In the past, employee performance management was top-down and one-sided. Nowadays, the paradigm has shifted, giving employees more control over their performance and fostering a culture of collaboration, accountability, and continuous improvement. Dr. Malika Viltz-Emerson, a Senior Global Human Resource Leader, has experienced this firsthand. In this interview, she explores the numerous benefits of involving employees in managing and improving their performance. Let’s delve into the strategies, tools, and best practices that can help organizations shift from traditional performance management approaches to more inclusive, employee-centric models.
Given today’s data-driven business landscape, how should organizations leverage digital tools and data analytics to shape their employee performance management practices, particularly in terms of providing real-time feedback and insights?
The current approach prioritizes collaboration, overall contributions, impact, and outcomes—all of which can be effectively managed and found within a single tool. It is an agile employee growth approach facilitated by continuous feedback and communication tools. There are four common pillars that guide impact identification in specific areas through open manager-employee dialogue, resembling a self-assessment. These are:
Operational excellence – Enhancing service quality and delivery, fostering innovation, and driving organizational growth while seeking opportunities to become a global strategic advantage
Culture journey – Finding deep meaning in working together, ensuring growth, diversity, and inclusiveness; working with values such as integrity, respect, and accountability
Growth and collaboration – Contributing to the growth of others while leveraging and expanding upon their work and ideas
Individual key accomplishments – The impact that a person has on a project, customer, team, product, or anything that delivers business results
But the major shift is towards data analytics and dashboards for team and company performance, rather than individual assessment.
Could you describe and share some key performance indicators (KPIs) that you’ve utilized to evaluate the performance of your organization’s employees?
The KPIs we use vary depending on organizational priorities, job roles, and specific departmental or organizational goals. There is a set of standard KPIs that focus on culture as a journey, and these include teamwork results, helping others grow, prioritizing the company goals’ impact, and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).
Per the World Economic Forum’s “Future of Jobs Report 2023“, Large Language Models (LLMs) can already automate about 15% of employees’ tasks, and this might rise to 50% with improved applications. How will these advancements not only affect tasks but also reshape the broader dynamics of employee performance?
These advancements vary across industries. But for most companies, they will allow employees to become more strategic, transform productivity, and reduce the time spent on repeatable manual tasks—ultimately paving the way for getting work done. Although I have some reservations regarding some companies’ usage of LLMs because we know co-pilots grow to become pilots, these reservations ensure we slow down, conduct proper due diligence, and have the right governance in place. The advancements open doors for many people to upskill, allowing people with either no or low coding experience to develop and discover alternative ways to solve problems. It also enhances key soft skills that require human judgment and emotional intelligence.
What role do organizations play in upskilling and reskilling employees in competencies of the future? What does your organization do in this area at the moment?
Providing opportunities for all employees to upskill and reskill should be embedded in an organization’s priorities and goals. Investing in a continuous learning program will help employees adapt to job changes. This program starts with two core competencies: digital acumen and business acumen. The importance of their employees’ data literacy or digital acumen level should be apparent to organizations. Employees need to enhance their familiarity with artificial intelligence (AI) tools to remain competitive. This does not mean they need to learn to be programmers, but as previously discussed, no-code or low-code programming is vital to stay competitive in the future job market.
Adoption is of the utmost importance, making sure that our full-time employees recognize the significance of their contributions and gain a broader understanding of the bigger picture. Embracing the transformations and designing a roadmap that closes the skills gap at every level of our workforce is essential.
Are there any emerging technologies that will significantly influence how organizations manage employee performance in the near future?
Embedding responsible AI is the imminent solution. Let’s face it, that is what we consider emerging technologies nowadays. Moreover, the technology involving data aggregation—i.e., limiting systems to pull data from one data source—should be part of every organization’s near-future plans.
A recent study conducted by Stanford University highlights a disparity in perception, with employees often perceiving higher productivity when working from home, while managers tend to perceive lower productivity levels. Could you provide further insight into the influence of remote work on employee productivity and discuss the differences in these viewpoints?
Having organizations foster all three setups—i.e., remote, on-site, and hybrid—as options is critical to employee experience. However, I believe that if a company promotes a remote work setup, then there should be a quarterly or annual gathering to bring the teams together. I also acknowledge the drawbacks of going fully remote, such as underutilized facilities and the impact on support staff like food vendors, custodians, and security personnel. I will conclude that there is no right or wrong answer to this problem. It should be considered a new way of working and requires future-forward ways of thinking, the same as we do with emerging technologies.
