MU Employee Evaluation. (version valid as of 15 January 2016)

Similar documents
Curriculum for the Master of Laws (LL.M.) at the University of Copenhagen

Study Regulations for the Bachelor of Business Administration in Tourism, Hotel Management, and Operations

Guidelines of the Swiss University Conference for Academic Accreditation in Switzerland

GUIDELINES 1 September 2011 Updated 16 April Personnel recruitment guidelines

International Agreements

Regulation for the degree of Philosophiae doctor (Ph.D.) at Gjøvik University College

Study Regulations for the Master of Business Administration Program at MODUL University Vienna

Profile Description - International Business & Marketing

DEPARTMENT OF ACCOUNTANCY ASSESSMENT PLAN FOR MASTER OF SCIENCE IN TAXATION (M.S.T.) DEGREE

Study Regulations for the Bachelor of Science in International Management

Study Regulations for the Master of Science Programs at MODUL University Vienna

Regulations of the Graduate School of Communication Science of the Department 06 of the Westfälische Wilhelms University Muenster

Guidelines of the Swiss University Conference for Academic Accreditation in Switzerland

Study Regulations for the Bachelor of Business Administration Program in Tourism and Hospitality Management

GRADUATE PROGRAM IN JAPANESE LANGUAGE AND CULTURE (Master s Course) PROGRAM APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS

National Commission for Academic Accreditation & Assessment. Standards for Quality Assurance and Accreditation of Higher Education Institutions

McNeese State University. Academic Program Review. Standards for Graduate and Undergraduate Programs

Doctoral Programs. Admission Rules Article 1. (Object)

The Appraisal Interview

University of Turku Rules of Procedure

Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi

Evaluation of the Graduate School of Business and Social Sciences, Aarhus University

Kosovo Accreditation Agency/ KAA Guidelines on drafting the Self Evaluation Report (SER) for programme evaluation (G2)

REGULATIONS FOR THE PHILOSOPHIAE DOCTOR DEGREE (PHD) AT THE NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (NTNU) 1

DoQuP project. WP.1 - Definition and implementation of an on-line documentation system for quality assurance of study programmes in partner countries

Request for Proposals Executive Search and Human Resources Development services

Managing Director s Guidance Memo. Standards 301, 302, 314 and 315 June Relevant Standards and Interpretations

Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi

ASSESSMENT PLAN FOR MASTER OF SCIENCE IN TAXATION (M.S.T.) DEGREE OCTOBER 2012

Graduate School Charter for the Faculty of Mathematics, Informatics and Natural Sciences

Masaryk University Library Rules

Total Quality Management

University of Southern California

DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING COLLEGE OF BUSINESS ADMINSTRATION POLICY ON REAPPOINTMENT, TENURE, AND PROMOTION (RTP)

REGULATION ON DOCTORATE AT RIGA TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY. Terms and definitions:

Programme Regulations of the Master s degree programme in. Management, Technology, and Economics

Faculty of Business Administration. University of Economics, Prague

1 Applicability of these regulations

Regulation on doctoral studies at the Agricultural University of Iceland

CURRICULUM. FOR THE PhD PROGRAM INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS TAXATION. at WU Vienna University of Economics and Business

Masters (M.S.) in Instructional Systems Department of Educational Psychology & Learning Systems Florida State University

THE BEST BUSINESS SCHOOL. in Central and Eastern Europe according to Financial Times. Ph.D. in Management.

The Technion Graduate School Regulations

Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi

Republic of Albania Parliament. Law. N , date On the Higher Education in the Republic of Albania

Professional Graduate Business School Standards

The sphere of Lahti University of Applied Sciences includes the following fields of study:

Curriculum for the PhD programme at the Faculty of Law, University of Copenhagen

GUIDELINES FOR ADVISING MPH STUDENTS Master of Public Health, MPH One University Place, Rensselaer, NY

AGENDA ITEM III C PROPOSED ACADEMIC PROGRAM LOUISIANA TECH UNIVERSITY

STUDY REGULATIONS Study regulations for International Executive Master of Business Administration (MBA) program, applicable to English language

GUIDELINES TO THE CRITERIA FOR ACCREDITATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS IN BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

Master of Science in Management

Global Change and Sustainability

COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES HONORS PROGRAM GUIDELINES APPROVED BY THE CAS HONORS COMMITTEE ON 11/25/2009

Regulations for admission to studies at University of Nordland which are not regulated by national regulations or national curriculum

The graduates who succeed on the program s conditions get graduate degree within master of science title.

