CIT Performance Management. Process Overview November 2009. Session Objectives. Understanding of Performance Management as a System Awareness of steps involved in managing and evaluating performance Future approach to Performance Management. Performance Management.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
CIT Performance Management Process Overview November 2009
Session Objectives • Understanding of Performance Management as a System • Awareness of steps involved in managing and evaluating performance • Future approach to Performance Management
Performance Management What do you think of when you hear “Performance Management?”
An effective Performance Management System is… A comprehensive process that maximizes engagement, development, and performance by all employees in the employment lifecycle by: • Defining and communicating performance expectations in a regular, on-going manner • Aligning position responsibilities with competencies (skills, attributes, talents) needed to successfully perform role • Remaining flexible, efficient, measurable, fair, and transparent • Proactively focusing on employee development and talent management to enable succession planning and career development to retain employees and to build skills for future needs • Linking performance to compensation, recognition, and rewards • Aligning employee’s work to department goals and objectives
Why is Performance Management Important? • No matter how large an organization is all performance begins with the individual • Individual performance impacts teams ,divisions, business units, and the organization • Success is achieved through people “If people know what they are suppose to do, get feedback on how they are or are not doing it, and get rewarded for doing they are supposed to be doing, companies will be more likely to get the results they desire.”
Why focus on Performance Management Now? • A desire to change the current process from a compliance-based performance dialogue focus to a holistic development-oriented process which will enable strategic changes as we re-imagine Cornell • Ensure a consistent focus on employee development across units and the organization, aligning performance conversations with strategic goals
How is an effective Performance Management System achieved? Training Train supervisors and employees CareerDevelopment Create Individual Development Plan (IDP) Utilize rotations and on-campus and off-campus training University MissionUnit Values and GoalsDepartment GoalsIndividual Goals Planning Establish unit strategy & goals Align goals of employee & unit Determine performance level criteria Recognition Correlate SIP and performance Correlate promotions and bonuses Utilize low-cost, no-cost ideas Assessment Annual PD On-going feedback Talent Discussion
Assessment • Annual Performance Evaluation • Talent Review Process • On-going feedback
Performance Evaluations • Formal discussion between a supervisor and employee occurring following some time frame as determined by an organization. • A form is utilized as a tool to both drive a discussion and create a permanent document for an employee’s file.
Why are Performance Evaluations Necessary? • Effectively communicate expectations for behavior and performance • Raise overall performance of the individual, work team, unit and Cornell • Improve communication between a supervisor and employee • Identify areas where development or training is desired • Establish a consistent process to develop, communicate, assess, and reward employees • Provide historical data for future supervisors who need to understand the context in which behaviors occurred • Establish objective, defensible documentation
Why are Performance Evaluations Necessary (Cont’d)? • Required by University • SIP eligible employees (term/regular part-or full-time, hired on or before February 28th of any given year) • Performance rating linked to SIP • CIT HR provides attestation annually to University Compensation – confirming evaluations have occurred (ratings are NOT submitted to OHR)
Why Performance Evaluations are Viewed Negatively • Information is poorly written • Comments are general and not specific • There is no link to employee’s job description or goals • Employees perceive them as unfair • Insufficient feedback gathered • Focus is on overall rating, not on the conversation or employee development • Evaluation is the same year after year • Employee and/or supervisor is uncomfortable giving feedback, even positive, or discussing their working relationship
Potential Results of Poorly Written and/or Delivered Evaluations • Employee does not feel valued • Loss of respect and trust for supervisor • Confusing expectations • Lower morale • Lower productivity • Perceived underlying reasons: retaliation, discrimination, doesn’t like me, etc. • Difficult to defend in court
Results of Inaccurately Inflated Evaluations • Gives employee a false sense of security and accomplishment which impacts motivation to do better • Negative impact on high-performers • Difficult to defend in court
CIT Talent Review Process Talent review began 5 years ago for CIT’s Directors to talk about WHY they were provisionally considering specific performance level ratings for individuals. Directors listened and thought about whether the REASONS being used in each case were similar to the reasons they were using, Performance level ratings are assessed and calibrated to ensure consistency of application across the department. The result is a set of rating criteria that defines behaviors associated with each performance level (1 through 5)
Consistent Ratings • Senior leaders need to agree on rating scales and definitions so that everyone has a common understanding of “what success looks like for their organization” • Consistency in ratings means that the narrative and ratings should match as well as the final overall rating should be supported in the early ratings. Inconsistencies can create problems both with employee perception and potentially legally. • Very important to use the same rating standards for people with the same level of responsibility for the same reasons as stated above.