With the rise of the gig economy and freelancing, how are traditional performance evaluation models evolving to accommodate the unique dynamics of temporary and contract workers?
From a performance evaluation dynamic and based on my experience, it is based on a scorecard whose criteria are based on the KPIs that the organization sets. While we use a significant amount of temporary and contract workers, we are only evaluating their performance based on the specific task or project they were contracted to support.
How is employee performance defined and evaluated in your organization? Can you discuss your organization’s performance criteria, rating levels, and frequency of performance reviews?
For us, it is not overly complicated. It is simplified by having the employees drive most of the process. It is about having rich conversations that optimize impact and get employees to do their best work. The frequency can be two to four times per year and is set by individual senior leaders. But there are at least two tracked conversations, not reviews. The employee outlines these conversations and focuses on areas like the growth of others, building on ideas, and contributions to the team, business, or customer.
How can organizations move from the traditional approach of annual performance appraisals to self-regulated teams and a strong feedback culture?
Stop thinking traditionally. Instead, bring in the right talent to help you foster a forward-thinking and growth mindset. Employees are not fans of performance reviews or 360-degree feedback, which breaks from the norm. Make it a conversation, a way to connect with the employees and teams. A standard set of core priorities puts the employee in the driver’s seat. Identify barriers to support the employee and have them do the same, enabling them to reflect and understand the impact of the work. Performance tools are for tracking the conversations, reviewing the total rewards outcomes and snapshots, and soliciting peer impact.
What can organizations do to engage more actively the employees in the individual performance management process, so that it is no longer regarded as solely an HR process?
To accomplish this, establish a culture that puts the employee in the driver’s seat, gives them accountability, and guides them to take ownership, including self-assessment, peer input, and aligning rewards with outcomes. Ensure regular manager check-ins and early sharing of insights. There should be no surprises for employees when discussing their performance.
Performance is also linked to learning, so having learning paths identified for both the employees and managers early in the process is crucial. The learning for employees would be tied to their core competencies and additional skills, and for the manager, on how to be a coach in the performance process.
How does your organization ensure alignment between employees’ objectives and corporate strategy?
We create deliberate listening mechanisms through which we better understand the needs and do some breakthrough thinking together.
What factors are critical to the success of a modern employee performance management system?
A modern system would be something that helps promote the company culture, continuous improvement, employee well-being, and ongoing development. But that’s more about the processes around the system. The tool itself would enable communication, tracking of capabilities, and identifying core competencies, opportunities, learning, and feedback. It should also give the employee a voice and put them in the driver’s seat. I did not speak about compliance, data privacy, and security—to me, those are obvious in any system, especially performance.
**********
Editor’s Note: This article was originally published in Performance Magazine Issue No. 28, 2024 – Employee Performance Edition.
Erratum: The previous version of this article mentioned “365-degree feedback”. It has since been corrected to “360-degree feedback”.
About the Practitioner:Dr. Malika Viltz-Emerson has over 20 years of experience in human capital management. Her mission is to identify and address the real-world challenges and opportunities for employees and the company, and design and implement optimal solutions that leverage the latest tools, technologies, and processes.
The individual is always part of something bigger. We cannot ignore that much of our self-concept is shaped by the groups we belong to, influencing us through shared norms, values, symbols, practices, and even the language we use. Even in the workplace, the groups we form give rise to culture. Consequently, this raises the question of whether embracing a shared culture comes at the cost of individual identity.
Organizations often assume that a strong culture is fully unified. But the reality is that within them, smaller groups naturally develop their own ways of working, thinking, and relating, built upon the identities that distinguish them. How these microcultures create harmony or friction and impact how teams succeed is not always straightforward.
Microcultures are the distinct subcultures that emerge within the broader organizational culture. They develop their own norms, practices, symbols, and even artifacts—inside jokes, memes, or something as simple as a shared Excel template can become defining markers of a group’s identity. These microcultures form naturally, aligning with social identity theory: people seek out groups where they find shared meaning, connection, and belonging.
Instead of searching for quick solutions to the challenge of aligning employees with organizational culture, it helps to recognize the many ways microcultures shape the workplace, like how they influence rules, how employees navigate conflicting loyalties, and what happens when their values diverge from those of the broader organization. Some evolve to drive innovation, while others resist change. Even in organizations with strong oversight, certain microcultures persist in unexpected ways, and the shift to virtual work adds another layer of complexity.
Being aware of these dynamics and their underlying elements provides a starting point for viewing workplace culture in a more nuanced way and inspires the ability to recognize, respect, and learn from microcultures.