Educational Leadership and Policy 1705 E. Campus Center Dr. Rm. 308C Salt Lake City, UT (801)

Academic regulations for bachelor s degree courses at the UPC

Frequently asked questions, in the order of different parts of the form:

Computer Engineering Undergraduate Program (CpE) Assessment report

UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS, PRAGUE W. Churchill Sq. 4, Prague 3

Accelerated Graduate Degree Programs Proposal Template

AND CONSOLIDATED) ON HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS AND ON AMENDMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTS TO SOME OTHER ACTS (THE HIGHER EDUCATION ACT)

Winston-Salem State University RSA Scholars Program

REGULATION for MASTER S EDUCATION Approved on 27/05/2013 by Academic Board - Decision 2 (Appendix :1)

Internal Regulation Number: 5/2013

Rules of Doctoral Studies at the Gdansk University of Technology

Regulations of granting a PhD degree in The University of Jordan

HUMAN RESOURCES STRATEGY FOR RESEARCHERS AND ACTION PLAN FOR THE PERIOD

Regulations of granting a master s degree at the University of Jordan

General Syllabus for Doctoral Studies in Sociological Demography, 240 Higher Education Credits

Master of Science in Management

Profile Description - International Business & Marketing

Recommended Guidelines for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree (PhD)

UNIVERSITY OF READING

Graduate School Policies and Procedures

Aarhus Graduate School of Business and Social Sciences

Rules and Requirements. PhD Program (Doctoral Program Doctor of Philosophy )

HIGHER EDUCATION DOCTORATE PROGRAMS INTERNSHIP HANDBOOK

Guidelines for the Award of Degrees for Master s and PhD s Programs

Procedure for Master s Degree Thesis Defense, Graduate Institute of Art History, National Taiwan Normal University

RULES ON DOCTORAL STUDIES AT THE REYKJAVÍK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW. Article 1 Doctoral studies (Ph.D.)

General Syllabus for Ph.D. Studies in Political Science at Stockholm University (this is a translation of the original document in Swedish)

Finland:Doctoral Candidate positions at the Faculty of Education

REGULATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PALERMO: DOUBLE DEGREE, JOINT DEGREE AND INTEGRATED PROGRAM.

EXTRACT FROM THE REGULATIONS FOR THE DOCTORAL PROGRAM OF THE FACULTY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Regulation concerning the attainment of doctoral degrees at the KU Leuven

Special Courses of the MIS Master's Degree Program

COMMUNICATION INTERNSHIP GUIDELINES College of Charleston

AACSB Self Evaluation Report Documentation. Supporting Materials and Timeline

Strategy of the Faculty of Arts for recruiting new members of academic staff

PhD Degree Programme in Business, Economics and Statistics and Doctoral Degree Programme in Business, Economics and Statistics

Guidelines on the assessment and public defence of the PhD thesis at the Faculty of Business and Social Sciences, University of Southern Denmark

Additional Information about the Psychology Concentration

AMENDMENTS TO THE REGULATION ON UNDERGRADUATE AND GRADUATE STUDY PROGRAMMES THE CENTRE FOR CROATIAN STUDIES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB

Instructions of Study Process Management in the Georgian Technical University

Regulations for the Doctor of Philosophy degree (PhD) at University of Nordland

Regulations to the Doctor of Philosophy Degree (PhD) at MF Norwegian School of Theology, Oslo

Doctor of Business Administration Program Catalog

Transcription:

MU Employee Evaluation (version valid as of 15 January 2016)

