THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT - THE STELLENBOSCH UNIVERSITY EXPERIENCE

Transcription

1 THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT - THE STELLENBOSCH UNIVERSITY EXPERIENCE 7 November 2008 HUMAN Human RESOURCES Resources DIVISION Presented by by Gretchen Louis Siebert Arangies 1

2 Performance management is a systematic approach to managing people, goals, measurement, feedback and recognition with the purpose to motivate staff to reach their full potential and at the same time realise the organisation s goals. (Mark Bussin, People Dynamics, March 1992) 2

3 1990 started with performance evaluations at SU based on attributes/behaviour 1998 New Remunerations Policy approved and adopted performance based remuneration 2004 Council approved PM policy started with work agreements based on KPA s and measurable outputs linked to the goals of the environment Allowed environments to use own system with certain requirements 3

4 600 Appointment Category / 65% / 35% No of obs

5 Work Agreements / 77% No of obs / 23%

6 450 Familiar with PE process / 55% No of obs / 10% 151/ 20% 99/ 13% / 1% Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree NA 6

7 Satisfied with PE process in environment No of obs / 37% 248/ 34% 164/ 22% 42/ 6% 12/ 2% Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree NA 7

8 Performance Discussions / 85% No of obs / 15%

9 400 Corrrect answer = / 46% / 30% 200 No of obs / 21% / 1% 12/ 2%

10 Effective management of poor performers / 41% / 33% No of obs 40 36/ 13% 20 12/ 4% 22/ 8% 0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree NA 10

11 180 PDP / 59% No of obs / 22% / 7% 16/ 6% 18/ 7% 0 Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree NA 11

12 2007/2008 Evident that application not optimal Link to other management practices HR committee request for bigger differentiation in annual increases based on performance marks 2009 new drive in respect of PM training 12

13 Context (Why) PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT Content (What) Processes (How) 13

14 Criteria-based goals On completion of the workshop line managers/staff members should: Be familiar with the rationale of performance management at SU Be familiar with the content of performance management at SU Be familiar with the process and flow of performance management at SU 14

15 (Content) Be able to draw up a work agreement Be able to design a PDP 15

16 (Processes) Be able to use work agreements to appropriately contract with subordinates regarding performance Be able to monitor performance continuously Be able to evaluate performance and give effective feedback Be able to calibrate performance marks in own environment 16

17 Human Capital Performance Management Model SERVICE CONTRACT ROLE DESCRIPTION PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PDP) WORK AGREEMENT COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK 17

18 Strategic Focus Areas Vision Mission Strategy Goals/business plans Performance outcomes Work agreements Line managers Personnel PDP Performance monitoring Results Recognition Manage poor performers Performance evaluation 18

19 WORK AGREEMENT KPA: KPA weight KPA point Performance indicators Goals/Standards Point attained (5-point scale) Weight Performance point 19

20 PERFORMANGE MANAGEMENT CONTRACTING KPAs of SU and environment shared with staff members KPAs allocated to staff members Work agreements developed by staff members Contracting/negotiating between line manager and staff members KPAs cascaded and fairness ensured by line manager No agreement Appeal process 2 levels and/or arbitrator Agreement Signed by both parties Performance monitoring Performance evaluations 20

21 PERFORMANCE MONITORING Evaluate performance of environment Communicate environment s performance Staff member monitors individual/own performance Ongoing performance evaluation discussions between line managers and staff Pro-actively identify environment/individual problems and opportunities Pro-actively renegotiate Recognition of good performance/performers Manage poor performers 21

22 360 /Multirater Assessment First Level Supervisor Second Level Supervisor Clients/Students Self Appraisal Peers Subordinates 22

23 5 POINT RATING SCALE: 1 Work performance completely unacceptable 2 Work performance mostly unacceptable 3 Work performance complies with contextualised norms 4 Work performance above average in some respects 5 Work performance is excellent 23

24 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS (INTERVIEWS) Preparation phase Introduction phase Comparison phase Analytical phase Renegotiation phase Development phase I N T E R V I E W Calibration phase 24

25 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (CALIBRATION) C A L I B R A T I O N P R O C E S S Clarify goals of evaluation process Clarify evaluation scale Performance evaluations Calibrate marks of individuals in environments Calibrate marks of individuals between environments RMT calibrate marks Finalise marks Communicate adjusted marks to individuals Line heads motivate over-achievers 25

26 MANAGING POOR PERFORMANCE To whom does the policy apply? This policy applies to all employees who cannot comply with the required performance standards because of incompetence, such as lack of the necessary skills, training or aptitude. It does not apply to employees who are capable of meeting the necessary performance standards but refuse to do so or fail to do so because of negligence or carelessness. 26

27 MANAGING POOR PERFORMANCE Identify under-performing staff member Informal session(s) to discuss improvement process Formal evaluation Not acceptable Acceptable No agreement Appeal Arbitration Agreement Performance enhancement process - > 3 months - Monthly evaluations Recognition/support Formal evaluation Not acceptable Disciplinary action Acceptable Dismissal Decrease (job/remuneration) Transfer Recognition/support 27