The Intersection of Personal and Social Identity in the Workplace
Our social groups shape our sense of belonging and add layers to who we are. As we move beyond national or ethnic affiliations, we find our identity in smaller, more intimate circles: the traditions of our families, the bonds with our closest friends, or even the teams we cheer for.
In the workplace, our affiliations provide a sense of purpose, self-worth, and belonging, and as individuals, we, in turn, influence the groups we belong to. This dynamic interaction creates an organic culture—one that naturally arises from our shared experiences, similarities, and commonalities (see Figure 1). However, for organizations to function effectively, some formalization is necessary. We need structure, rules, and guidelines—things like mission, vision, values, governance structures, and processes—to ensure consistency and alignment across the organization.
But here’s where it gets tricky: the moment we formalize this culture, it can become static. It’s no longer the fluid, evolving, ever-changing entity it once was. A formal culture has to be adhered to, enforced, and clarified. This leads to the assumption that people can simply conform to this collective identity when they enter the workplace.
When organizations artificially create culture, they’re essentially trying to force an answer to the question: “Who am I when I am here?” The greater the gap between “Who am I?” and “Who am I at work?” the weaker the alignment between the employee and the company’s culture.
In addition, a high workload, intergroup conflicts, constant change, or rigid procedural structures make it nearly impossible for individuals to embrace the bigger company identity. Instead of feeling connected to the whole, employees retreat into their more familiar microcultures, whether those are teams, departments, or informal social groups.
The Power and Risks of Microcultures
The various subgroups influencing our work identity can range from formal work groups and departments to more informal networks, like lunch buddies or even hobby groups. Imagine a group of employees from different departments who meet for a daily coffee break simply because they all drink decaf. Even this seemingly trivial connection contributes to a unique microculture. A microculture could be a workgroup, a department, or even smaller subgroups, like the group of people who share coffee breaks.
Microcultures allow organizations to maintain a unified culture while fostering diversity and inclusion. They provide employees with a sense of belonging beyond the overarching corporate identity, making workplaces more engaging and dynamic. Strong microcultures can boost morale, enhance collaboration, and even drive innovation as they create spaces where employees feel psychologically safe to express ideas and challenge norms.
However, there is a risk. Given the number of groups we belong to, our social identity becomes a complex and sometimes intricate puzzle. This multiplicity of roles often leads to role conflicts. Imagine an HR professional deeply invested in supporting their employees. They work closely with individuals from various departments, each with different values, priorities, and experiences. Now, suppose this HR professional wants to give raises to all employees based on merit, but the financial department has a strict budget and is hesitant. This creates a potential conflict: the HR professional’s desire to reward the team clashes with the financial constraints imposed by the company. But it goes deeper. The HR professional happens to be close friends with a member of the finance team, and they share a passion for veganism. Outside of work, they bond over their shared values, but within the office, their professional identities create friction between them.
In moments like these, employees are torn between their personal values and professional duties. This is the role conflict that arises from belonging to different groups, each with its own set of values, goals, and identities. The workplace is full of these competing dynamics, and sometimes, navigating them feels like juggling multiple versions of ourselves.
The reason is that microcultures are never neutral. Every microculture, no matter how positive, naturally creates a distinction between insiders and outsiders—an us vs. them dynamic. In the workplace, this often means that the broader organization itself becomes the “them.” Microcultures form around shared values, practices, or grievances, which can sometimes put them at odds with company-wide policies, leadership decisions, or the overarching corporate culture. Moreover, the meaning of concepts, goals, and behaviors can shift significantly from one microculture to the next.
When microcultures are healthy, they strengthen teams, enhance engagement, and improve retention. But when they feel threatened—whether by restructuring, policy changes, or leadership decisions—the fallout can be catastrophic. If left unaddressed, these tensions can lead to communication breakdowns, high turnover, low morale, decision-making paralysis, and workplace divisions.
Stop Fixing, Start Understanding
The instinct in organizational culture work is often to jump straight to solutions: to standardize, formalize, and proceduralize. But microcultures don’t work that way. They can’t be managed through another corporate initiative, another checklist, or another best practice borrowed from a different company. The biggest mistake organizations can make is assuming that what worked once will work again or that a single approach will fit all microcultures.
So before trying to “fix” microcultures, stop. Observe. Listen. Shift from doing to being aware.
Rather than forcing integration, start by understanding how microcultures naturally emerge and function. Instead of prescribing engagement tactics from the top, pay attention to where people already feel engaged. What keeps teams together? What unspoken norms make them thrive? And where do microcultures resist, disengage, or turn toxic?