Talent Review Myths • Myth 1: Due to funding limitations, we can only allocate a certain number of 4’s & 5’s • Truth: CIT funding is not related to the number of 4’s and 5’s given out. We believe people should get the rating that represents their performance for the given review period. We do not have arbitrary caps on ratings.
Talent Review Myths • Myth 2: Performance ratings are determined during the talent review meeting – even before the evaluation is written • Truth: The talent review does NOT set final ratings. The review process is incomplete at the time of the talent review meeting. Also, the conversation at the talent review is not as well-informed of specifics as is the direct supervisor and Director. The point is not about the rating of the individual but the development of a common set of criteria that divisions will use.
Remember, there are two key aspects of performance to consider: WHAT is accomplished and HOW it was accomplished. Results Integrity Community Innovation Respect
Example Employee A Employee B Deliverable: Represent unit on CIT Cross Divisional Team Result: Participated Rating: ? Behaviors: • Attended all meetings. • Shared information about meetings with workgroup. Deliverable: Represent unit on CIT Cross Divisional Team Result: Participated Rating: ? Behaviors: • Attended all meetings and volunteered to create/maintain Confluence site for team. • Provided updates to entire unit at unit ‘town meeting’ • Helped write and present team updates at CIT Town Meeting • Asked others in unit for input on discussion areas to bring feedback to meetings.
The Formal Evaluation Process • November 2009 – Information Gathering • December 7, 2009 – Talent Review • December 2009 – Evaluations Drafted and Reviewed • January 2010 – Performance Evaluation Discussions • February 15, 2010 – Performance Evaluations submitted to CIT HR
Information Gathering • Strongly encouraged and expected that everyone in CIT share feedback on their experience with others in the organization as well as request feedback on their individual performance • Collect emails, value cards, or other feedback received throughout the review period • Feedback can be given on and come from peers, internal CIT customers, and/or your management (optimal: 10) • Objective is to gather a wide range of perspectives on each person’s performance from a variety of sources.
Self-Evaluation • Employee completes self-evaluation (can complete performance evaluation form OR use form as a guide for narrative self-evaluation) • Document can be shared with the supervisor before or at the scheduled discussion • It’s another piece of information for the final review to help identify everything the employee has accomplished throughout the review period • Helps understand where potential misperceptions may exist – where more information may need to be gathered • A mechanism for an employee to self-monitor progress
Effective Evaluation Elements • Review employee’s position description noting any changes in job responsibilities • Compare data collected against the employee’s position description and program contributions • Review employee’s self evaluation • Consider the entire review period • Provide clear explanations of ratings using specific examples • Do not use ‘generalizations’; focus on behaviors – think about the “how” • Be careful not to use language that may be legally misconstrued • Be consistent in assigning ratings with overall rating • Differentiate between employees’ performance levels • Do not avoid areas that need improvement
Common Rater Errors • Halo Effect • Strictness, Leniency, and Central Tendency Bias • Recency Bias • Contrast Effect • Personal Bias
Overcoming Rater Errors • Good performance documentation. Written notes, regularly updated, can also serve as a source of specific information for coaching and counseling and as required documentation for progressive discipline cases. • Clear definition of employee objectives and performance expectations. If both the manager and the employee have a clear understanding of what is expected on the job, the entire performance evaluation process becomes much more effective.
