J. and Kinnie, N. (2007) ‘HRM and Business Performance’ in P. Boxall, J. Purcell and P,

Wright (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Human Resource Management. Oxford: OUP


http://www.cipd.co.uk/hr-resources/factsheets/role-line-managers-hr.aspx

Purcell, J., and Hutchinson, S. (2007). Front-line managers as agents in the HRM–performance

causal chain: theory, analysis and evidence. Human Resource Management Journal. Vol 17, No 1.

Redman, T., and Wilkinson, A. 3rd edn. (2009) Contemporary Human Resource Management, Harlow

FT Prentice Hall, Chapter 2

Redman, T and Wilkinson, A (2009) Ch. 7 in Contemporary Human Resource Management: Text and

Cases, Third ed, Ft/Prentice Hall, London.

Shields, J. (2007) Managing Employee Performance and Reward - Concepts, Practices and Strategies. New

York: Cambridge University Press.

Torrington, D., Hall, L., Taylor, S. and Atkinson, C. (2010) Human Resource Management. Eight

edition, FT/Prentice Hall., Chapter 3 & 12

Ulrich, D. (2012) HR from the outside in. Chapter 1


nhsbt management consultancy report 14035613

Documents