1. What would hold back an employer from using HRM technology that was likely to improve performance? Which of these obstacles, if any, are reasonable barriers to using HRM technology, and which should HR managers try to overcome?
2. Suppose you are an HR manager who wants to encourage your organization to begin using Workscape Performance Manager or a similar system. How would you measure whether this system is a wise investment for your organization?

We know that companies use performance management systems because they want employees to do the things that will help their company succeed. And we know that the business environment is constantly changing, so companies need to be flexible in terms of their strategies and objectives. So logically, performance management systems should be flexible, too, adjusting goals as economic, social, competitive, and technological forces introduce risks and open up opportunities.
That may be logical, but according to a recent survey, it isn't what companies are actually doing. The Human Capital Institute recently found that 66 percent of midsized companies said their performance management system isn't set up to adjust goals; rather, employees see performance appraisals and get new goals once or twice a year.
Constant adjusting of goals could be complicated and confusing, but HRM technology exists to make flexibility part of the system. For example, Works-cape Performance Manager is a Web-based HR application in which employees and their managers enter goals as the system prompts them through the process.
Then employees log into the system to see a list of their goals, indicating the priorities, progress, and deadline for each, along with planned development activities and tasks related to performance appraisal. Users of the system can look up and alter details of the plans and their progress at any time.