THE PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR DEPUTY MINISTERS. May 2012

Transcription

1 THE PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR DEPUTY MINISTERS May 2012

2 HISTORY The Performance Management Program for Deputy Ministers has been in place since 1999 following the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Senior Level Retention and Compensation. The objectives of the program are to: encourage excellent performance and recognize the achievement of results linked to business plans and government objectives and to encourage and recognize the demonstration of leadership competencies; and, to provide a framework within which a consistent and equitable approach to performance management can be applied. 2

3 THE PROGRAM Performance Agreements Program Results Policy & Program Results Commitments consistent with business plans and broader Government priorities Excellence in the achievement of departmental business plans and policy / program objectives 40% of at-risk 60% of at-risk Management Results Commitments consistent with the MAF Leadership Results Commitments consistent with the Key Leadership Competencies Corporate Results Annual corporate performance commitment related to a Government priority Excellence in public sector management, including people management, as defined by the MAF Excellence in the display of expected behaviours as expressed by the Key Leadership Competencies Excellence in the approach taken by the organization in contributing to the annual corporate performance commitment 3

4 RATINGS 1. A ra,ng for corporate results : Does Not Meet did not meet expecta-ons Par?ally Achieved did not fully achieve the expecta-ons and/or only par-ally met the established criteria for the corporate commitment Achieved has achieved the performance expecta-ons and meets most or all of the established criteria for the corporate commitment Fully Achieved fully achieves the performance expecta-ons and meets or exceeds all of the established criteria for the corporate commitment 2. A ra,ng for individual results: Did not Meet /Unable to Assess: Did not achieve performance expecta-ons or unable to assess the performance during the cycle (due to leave, training, special assignment) Succeeded : Did not fully succeed in mee-ng performance expecta-ons. Or, while succeeded, it was in a posi-on with performance expecta-ons of less scope and complexity in rela-on to those of other deputy level jobs. Succeeded : Has fully achieved the performance expecta-ons. Succeeded + : Exceeded the performance expecta-ons. Or, fully succeeded in a posi-on of greater scope and complexity in rela-on to those of other deputy level jobs. Surpassed : Went well beyond performance expecta-ons.

5 COMPENSATION LEVEL DM 1, GX TOTAL AT RISK PAY DOES NOT MEET 40% FOR CORPORATE RESULTS 60% FOR INDIVIDUAL RESULTS PARTIALLY ACHIEVED ACHIEVED FULLY ACHIEVED* DOES NOT MEET S S S+ SR* 20% 0% 4% 6% 8% 0% 6% 9% 12% 12% 6% DM 2, 3 25% 0% 5% 7.5% 10% 0% 10% 12.5% 15% 15% 8% DM 4 30% 0% 6% 9% 12% 0% 14% 16% 18% 18% 9% BONUS * To be eligible for a Surpassed ra,ng on individual results (and a bonus), a deputy must earn a ra,ng of Fully Achieved on his/her corporate results. Examples: A DM 2 earns Achieved for corporate results and Succeeds for individual results: Total performance pay awarded = 20% (7.5%+12.5%) at risk A DM 1 earns Fully Achieved for corporate results and Succeeds+ for individual results: Total performance pay awarded = 20% (8%+12%) at risk

6 MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK Management Results: Individuals with responsibility and accountability for the management of an organiza,on are measured on their progress in implemen,ng the management condi,ons described in the Management Accountability Framework (MAF), with emphasis on the priori,es iden,fied by the deputy minister and the Secretary of the Treasury Board or the Chief Human Resources Officer, including people management. The management condi,ons set out in the MAF translate into generic commitments and serve as benchmarks for expected performance of all deputy ministers. As such, there is no need for deputy ministers to include management results in their performance agreements unless they wish to highlight a par7cular ini7a7ve. 6

7 ASSESSMENT INPUTS At the end of the performance cycle, each deputy minister completes a self evalua,on assessing achievements against the agreed upon commitments. Addi,onal informa,on is sought by the Privy Council Office to supplement the self evalua,ons including: the input of the responsible Minister; the comments of central agencies including the Privy Council Office, the Treasury Board Secretariat and the Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer repor,ng on results in rela,on to the MAF; the input gathered by a recently re,red deputy minister from others as appropriate, such as chairpersons of deputy minister commibees and other deputy ministers or deputy heads in the porcolio; and the input of the Commibee of Senior Officials. 7

8 HISTORICAL RESULTS Year Total Popula?on Did Not Meet / Unable to Assess Succeeded Succeeded Succeeded + Surpassed (8%) 6 (9%) 20 (31%) 16 (25%) 17 (27%) (11%) 7 (11%) 23 (35%) 20 (31%) 8 (12%) (9%) 5 (6%) 30 (41%) 23 (31%) 10 (13%) (7.8%) 16 (20.8%) 32 (41.6%) 18 (23.3%) 5 (6.5%) (9.0%) 5 (6.4%) 38 (48.7%) 21 (26.9%) 7 (9.0%) (7.1%) 3 (3.5%) 42 (49.4%) 26 (30.6%) 8 (9.4%) (14.0%) 3 (3.5%) 37 (43.0%) 29 (33.7%) 5 (5.8%) (4.4%) 8 (8.8%) 40 (43.9%) 33 (36.3%) 6 (6.6%) 8