New Performance Management Policy

APRIL 2013

So what’s this all about?• A fair, wider ranging and more open system

for honest performance assessment

• …in which we evaluate the ‘how’ (behaviours) as well as the ‘what’ (delivery)

• …with validation of performance ratings across employee groups of the same grade

• …to help in awarding ratings, addressing performance and developing talent

So does this change everything?

• No. The key relationship is still between job holder and manager (eg to set objectives)

• …the emphasis remains on fairness, honest feedback and managing performance promptly

• …with the aim of developing our people for the benefit of the Agency as well as themselves

• …but with a broader view of ‘performance’

Main Changes (1)

• CEO email 17 Dec 12 introduced the changes• Performance & development year begins Apr• Mandatory people management objective &

leadership objective (HRAN 2009/02)• SMART objectives (+ reasonable adjustments)• Assessed against `what’ (delivery) and `how’

(behaviours, competencies, values)• Consistency check across peer groups

Main Changes (2)

• Regular performance discussions

• Mandatory mid-year review (Sep/Oct)

• Job-holders complete a self-assessment of their performance at mid-year

• LMs provide an indication of performance level using the ‘Performance Wave’ tool

• Validation check across peer groups

Main Changes (3)

• 3 performance ratings:

1 = exceeded outcomes & behaviours2 = exceeded / satisfactory / just met 3 = satisfactory / must improve/develop

NB: Employees being formally managedfor poor performance are excluded

Performance Wave

Main Changes (4)

• Mandatory end of year review / job-holder prepares a self-assessment

• LM and JH bring examples to support assessment

• End of year validation (LMs meet to review performance of a group of employees with their peers). Outcome is agreed rating

• Guided distribution range (1 = up to 25%; 2 = 50% to 80%; 3 = 10% to 25% of staff)

Main Changes (5)

• Consistency checking – countersigning & LMs consult on performance expectations at start / mid / end of year for consistency.

• Countersigning manager ensures consistent performance expectations; agrees employee peer group; checks end year-consistency; ensures unsatisfactory performance dealt with

• Disagreements – JHs can appeal or raise grievance if process not followed

Performance Year

Main Changes (6)

• PDPs discussed at start of the calendar year and in accordance with HRAN 2010/12

• Refer to ‘A Manager’s Guide to Developing Staff’ on L&D microsite for further PDP advice

• See also `How To’ resources e.g. set SMART objectives; deal with performance dips; conduct validation and consistency checks; roles & responsibilities; constructive feedback; learning support for performance management

Summary

• Performance is the joint responsibility of the manager and the job holder, addressing both what we do and how it is done

• Performance will be proactively managed in a supportive learning environment, with regular feedback and prompt action to address performance concerns as they arise

• This is a fair and consistent performance management system, with a better focus on developing our people

• Between now and April we will hold briefings and workshops to help managers and staff familiarise themselves with the new process