The modern workforce exists in a delicate balance between personal identity and social belonging, between choice and collective expectations. Organizations that fail to recognize this reality risk alienating employees rather than fostering connection. The most effective leaders won’t be those who impose uniformity but those who navigate complexity with curiosity, adaptability, and a deep respect for the different identities that shape their organizations.
**********
Editor’s Note: This article was originally published in Performance Magazine Issue No. 32, 2025 – Employee Performance Edition.
Return-to-Office (RTO) mandates gained momentum throughout 2024, with major corporations advocating for in-person work under the premise of boosting productivity and strengthening workplace culture. Heading into 2025, tensions were rising, employee backlash was growing, and yet another wave of resignations seemed inevitable.
This shift comes after nearly five years of remote and hybrid work becoming the norm. During this period, employees embraced flexibility and autonomy, while organizations adapted by developing new work models to meet evolving needs. Yet, as companies like Amazon, X (formerly known as Twitter), and JPMorgan enforced stricter RTO policies, requiring employees to be in the office full-time or for a set number of days per week, one question remains: Are these mandates genuinely focused on strengthening workplace culture?
RTO Policies: Culture-Driven or Control-Based?
A Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) survey found that the stated top drivers of RTO include the need for in-person teamwork (75%), workplace culture and engagement (69%), leadership preferences (65%), restoring normalcy and routine (54%), and concerns about productivity (41%). Similarly, a Resume Builder study revealed that among the companies increasing office days, 86% believe it will boost productivity, 71% see it as essential for company culture, 57% aim to improve employee well-being, and 55% seek to enhance retention.
Despite these justifications, many employees remain resistant to RTO, seeing it as a disruption to flexibility rather than a cultural benefit. Making matters worse, a research study published in the S&P Global Market Intelligence Research Paper Series found that many managers admit they based RTO decisions more on intuition rather than data, further weakening employee buy-in. The consequences are already visible.
Several studies have examined the impact of RTO mandates on employee satisfaction, corporate culture, and business outcomes. The same research study found that RTO mandates negatively impact employee satisfaction in areas such as work-life balance, perceptions of top management, and overall corporate culture. In fact, the decline in employee perception of corporate culture challenges the claim that RTO policies strengthen it.
Moreover, the study found no significant improvements in firm performance, whether measured by profitability or stock market valuation, following the implementation of RTO policies. If the goal of RTO is to drive better business outcomes, the evidence does not support its effectiveness.
Beyond culture and performance, another analysis from the same research series reveals that RTO mandates also directly impact talent retention. On average, companies enforcing RTO see a 13% increase in turnover, with women leaving at nearly three times the rate of men. More senior employees are also more likely to exit, and it now takes firms 23% longer, or approximately 12 extra days, to fill positions post-RTO.
These results highlight the growing concern that RTO policies may cost firms their most valuable talent instead of strengthening their culture.
Productivity Focused on Performance, Not Presence
Delving into productivity, despite the push for RTO, data does not support the notion that in-person work equals better productivity. According to Microsoft’s Work Trend Index, 85% of business leaders say that the shift to hybrid work has made it difficult to assess employee productivity. Yet, there is a significant disconnect between leaders’ confidence in their teams’ productivity (only 12%) and employees’ self-assessment (87% feel productive).
Furthermore, many managers struggle with remote work dynamics, expressing doubts about their ability to effectively oversee employees outside the office. This so-called “productivity paranoia”, as mentioned in Microsoft’s Work Trend Index, has led organizations to focus on tracking visibility rather than actual impact. However, in organizations with worldwide ecosystems, I believe managing productivity through visibility is an outdated management mindset that no longer holds up.
To move past performative work habits, such as the “green status effect” or “productivity theater“, organizations need to shift toward results-driven performance management systems. Frameworks like the balanced scorecard (BSC) or objectives and key results (OKRs) provide structured ways to set clear expectations. When productivity is measured by outcomes, employees are empowered to be more accountable, engaged, and focused on achieving results.
Similarly, leaders must recognize that simply mandating a return to the office won’t automatically improve culture or engagement. Instead, intentional efforts are required to foster a strong company culture that boosts productivity, engagement, and job satisfaction, regardless of the teams’ work settings.