Ratings Supported by Examples This is particularly important when ratings are on either of the extreme ends. The more specific the examples are the better. The best examples include: • Who was involved • What was expected • What was accomplished (or not) • What was the impact (or not) • How it was accomplished • Supporting feedback from others
Generalization vs. Behaviors • Bob has a positive attitude. Others really enjoy working with him. He always accepts new assignments –even things that are not included on his job description. He is a real pleasure to have on my team. • Bob always demonstrates a positive attitude – which makes others want to work with him. Recently he and a few other members of the team were assigned to the office move project – which was one of many assignments he willing accepted this year. He came to every meeting, was willing to take and distribute minutes for the rest of the team and personally walked around the new floor plan to every member of the team to discuss their needs in the new space. Not only was he integral in creating the new plan, but he really helped to convert others from being extremely negative about the move to being very supportive because of his upbeat nature, and keen listening skills. This is just one of several examples I could mention.
These are critical because… • Shows employees the supervisor cares and notices what they are doing • It’s hard to argue behaviors vs. judgments • Helps to clearly demonstrate specifics of what an employee should continue/discontinue doing • Provides solid information for supporting the assigned rating(s) • Provides a foundation to enable to employee to understand expected behaviors/results that can potentially help them achieve a higher rating for the next review period. • Protects legally and in government audits
Also… • Cornell’s expectations for CIT keep changing – the bar is continually rising • We are expected to do more with less – working smarter • Likewise, CIT’s bar is rising for “meeting expectations” each year. • Employees who are not making these changes will not meet expectations over time.
Legal Language It is very important to avoid language that could potentially be used against the unit or a supervisor in a lawsuit. A performance evaluation is something almost always subpoenaed in a lawsuit. • Topics to avoid: gender, race, religion, marital status, kids, disability, illness, age, sexual orientation, national origin and/or other personal life situations. • Something like – “receives too many personal calls” is ok – as a general statement since it is a work related policy issue. When in doubt, ask HR.
Setting Goals • The man who starts out going nowhere, generally gets there.Dale Carnegie, author and pioneer in self-improvement and interpersonal skills • There’s nothing so useless than executing a task efficiently when it actually never should have been executed at all.Peter Drucker, American management guru • The value of achievement lies in the achieving. Albert Einstein, German-born American theoretical physicist
Setting Goals • 4 Questions to consider • What is to be accomplished? • How will it be measured? • When should it be achieved? • How will it be achieved? • Determine reasonable outcomes and/or projects for the employee to accomplish during the upcoming review period • Identify as many are needed; however, make sure the workload is realistic • Follow the SMART criteria: • S – Specific • M – Measurable • A – Attainable • R – Realistic • T – Time Bound
Setting Goals • Supervisor and employee together may develop goals • Supervisor and employee may develop goals separately, then meet and make modifications • Supervisor develops goals and reviews them with the employee
Setting Goals • Allow flexibility when developing goals. They will need to be adjusted when work priorities change. • Joint involvement ensures shared understanding of performance expectations and accountability and responsibility of results. • Ask employee what they think they can achieve – then work together to set reasonable, obtainable expectations
Reviewing Goals • Supervisor is expected to monitor projects and assignments on a continual basis • Feedback can be given in a more timely manner and assistance can be provided, if needed • Recommended to review goals at least once during a given review period to discuss performance-to-date • Interim reviews should include a discussion about whether the stated goals have changed or should change
Sample Goals and Performance Expectations Example 1 Objective: Coordinate the technical aspects of the Stargazer project and ensure the project is complete by February 1, within the $600,000 budget, and that the resulting system meets customer specifications. Performance Expectation: “Fully Achieves Expectations” performance will consist of 1) completion by deadline, 2) costs at budget, 3)systems performance meets customer requirements, and 4) customer signs off that they understand user procedures and are able to operate the system
Sample Goals and Performance Expectations Example 2 Objective: Within the next six months, the employee will define customer requirements for the Stargazer system, develop a proposed system solution to meet requirements and obtain customer approval for mock-up, including input and output formats, computational processes, and quality assurance procedures. Performance Expectation: Customer evaluation of project produces ratings of “Frequently Exceeds Expectations” or higher on 1) responsiveness of customer needs, 2) timeliness, 3) quality of work, 4) efficiency/cost control, 5)technical performance of system.
