Durrell's SWEAT framework

While performance management tends to lead to 'corrosive' stress, if well-designed, it can promote ‘good' stress, or eustress. Eustress is a light level of pressure which helps us to stretch our performance a little beyond what we think we can do; whereas distress - corrosive stress - relates more to high pressure which triggers emotions such as anger, aggression, frustration, depression or disengagement (Bolles, 2017). This type of negative emotion generated by distress - whether outwardly or inwardly directed - risks impacting both our personal development and organisational productivity.

Distress can be mitigated by ensuring there is adequate performance support provided (Bolles, 2017); such as training and development for all staff - employees and managers - through regular up-skilling, mindfulness and stress-management training, awareness and sensitivity training, job sizing, mental health days, ensuring holidays are taken, mentoring, and buddy systems.

We can also ‘self inventory’; we can explore and develop our own insights for personal growth via a regular SWOT analysis; reflecting on our personal strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and threats to our progress (Bolles, 2017). But more than this, we could apply the SWEAT model (Durrell, 2024), exploring five instead of four sections for our personal strengths, weaknesses, experiences, accomplishments, and targets inventories, as follows:

• Strengths: "Identifies and acknowledges the soft and hard skills" (Durrell, 2024)
• Weaknesses: "Identifies the skills that need improvement. It can involve acquiring new skills, education, and training that are needed to reach the target" (Durrell, 2024)
• Experiences: A" record of work history and practical skills" (Durrell, 2024)
• Accomplishments: "Showcases achievements obtained in experiences. It can involve accolades obtained during community service, education awards, and extracurricular activities" (Durrell, 2024)
• Target: "Lists the career goal, aspiration, or objective" (Durrell, 2024)

It should be noted that, in working through each of these elements, we need to follow a process - which will take some time, if we do it properly - as outlined by Weihrich (1982):

• Brainstorm a range of experience, projects, strategies, macro- and micro-environmental factors as a lens to view:
• Experience: log it, tell mini stories, ensure there is data recorded, build accomplishments into each
• Strengths: what is internally going well for us;
• Weaknesses: what is internally not going well;
• Opportunities: what is – or what may become - a potential external  avenue and/or things that we want to target;
• Threats: and what is – or may become - an external challenge or work we want to avoid.
• Out of these ideas, identify the key elements or issues. Consider these in relation to our capacity, desired income, security, IP, longevity, investment, branding, reputation, strategic direction, development, ideas, resources, etc.
• Formulate strategies to meet the identified issues
• Then – because the list will be FAR too long – prioritise the issues and strategies.
• Implement the strategies which we can afford to implement now. Bank the second tier for implementation when the first tier are underway
• Monitor strategies regularly to see what works. Review the SWOT regularly and build into the our planning cycle.

And then we should be good. 

Sam

References:

Bolles, G. (2017). The Future of Performance Management: Dark Side to Performance Management [video]. LinkedIn Lynda Course. https://www.linkedin.com/learning/the-future-of-performance-management/team-performance-design?autoSkip=true&autoplay=true&resume=false&u=76059146

Durrell, J. L. (2024, January 5). S.W.E.A.T It Out: A Guide For Job Application Documents. National Career Development Association [NCDA]. https://associationdatabase.com/aws/NCDA/pt/sd/news_article/562211/_PARENT/CC_layout_details/true?tcs-token=c5d672670ffda7c9af250c94151f65ab7cc8f66578ef1b7f03a4fc33f7a58f82

Weihrich, H. (1982). The Tows Matrix – a Tool for Situational Analysis. Long Range Planning, 15(2), 54-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(82)90120-0