Some companies have successfully redefined their work models to balance flexibility with cultural cohesion. Airbnb’s flexible work model is a great example of how a company can adapt to the evolving work landscape without sacrificing culture or productivity. Airbnb has embraced flexibility by allowing employees to work from home or the office—and even relocate within their country without a pay cut. Rather than enforcing rigid office attendance, the company prioritizes meaningful in-person interactions through regular team gatherings, offsites, and social events designed to foster collaboration, connection, and creativity. These interactions are not about physical presence for its own sake but about creating valuable connections and deepening the sense of belonging.
Similarly, Dropbox’s Virtual First model strikes a balance between a remote-first approach and strategic in-person collaboration. While the company primarily operates remotely, it schedules quarterly sessions for team-building, brainstorming, and strategic planning. This approach ensures that creativity and community-building remain strong, even in a distributed workforce.
The aforementioned models show that with strategic in-person touchpoints, companies can maintain a strong culture without sacrificing flexibility. The evidence so far suggests that RTO mandates have not produced the cultural and productivity improvements many leaders expected. While it is still too early to predict the long-term impact of these policies, one thing is clear: returning to the traditional office model disregards the progress made in workforce management in the past five years.
A one-size-fits-all approach no longer aligns with the modern workforce. Organizations that recognize this shift and offer employees the flexibility to choose how they work best will be better positioned for long-term success. Moreover, fostering a strong company culture requires more than just physical presence—it demands intentional efforts to build engagement, trust, and a sense of belonging.
**********
Editor’s Note: This article was originally published in Performance Magazine Issue No. 32, 2025 – Employee Performance Edition.
Being a jack of all trades and a master of none used to put professionals at a disadvantage. But in today’s dynamic employment landscape, individuals with a diversified skill set are sharing the stage with specialists. Enter the age of the skills-first approach.
The skills-first approach is a transformative solution to employment challenges across the board. Removing traditional qualifications, such as academic requirements, could create a more inclusive labor market and empower individuals regardless of country, race, and gender—all while addressing global unemployment and labor shortages.
At the corporate level, embracing a skills-first approach allows companies to expand their talent pool and match candidates to the specific skills required for a job posting, as reported by LinkedIn in “Skills-First: Reimagining the Labor Market and Breaking Down Barriers 2023.” Moreover, the shift could increase a company’s chances of reaching financial targets by 63%, according to findings from the World Economic Forum (WEF) in “Putting Skills First: A Framework for Action.”
Here are the action areas for organizations based on the World Economic Forum’s proposed initial framework for systematically implementing skills-first practices:
Identify current and future skills needs and gaps and map skills to work tasks.
Articulate skills needed in job descriptions, and leverage and recognize innovative skills assessment methods.
Co-develop and co-deliver skills-based training programs with industry, learning providers, and government.
Boost lifelong learning and access to skills-based learning opportunities.
Create skills-based pathways for development and redeployment.
The WEF’s data also shows that a skills-first approach could enable over 100 million people to fully utilize their capabilities across different global economies. Furthermore, the WEF suggests that a wide variety of individuals will benefit, including those whose jobs are becoming obsolete as a result of advances in technology as well as people from different walks of life, including migrants and refugees who are struggling to be recognized in their host countries, parents and caretakers who have taken breaks to support their families, and people with disabilities who have face discrimination when it comes to showcasing their skills.
The spreading movement appears to be a relevant response to the findings of the WEF’s Future of Jobs Report for 2023, which underscores the urgency for businesses to address the skills gap as they compete to fill “the jobs of tomorrow.”
The game plan for workers is clear: Gain competencies for their preferred job or industry or choose from today’s most in-demand skills and build a “portfolio of skills”. According to LinkedIn’s data, since 2015, the skills that employees need for a specific job have changed by about 25%, and by 2027, that figure is projected to double.
Adopting a skills-first strategy will trigger changes in different areas of an organization, from talent development to performance measurement. It will amplify the call for a holistic approach to implementing employee performance management systems.
It is important to keep in mind that while employers are seeking candidates with abilities akin to a Swiss Army knife, it is equally important for these individuals to continuously learn and ensure that each of their tools is finely tuned to function effectively.
**********
Editor’s Note: This was originally published in Performance Magazine Issue No. 28, 2024 – Employee Performance Edition.
“An organization’s ability to learn and translate that learning into action rapidly is the ultimate competitive advantage.” This insight from General Electric (GE) Chairman and CEO Jack Welch captures a fundamental truth in today’s fast-paced business environment—where a strong performance culture rooted in continuous improvement can drive innovation and adaptability. Several studies consistently show the tremendous benefits of such a culture across various areas of business, from performance to innovation, and trends further validate this.