Assessing Goals Supervisor documents outcome of employee’s efforts to achieve stated goals. This includes: • Description of extraneous factors or unanticipated events that complicated or inhibited the employee’s ability to achieve the desired result(s) • Reasons for any revisions that were made to the original goals and performance expectations as well as what adjustments were made • Discussion of how the employee performed – impact on peers, users, effectiveness of unit – focusing on behaviors, skills, knowledge, techniques involved and how the affected the effectiveness of the employee • List other accomplishments that were not included in the original list
Areas for Development • Traditionally, the focus as been on areas where performance is ‘below expectations.’ • In situations, where an employee has a ‘weakness’ that does or may impact their overall performance, these areas need to be discussed with the employee to ensure their success. Focus on developing strengths as well. • When the employee is fully meeting expectations, focus development on building strengths. • Work together to create more opportunities for the employee to utilize their strengths in their day-to-day work, where possible.
Identifying Strengths • Employees are best at identifying their strengths • Strengths are activities that make a person feel strong • S – Success (when you do it, you feel effective) • I – Instinct (before you do it, you actively look forward to it) • G – Growth (while doing it, you feel inquisitive and focused) • N – Needs (after you’ve done it, you feel fulfilled and authentic)
Giving Developmental Feedback • Describe the specific job behavior(s) that • met/exceeded expectations and needs to be replicated OR • that failed to meet expectations and needs to be improved • Explain the “line of sight” by describing how the behavior positively or negatively impacts the employee and the work unit • Ask the employee for comments; then LISTEN and discuss • Focus on the behavior not the employee
Continued… • Follow-up with feedback on growth and improvement efforts – recognize progress • Document, document, document (both positive and negative) • The evaluation should not contain surprises! Significant events or performance concerns included in the document should have been discussed with the employee during the review period. • If performance does not improve, consult with CIT HR to discuss next steps
Needs Improvement CIT HR must be consulted if it has been determined that an employee is not meeting expectations which may potentially result in a rating of “Needs Improvement” or “Fails to Achieve Expectations.” This must occur before the performance evaluation discussion is conducted.
Form – Changes 2009 • Ratings • Personal Communication Devices • Flexible Work Arrangements
The Meeting (supervisor) RESOURCE: Preparing for the Annual Performance Dialogue (employee and supervisor) http://www.ohr.cornell.edu/careerDev/performMng/preparingchecklists.html • Establish a convenient time and location • Allot ample time to allow for a meaningful and constructive discussion • Location should be free from interruptions (e.g. phone calls, office visitors, general conversations and other common office activities)
The Meeting (supervisor) • Encourage the employee to communicate - ask the employee to start the meeting talking about things they felt went well and things they felt could have gone better; Ask how you can help. • Use “I feel”, “I believe” rather than “you” language where possible – particularly if areas are sensitive/conflict laden • Actively listen to the employee and check for clarification and understanding • Agree to disagree – be respectful • Ask what you can do better
The Meeting Cont’d • Be realistic and honest – do not make promises or mislead • Agree on goals • Set dates to follow-up, if needed • Thank the employee • Revise evaluation, if needed • Have employee sign the final revision; obtain next level of supervision signature • Employee signature indicates the evaluation discussion occurred as well as receipt of the evaluation form and does not necessarily constitute agreement with the review.
The Meeting – Potential Mistakes • Failure to fully explain the rationaleof the evaluation process to the employee. • Rushing the meetingor allowing insufficient time for dialog. • Doing too much of the talkingyourself instead of actively listening to the employee. • Discussing activities instead of the resultsof those activities. • Avoiding or underemphasizing performance problems. • Being too negativewhen you do discuss problems. • Over-praising, the opposite sin. • Failure to cite specificsto support the rating. • Comparing employeesinstead of making individual assessments.