Index 1 INTRODUCTION... 4 2 MU EMPLOYEE EVALUATION METHODOLOGY... 4 2.1 Internal employee evaluation guidelines... 5 2.2 Recommended evaluation procedure... 6 2.3 Recommended evaluation procedure schedule... 7 3 METHODOLOGICAL EMPLOYEE EVALUATION SUPPORT... 7 1 Introduction page No. 3/6

1 Introduction Quality assurance in higher education calls for the implementation of a high-quality internal employee evaluation system. The obligation to conduct an employee evaluation is determined by the Labour Code (section 302, letter a) and, in the case of academic employees 1, further regulated by the Masaryk University Career Code (section 7, subsection 1). A comprehensive employee evaluation system: provides a periodic overview of employee performance quality, helps optimize the university's existing human resource utilization, helps monitor unit development, boosts motivation and provides a transparent remuneration benchmarking tool, in accordance with the MU Career Code, employee evaluation outcomes are taken into account when determining the duration of an employee's employment relationship, including in the case of openended employment relationships. provides information on the annual performance of individual employees, their professional aims, career objectives and their fulfilment, annual employee evaluation outcomes constitute a basis for further evaluation procedures (unit selfevaluation, accreditation materials evaluation, etc.). Key requirements for the development of an employee evaluation system at Masaryk University included focus on its comprehensive and transparent nature, consistency throughout MU, flexibility designed to accommodate the specific needs of individual faculties and other MU constituent parts and the ability to cover a wide spectrum of activities while minimizing the administrative burden. The resulting EVAC 2 application, designed in collaboration with a specialized IS MU team, is capable of collecting data, providing a basic evaluation and generating output assessing the performance of MU employees. 2 MU Employee Evaluation Methodology Employee evaluation is carried out at the level of individual units at all MU faculties. Evaluators are generally unit heads, faculty deans or authorized vice-deans. The internal performance evaluation of 1 For the purposes of this document, academic employees include academic workers and other higher education employees who are not academic workers but who participate in educational, research and development activities as defined by the Masaryk University Career Code. 2 EVAC is an acronym which stands for EValuation of ACademics. Although the EVAC application focuses primarily on the evaluation of academic employees at MU faculties, it may be used at all other MU constituent parts. 1 Introduction page No. 4/6

employees is carried out on a regular basis, with specific dates for collecting data required by the evaluation process determined by the evaluator according to the needs of each faculty. A regular evaluation of academic employees must consider all key job performance areas, i.e. educational activities, research activities and organizational activities beneficial for the university, while also taking into account management activities and the performance of academic functions. Additional employee evaluation areas include the achievement of planned professional development (i.e. factual as well as formal qualifications) during the course of the past year, compliance with regulations stipulated by the employer, etc. An integral part of the evaluation process is also the assignment of objectives for the upcoming period. The annual evaluation process culminates with an evaluation meeting of the unit head and the evaluated employee; the senior employee can now rely on information obtained using EVAC, a dedicated IS MU application. Each employee is evaluated by the unit head individually with respect to obligations arising from the employee's position and other relevant circumstances. The final outcome of the process, i.e. a document summarizing the findings of the evaluation procedure, is placed in the employee's personal file (or, in case of electronic document approval using the EVAC application, in the employee's personal Records Service file). Evaluation records are not made available to third persons with the exception of the evaluated employee's direct superior, the head of the relevant constituent part of MU (or persons authorized by the head of this constituent part) and the Rector of MU (or persons authorized by the Rector). In case the EVAC application is used, all electronic records are kept in the IS MU; the same access restrictions apply. 2.1 Internal employee evaluation guidelines Throughout the employee evaluation procedure, it is essential to bear in mind that: 1. The regular employee evaluation system must be transparent (i.e. employee evaluation criteria must be clearly established). 2. The evaluation of an employee's performance must be conducted purely with respect to performance associated with the position in question (i.e. the performance of e.g. professors and lecturers must be evaluated according to different criteria). 3. In order to ensure equal opportunities, different standards may not be utilized for the evaluation of specific employees (standards must be consistent for individual positions). 4. Throughout the evaluation process, individual employees must be viewed comprehensively, i.e. taking into account all performance indicators (e.g. an employee cannot be judged on the merits of scientific performance alone in case their position also requires teaching). 5. Besides hard data, additional factors must be taken into account, including the employee's workload as well as various external or internal circumstances which could have affected their performance during the reporting period (e.g. the performance of additional activities beneficial to the university, placements abroad, habilitation thesis preparation, exceptional family-related or personal situations, etc.). 6. The overall employee evaluation also covers issues of professional ethics. 2 MU Employee Evaluation Methodology page No. 5/6