Personalized development plans are the result of performance culture, empowering employees to grow within inclusive, diverse, and tech-enabled ecosystems. Leading firms are also leveraging hybrid learning models tailored to individual and organizational needs, making education an integrated, adaptive journey crucial to business agility and innovation.
Meanwhile, employees in high-performing organizations are encouraged to adapt and reinvent themselves by fostering an attitude of constant learning. Through the development of a growth mindset, curiosity, and an openness to failure and experimentation, experiment-and-learn environments promote personal development and progress. An example of this culture is Google’s 20 percent time policy, which encourages staff members to dedicate time to their own ideas. This approach contributed to the creation of innovations such as Gmail and Google Maps, among others.
Similarly, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella’s transformation of company culture in 2014 from competitive to learning-focused further illustrates the impact of this approach. By encouraging continuous learning, fostering a growth mindset, and empowering cross-functional teams through initiatives like Microsoft Learn and Hackathons, Nadella’s leadership has led to a resurgence in both innovation and profitability.
While these trends reveal ideas that can help build a performance culture, the biggest challenge is determining what such a culture actually looks like and how to sustain it, rather than having it be just a one-off initiative. To gain clarity, an organization should rethink its approach to performance culture and continuously improve it to make sure that the right people, behaviors, and systems are in place.
According to the Global Performance Audit Unit (GPA Unit)—a division of The KPI Institute specializing in strategy and performance management system (PMS) maturity assessments—what makes developing a high-performance culture tricky is that it extends beyond strategy and performance management systems. The GPA Unit states that, “With no actual framework to lay down its fundamentals, the performance culture is a holistic impersonation of the strategy and performance management system. While more than many organizations associate a high-performance culture with the proper working environment, there is much more to the concept than a friendly office, random perks, and casual benefits.”
A performance culture is characterized by solid employee engagement, continuous learning and development, an aligned performance management system, inclusive environment and workforce diversity, effective leadership and relationship management, sustainable work-life balance, and a commitment to the principles of governance, responsibility, and high accountability.
In addition, the GPA Unit emphasizes that people analytics and data-driven strategies have been providing useful insights into the core components required to transform culture from a collection of superficial perks to a more strategic aspect of an organization.
Measuring culture with KPIs – KPI results can help identify strengths and weaknesses in the existing organizational culture and facilitate decision-making to drive improvement.
Actively using culture surveys – Simple yet meaningful culture surveys can collect employee sentiment and feedback, becoming the perfect internal assessment tool.
Building on talent data and HR analytics – People analytics equips leadership with insight on talent recruitment and development, employee performance, and retention.
Relying on the performance management system to strengthen alignment – A structured and coherent performance management system will ensure that the performance culture is aligned with the strategic mission and values of the organization while maintaining focus, agility, communication, collaboration, and well-being.
This approach suggests that a performance culture does not mold employees who are simply focused on performing tasks but are also growing in ways that support the organization’s long-term strategic goals.
Assessing Performance Culture Maturity
How can an organization determine whether its performance culture is sufficient and sustainable enough to achieve continuous improvement? The GPA Unit recommends the use of the Performance Culture Maturity Model Framework v1.0 to ensure a systematic, scalable approach to building and evaluating organizational and individual competencies. Using this system also allows organizations to identify its culture’s strengths and weaknesses and nurtures the right cultural elements.
The expected behavior of this framework focuses on establishing a cycle of continuous learning, measurable development milestones, and strategic alignment of skills with core business objectives. One of the framework’s key dimensions exemplifying this is Education and Knowledge. By integrating this dimension, organizations move through stages of maturity from ad hoc learning efforts to an optimized, fully integrated culture of performance.
As organizations mature, best practices such as continuous feedback loops, knowledge-sharing platforms, and leadership-driven learning initiatives become embedded in their DNA. For example, as organizations progress, the expected behavior transitions from static skill development programs to dynamic, adaptive learning ecosystems that respond to industry demands. This shift encourages employees to engage in cross-functional knowledge-sharing initiatives, develop expertise aligned with market needs, and accelerate personal and organizational growth.
The other dimensions of the framework are Integrated Performance Capability, Communication and Leadership Support, Creativity and Education, Education & Knowledge, Benefits & Recognition, and Happiness & Well-Being.
The journey toward a mature performance culture isn’t a quick fix—it’s a continuous evolution fueled by a commitment to learning and an openness to change. When employees are empowered to develop their skills and contribute their insights, they become not just participants but catalysts of transformation.
