Early
in the 20th century, businessman William Kettering commented that “the
biggest job we have as managers is to teach a newly hired employee to
fail intelligently ... to experiment over and over again and to keep on
trying and failing until he learns what will work.” As we begin
2004, many companies are struggling with the issue of employee appraisal
and evaluation. While generally adopted in most western-based business
cultures, such employee review and appraisal in Indonesia can be fraught
with misunderstandings as to purpose and methodology, be filled with accusations
of impartiality, and be slowed by hesitation to formally criticize a subordinate.
This issue comes up in easily 95 percent of my cross-cultural
training programs. American companies normally wish to establish some
sort of review procedure but once they begin addressing how to actually
institute the process and decide what direct benefits they wish to see,
they often become bogged down. The threshold question then is whether
a foreign company should even try to implement such a system. There are
several cultural barriers to such a system here. Among them is the difficulty
with direct communication with employees and also the ‘saving up’
of problem areas until a later time.
Direct communication is difficult for most Indonesians. Indonesians
generally adopt an indirect approach to problem solving to avoid the possibility
of confrontation and the disruption of office harmony. The preservation
of such office harmony being a prime Indonesian business value, of course,
and one often having priority over work performance. Also in Indonesia
an erring employee or other problem situation is addressed as soon as
possible, albeit in an indirect and non-blame pointing way, and then forgotten.
To bring the subject up again at some review several months later is going
to be considered inappropriate.
For these two reasons, individual performance appraisals tend
to have the following pattern: An employee comes in to the meeting with
some misunderstandings or perhaps anxiety about what will be discussed
and how it will affect their career. The supervisor can go over the ‘good’
qualities of the employee without difficulty. However, when the supervisor
begins discussing areas that ‘may need improvement’ there
is normally an attitude change on the part of the employee with him or
her becoming either defensive or submissive. In other words, the employee
may either disagree with the supervisor’s assessment or else may
ask something like “Why are you doing this to me? I thought that
we had a good working relationship. I did not realize that I was letting
you down so badly. Do you want me to resign?”
The supervisor then is in the position once again of explaining
the purpose and objective of the assessment process. In general, annual
performance evaluations and reviews tend to be disruptive to the Indonesian
office. In my opinion, companies should focus on immediate feedback and
reprimand, if needed, and not use the annual approach.
Another difficulty is the cultural reluctance for some Indonesian
managers to formally and in writing criticize their own subordinates.
I often hear the example of the expatriate manager who has had one of
his direct reports complain often about the performance of his own subordinates.
However, when it comes time for the annual review, the direct report submits
an outstanding report on that same subordinate.
The decision to have annual performance evaluations and reviews
may not be up to the Indonesian subsidiary of a multi-national company.
Home office may dictate such a policy and the local company’s only
choice is how to implement. There seem to be three basic approaches to
this situation. First is to just go through the motions, telling your
employees that ‘this is a Western thing. It will not affect your
salary or career’, which basically voids the process. Second, you
can use the information to provide training and education of the employees
turning the evaluation process into a kind of reward system. Third and
most difficult, is the attempt to fully implement and effectively use
this Western evaluation tool. It can and has been successfully implemented
by a number of American companies operating in Indonesia, but it does
need the directed will of the top management along with allocated resources
and training to be successful.
At the very least, there must be a significant training period
to help your employees understand what the process is and, more importantly,
how it will affect them. Year one should involve a formal introduction
to the process with written, quantifiable criteria for the evaluation.
Year two should include mock appraisals that do not have any effect on
the career of the employee. Year three could see the first recorded appraisals.
Once the process is institutionalized, new employees will be told by their
colleagues about this strange and foreign system and what to expect. It
then becomes part of your ‘third corporate culture.’ Any attempts
to speed up the process are often seen as arbitrary and unfair.
Further, you should definitely expect such accusations of being
arbitrary and unfair if you take the next step after the evaluation process
and tie the appraisal into bonuses or salary increases. Such performance-based
bonuses or salary increases are pretty much in direct opposition to the
Indonesian business values of the group working together and maintaining
office harmony. Traditionally, the ideal Indonesian employee is one who
is loyal to the boss for a long time. In other words, loyalty and seniority
are the prime attributes, and by loyalty, I mean personal allegiance to
the boss, not to the corporate entity. Pointing out a specific employee
and emphasizing the fact that he is superior to and a better employee
than those he or she works with on a daily basis is going to be disruptive
to the office and embarrassing to the individual.
For instance, if you have an annual office party or awards dinner
for your staff and you say something like: “Now here is Budi who
outperformed everyone else in our office and we are giving him a new TV.”
The polite clapping of his co-workers is going to be overshadowed by thoughts
of ‘traitor’ and plots for revenge against the award winner.
If you bring up another employee and say ‘Now here is Bambang who
has worked for our company for 10 years and we are giving him a new TV’,
Bambang will bask in the limelight and his co-workers will no doubt truly
admire his accomplishment. The difference being that Bambang was rewarded
for seniority, while Budi was rewarded for violating basic Indonesian
business values.
One should not expect the same confidentiality of salary information
in Indonesia that one might expect in the home country. We joke that on
the day performance bonuses are given, the employees exchange pay stubs
in the canteen. Even if the situation is not that extreme, you can be
sure that most people in your office know what each other has received,
and those employees with more seniority may soon be in your office asking
for a bigger bonus or larger salary increase.
You may then once again be explaining the company’s policy
on performance appraisals and evaluation but this time be met with defensive
and even hostile disagreement as to whom was the better worker. Allegations
that the company’s criteria for awarding bonuses or salary increases
is unfair and arbitrary and lacks understanding of the situation in Indonesia
may be made. Employees have certainly used the conflict resolution strategy
of ‘appeal to authority’ to resolve these disagreements going
to the country manager complaining that their supervisor is acting improperly.
There have also been cases of employees going to Indonesian government
departments like Manpower or Immigration complaining about their expatriate
supervisor. With the current priorities in these departments, such complains
have resulted in the early repatriation of expatriate supervisors.
The process of annual performance appraisal and evaluation of
Indonesian employees is not one that foreign companies should enter into
lightly. The implementation of this very Western-based management tool
should be well thought out and supported by top management. Alternatives
exist that may be better suited to your company’s long-term success
in Indonesia. Encouraging employee performance and addressing areas of
weakness remain a good manager’s obligations to his subordinates.
The question to be asked is what method works best for you.
December 2003
George B. Whitfield, III is a Technical Advisor with Executive
Orientation Services of Jakarta. EOS is a cross-cultural training company
specialising in the corporate cultural integration of foreign and Indonesian
management teams and staff.
|