7. The evaluated employee must be provided with an opportunity to comment on evaluation outcomes. All comments made by both the evaluator and the evaluated employee are thus part of the final written record. 8. The employee in question has a right to discuss the evaluation in the presence of a third person acting on behalf of the employer and assigned for this purpose by the head of the relevant economic unit. 9. A written record which summarizes key evaluation outcomes as well as the employee's objectives for the upcoming period must be approved or rejected by the employee in writing. The record is archived in printed or electronic form (using the EVAC application). 2.2 Recommended evaluation procedure The EVAC application offered by the IS MU may be used for all evaluation stages described below. 1. The evaluator defines criteria for the evaluation of employees at a given unit, taking into account key job performance areas (education, research, organizational and managerial activities) as well as indicators facilitating the assessment of personal, work-related and social behaviour of the employee). 2. The evaluator sets a deadline for the collection of documents required for the evaluation and informs the employee of the collection period beginning and end dates (a period of no less than 10 days is recommended) as well as of the data collection method (e.g. using the EVAC application). The evaluator also informs the employee about the planned terms of evaluative meetings scheduled to take place following the completion of the document collection phase. 3. The evaluated employee provides the senior employee with any additional documentation requested during the designated data collection period; in case the IS MU application is used, the employee may be asked to add missing data electronically. The employee may comment on any of the monitored criteria (e.g. in order to clarify reasons leading to reduced work performance, etc.). The employee is required to complete a professional development schedule (i.e. including professional and formal skills) and propose a list of objectives for the upcoming period. The employee must provide the information truthfully. 4. The evaluator performs evaluation interviews, i.e. individual meetings with each evaluated employee. Evaluation interviews are based on previously collected data. The evaluator discusses the employee's job performance in individual evaluated areas, monitors the fulfilment of objectives set in the past and discusses the employee's work schedules and career growth planned for the upcoming period. 5. Outcomes of the evaluation interview are recorded in writing. The evaluator processes the final employee evaluation record either during or after the evaluation interview, i.e. once any circumstances potentially influencing the employee's performance have been discussed. The final evaluation record must be approved by both the employee and the evaluator (using either an electronic or handwritten signature). The record is subsequently placed in the employee's personal file (or, in case the personnel office is involved or in the event of electronic approval, in the employee's personal Records Service file). 6. Any disagreement with evaluation outcomes must be expressed by the employee in written form along with the relevant reasons. In such a case, the matter is referred to the head of the constituent part of MU or other authorised person. The outcomes of subsequent negotiations are recorded in writing and subsequently placed in the evaluated employee's personal file. 2 MU Employee Evaluation Methodology page No. 6/6

2.3 Recommended evaluation procedure schedule The frequency of academic employee evaluation is stipulated by the MU Career Code (section 7, subsection 1). The frequency of evaluation procedures designed for other employees is governed by the internal regulations of individual constituent parts of MU. In view of an employee's workload or employment relationship duration (e.g. workload of 0.5 or less, recently initiated employment relationship, etc.), the senior employee in charge of the evaluation may decide to cancel the evaluation procedure for that employee. The recommended term for holding an academic employee evaluation for a calendar year is the beginning of the spring semester of the following year, i.e. with data collection for the autumn semester completed, including all final exams (e.g. data collection for 2014 should not be launched until the second half of February 2015, with evaluation interviews and all concluding stages taking place in March or April 2015). 3 Methodological employee evaluation support Employee evaluation falls within the purview of the vice-rector for academic affairs. Methodological support is provided by the Academic Affairs Office of the Rector s Office. Up-to-date information regarding employee evaluation may be found on the website and any questions or comments may be directed to Academic Affairs Office employees. 3 Methodological employee evaluation support page No. 7/6