Performance management is performance mismanagement

The system needs reforming. We should ditch all the ranks (retaining them only as honorary titles for exemplary achievements) and move to a base rate reflecting contractually agreed delivery of core tasks (teaching, scholarship, service) with increments based on years of service and then annual bonuses based on research income as well as other valued activities such as outputs, social responsibility, knowledge transfer etc (the rules can be set by institutions rather than sector-wide encouraging competition for labour) . Currently, promotions are based on performance during a review window with the expectation that a given trajectory will continue or accelerate even, but past performance may not predict future performance, which should be continuously appraised for remuneration purposes. Moreover, you may well have two academics ostensibly contributing/achieving the same in a year (same teaching load, grant income, outputs, etc) but with vastly different pay. This seems anomalous with the tenets of equal pay. With the suggested reform, you can continue to manage individuals' performances to aspire to the highest level but academics will be more secure in their jobs as long as they continue to deliver their core duties. It will also inject healthy competition into the system.