28 Link to remuneration General increase Overarching performance mark = 5; Remuneration adjustment = 1 x X% Overarching performance mark = 4; Remuneration adjustment = 1 x X% Overarching performance mark = 3; Remuneration adjustment = 1 x X% Overarching performance mark = 2; Remuneration adjustment = 0.5 x X% Overarching performance mark = 1; Remuneration adjustment = 0 x X% Rector s Award for Performance Compensation Workbench 28

29 STELLENBOSCH UNIVERSITY PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PDP) NAME : JOB TITLE : JOB LEVEL : UT NUMBER : SECTION : PRESENT JOB APPOINTMENT DATE : HIGHEST QUALIFICATION : OTHER QUALIFICATIONS : LINE MANAGER : MENTOR (S) : Staff member in possession of the following updated documentations (date) : ROLE DESCRIPTION WORK AGREEMENT COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK SKILLS DEVELOPMENT (Last 12 months) INTERVENTIONS COMPLETION DATE SHORT TERM (Present job) LONG TERM (Career development) 29

30 PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PDP) GOALS COMPETENCIES REQUIRED (PRIORITY) INTERVENTIONS/DATES/COSTS APPROVED COMPLETED DATE OJT = ON JOB TRAINING SC = SHORT COURSES (Intern/ Extern) FQ = FORMAL QUALIFICATIONS Short term (skills/knowledge & attitudes needed for the optimal functioning in present job) Long term (skills/knowledge & attitudes needed for career path/development link to talent management/success or planning) STAFF MEMBER : DATE : LINE MANAGER : DATE : 30

31 CHECK LIST BUSINESS PLAN in line with the SU plan staff opportunities for input includes vision and mission consists of KPAs, KSFs, action plans, standards, goals and responsible persons signed ROLE DESCRIPTION all staff with updated role descriptions indicates clear responsibilities and tasks for specific role WORK AGREEMENT all staff in possession of their WA in line with environment plan consists of KPAs/ KSFs/standards/weights in line with job level and role description updated and signed PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PDP) environment development plan reflects individuals PDPs all staff in possession of an updated and signed PDP PDP in line with WA, competency framework and RD PDP discussion on ongoing basis 31

32 CHECK LIST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION ongoing monitoring of environment and individuals ongoing feedback of the results 360 evaluation process ongoing discussions with one formal feedback discussion with every staff member final evaluation report signed Calibration PERFORMANCE RECOGNITION staff informed of process allocations acknowledge performers poor performers are managed in line with required process PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT PROCESS staff are satisfied with the way performance is managed in environment the process from finalising the business plan up to the recognition process is open and fair knowledge and skills of management and staff as required performance management included in management s KPA and PDP 32

33 74 Performance Management workshops presented since Sep attendees (from Deans, HOD s to general staff) 33

34 Number of staff members evaluated:

35 TOP PERFORMERS Guideline 20% of employees Mark Mark

36 Performance evaluation cycle: Jan - Dec September/October Proposed general increase known By 15 December Feedback discussion and performance marks of poor performers captured on system 1 January - Remuneration increment December to March Feedback discussions with other staff and finalize work agreements for next cycle By 31 March Final performance marks on Oracle 31 May Payment of Rector s Awards for performance 36

37 Monitoring of PM System 3 month interview with new appointees Spot checks on work agreements and PDP s Annual audit by external auditors 37

38 ROLE OF GOVERNING BODY: Council Remunerations Committee of Council Audit and Risk Committee of Council HR Committee of Council VCMT 38

39 Stellenbosch University PERFORMANCE MARK NUMBER % NUMBER % NUMBER % NUMBER % NUMBER %

40 PERCENTAGE STAFF MEMBERS PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT YEAR

41 Faculty of Agrisciences PERFORMANCE MARK NUMBER 2009 NUMBER 2010 NUMBER 2011 PERCENTAGE 2009 PERCENTAGE 2010 PERCENTAGE

42 PERCENTAGE STAFF MEMBERS PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT 120 FACULTY OF AGRISCIENCES PERFORMANCE MARK 0 42

43 Executive Director: Operations and Finance PERFORMANCE MARK NUMBER 2009 NUMBER 2010 NUMBER 2011 PERCENTAGE 2009 PERCENTAGE 2010 PERCENTAGE

44 PERCENTAGE STAFF MEMBERS PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: OPERATIONS AND FINANCE PERFORMANCE MARK 44

45 Key elements for implementation: Buy-in and support of governing body and management Communication Training of managers and staff 45

46 New developments: 360 degree assessments for all staff Electronic assessments Bigger differentiation in annual increases based on performance marks 46

47 CHALLENGES: Avoidance of conflict Insufficient management of poor performers Insufficient link to training and development needs (PDP) 47

48 Performance Management Policy and Remuneration Policy under Policies and Procedures Work Agreement Template, Personal Development Plan Template and Checklist for Audit Purposes under HR Forms 48

49 THANK YOU!