2005 Performance Development System Survey Human Resources Staff Meeting March 20, 2006.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A Presentation to the Cabinet A Presentation to Stakeholders
Advertisements

Performance Management
Performance Management
Performance Development Plan (PDP) Training
1 Performance Assessment Process: The Reviewer’s Perspective May 2014.
Mid Year Performance Review Process
Campus-wide Presentation May 14, PACE Results.
HOUSTON EMPLOYEE ASSESSMENT AND REVIEW (HEAR) PROCESS INFORMATION SESSION NON-SUPERVISOR For more information, visit
Session 2.3: Skills for Supportive Supervision
1. Set expectations and measure performance ◦ What employees are expected to do for their organization in return for pay and benefits ◦ Allows employees.
Performance Management Guide for Supervisors. Objectives  Understand necessity of reviews;  To define a rating standard across the Foundation for an.
HOUSTON EMPLOYEE ASSESSMENT AND REVIEW (HEAR) INTERIM APPLICATION ORIENTATION FOR TRAINERS & HEAR ADMINISTRATORS For more information, visit
UCLA Student Affairs Performance Management Program (PMP)
Logistics Customer Satisfaction Survey Results FY 2007 Logistics FY 2007 Customer Satisfaction.
2012 Performance Evaluation System. Why An Evaluation? O Set expectations between Supervisor and the employee. O Valuable tool for an employees in their.
Performance Assessment Process: The Employee’s Perspective May 2014.
 Revisions and General Guidelines.  Productive performance management is key to employee engagement.  You spoke. We listened.  Here are a few items.
7.1 Improved Performance Abilities, know- ledge, skills Select: match workers to tasks Supervisor’s Action Necessary Condition Instructions Direct: tell.
System Office Performance Management
Performance Appraisal System Update
Performance Development Plan (PDP) Training
Staff Compensation Program Update
STAFF APPRAISAL PROGRAMS
Position Questionnaire Supervisor Training ND Renew Agenda  Overview  Objectives  Supervisor Role and Responsibilities  Position Questionnaire.
2010 Performance Evaluation Process Information Session for Staff
Employee Development and Retention Rick Kauzlarich State Right of Way Chief 2005 AASHTO/FHWA Right of Way & Utilities Subcommittee May , Austin.
National Public Health Performance Standards Local Assessment Instrument Essential Service:8 Assure a Competent Public Health and Personal Healthcare Workforce.
United States Fire Administration Chief Officer Training Curriculum Human Resource Development Module 6: Managing the Workforce.
Performance Management Open Information Session Spring 2009.
Career Management A Roadmap for Planning Your Career.
A Performance Management System
Tulane University 1 Tulane University Employee Satisfaction Survey Results October 2012.
Teacher Engagement Survey 2014
Department of Administration Employee Relations Committee 2012 Survey.
Succession Planning Who will replace your leaders? Presented by Jacquelyn Thorp, MSHR/SPHR -CA.
Staff Performance Evaluation Process
2010 Results. Today’s Agenda Results Summary 2010 CQS Strengths and Opportunities CQS Benchmarks Demographics Next Steps.
College Board EXCELerator Schools Site Visit Preparation.
UBC Department of Finance Office Staff Survey Forum Presentation March 17, 2004.
NATIONAL SURVEY OF STUDENT ENGAGEMENT AT IU KOKOMO Administrative Council 26 September 2007.
Campus Quality Survey 1998, 1999, & 2001 Comparison Office of Institutional Research & Planning July 5, 2001.
Performance Development System Web Enhancement Training pds.temple.edu.
Faculty Satisfaction Survey Results October 2009.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin© 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. 7-1 Chapter Rewarding Organizational Behavior.
General Staff Performance Reviews Campus Briefings
Hawaiian Airlines Na Leo Survey 2010 Your Results.
WLUSA/OSSTF Annual Performance Review Process Human Resources & WLUSA| 2015.
© 2004 by Prentice Hall Terrie Nolinske, Ph.D Developing Careers.
TTI Performance Evaluation Training. Agenda F Brief Introduction of Performance Management Model F TTI Annual Performance Review Online Module.
Achieving Business Impact Winner - Best Results of a Learning Program.
New Supervisors’ Guide To Effective Supervision
The Use of Formative Evaluations in the Online Course Setting JENNIFER PETERSON, MS, RHIA, CTR DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SCIENCES.
GC e-Orientation Program for New Hire Module 4 – Knowing your Career in Oracle Updated by HR in July 03.
Performance Evaluation Committees’ Report Combined Report from Committee for Professional and Administrative Staff and Committee for Classified Staff 2016.
Employee Satisfaction Survey Results 2015 v Employee Satisfaction Survey Results 2015 v Work Areas 2015 Response Count 2014 Response Count.
School of Biological Sciences Staff Survey 2013 Department of Zoology Results Briefing, 21 May 2013.
2009 Annual Employee Survey U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development December 29,2009 (updated January 8, 2010)
COLORADO COLLEGE PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE  WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT GOALS?  VALUE OF GOALS  DESIGNING SMART GOALS  EXAMPLES.
Performance Evaluation Policy Macon County. Performance Appraisal is a process... Not a form or document.
D. Randall Brandt, Ph.D. Vice President Customer Experience & Loyalty The Customer Experience Trust Factor Do You Know How Well Your Employees Are Delivering.
Mid-Year Performance Review Process University System of New Hampshire System Office | 5 Chenell Drive, Suite 301, Concord, NH
Northwest ISD Board Presentation Staff Survey
©SHRM SHRM Speaker Title Bhavna Dave, PHR Director of Talent SHRM member since 2005 Session 2: Relationship Management Competencies for Early-Career.
Mid Michigan Community College Prepared by President Christine Hammond March 31, 2016 PACE Survey Results Summary.
Performance Management
Performance Management
Performance Management and Employee Development
Competency Based Learning and Development
Competency Based Learning and Development
2018 Great Colleges Survey for Champlain College
Presentation transcript:

2005 Performance Development System Survey Human Resources Staff Meeting March 20, 2006

Has the Performance Development System Made a Difference?  2004 Survey – Baseline date on Performance Management prior to the PDS  2005 Survey – Solicited opinions on: Supervisory performance management practices Career development and advancement opportunities Training participation and impact/transfer to the job Customer Service

The Upside  More people participated— up 12.7% ,208 respondents out of 4,004 supervisors and staff (30.2%) 2004 – 1,072 respondents  Mean scores increased across the board The PDS is having a positive impact on employees and Temple University. “ I am sure this system has played an important role in identifying the duties of various positions and strengthening the communications among employees and supervisors.“

Significant Improvements Difference Formal evaluations each year TU encourages performance excellence Setting annual work goals Taking advantage of professional development

Significant Agreement 94% 92%

Mixed Reviews Supervisor Effectiveness Supervisor Mean Employee MeanDifference Acknowledges accomplishments Gives ongoing feedback Has skills to manage Meets with staff to set annual goals “My work performance isn't managed or acknowledged at all.“

Development/Training  Majority agree that: They receive the training necessary – 78% Supervisor encourages professional development – 83% Take advantage of professional development – 90% Use/apply learning to perform better – 85%  Majority of supervisors agree that: They reinforce what employees learn – 83% They encourage employees to participate – 88% Employee apply what they learn to perform better – 81%

Mixed Reviews on Customer Service 2005 Supvr Mean EE MeanDiff. CS has enhanced my ability to deliver high quality service “ As far as the customer service focus of the U., in general this atmosphere provides a helpful context, but there has been no direct impact, good or bad, on my department's work.” 2004 Supvr Mean EE MeanDiff. I understand importance of CS I have the skills to deliver quality CS

2004 Student Questionnaire (1=very dissatisfied, 2=Somewhat dissatisfied, 3= somewhat satisfied, 4= very satisfied)  I feel the Temple offices I interact with provide quality customer service 2.71  In general, I have received good treatment at Temple 3.15  If I had to do over again, I would enroll at Temple 3.16  Overall satisfaction with education received at Temple 3.16

2005 National Survey of Student Engagement Relationship with administrative personnel and offices (1= unhelpful, inconsiderate, rigid to 7 = helpful, considerate, flexible) Temple first year students 4.16 Temple seniors 3.95 Urban Universities first year students 4.49 Urban Universities seniors 4.40

2005 National Survey of Student Engagement How would you evaluate your entire educational experience at this institution? (1=poor, 2=fair, 3=good, 4=excellent)  Temple first year students 3.01  Temple seniors 3.08  Urban Universities first year students 3.02  Urban Universities seniors 3.05

2005 National Survey of Student Engagement If you could start over again, would you go to the same institution you are now attending? (1=definitely no, 2=probably no, 3=probably yes, 4=definitely yes)  Temple first year students 3.11  Temple seniors 3.04  Urban Universities first year students 3.06  Urban Universities seniors 2.99

Concerns

FY 2004/05 FT/Reg New Hires Promotions & Transfers 36% 25% 26%

Concerns Raised in Comments  337 (28%) staff and supervisors commented  88 supervisors (19%) responded to the supervisors only comment question  Critical of: Management skills of supervisors Monetary rewards, relationship of pay to performance Applicability to employees in unions and in research positions

Suggestions Raised in Comments  Employee evaluation of supervisors  Make the PDS more user friendly  Expand training courses and offer more widely beyond Main Campus

Conclusions  Good News: Scores are Up!  Some performance management is acknowledged : Clear on job responsibilities Performance expectations Formal evaluations each year Encouragement to pursue professional development

Conclusions (continued) Room for Improvement  Job Descriptions  Supervisors’ Skills in: Managing and Evaluating Performance Coaching/Counseling  Career Advancement  Customer Service Report Summary and PowerPoint Presentation Available at

Next Steps  Update job descriptions Key to defining responsibilities Employees expect them HR and Departments collaborate  Coaching and counseling Explain what it looks like Tell your employees when it happens Manage their expectations Attend supervisory/leadership training

Next Steps  Job advancement Provide mentoring and career counseling Manage expectations/communicate successful internal hiring Identify opportunities  Cross training  Developmental opportunities  Job rotation  Customer Service Are we any better? How do we change perceptions? How do we measure it?  Implement PDS Web System Enhancements

Planned PDS Web Enhancements  Either supervisor or employee can start a PDP and both can enter comments  Improved print function  Easier way to rate all core and selected role competencies  notifications  Progress notes and/or end of the year summary comments required for all essential functions and goals  2006/07 Goals required on current year PDP

Change in PDP Weightings of Final Scores  40% for Responsibilities/Essential Functions  40% for Goals  10% for Developmental Competencies  10% for all Core and Selected Role Competencies.

Coming Soon to a Training Room Near You  March – Employee Manual Supervisory Training and Information Sessions for Union and Non-Union Employees  April – PDS System Changes and Rules of Conduct