Performance Evaluation Committees’ Report Combined Report from Committee for Professional and Administrative Staff and Committee for Classified Staff 2016.

Slides:



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

St. Louis Public Schools Human Resources Support for District Improvement Initiatives (Note: The bullets beneath each initiative indicate actions taken.
Performance Appraisals
Performance Management
Performance Management
Campus-wide Presentation May 14, PACE Results.
Northern Convening Butte College April 26, 2013 College Team Facilitators’ Presentation Student Support (Re)defined.
Manager Performance Evaluation
1 The Revised PEP Process Presented by… Rick Losemann Director, Employee Relations Division Office of Personnel Services and Benefits.
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.
Performance Management Review FAQs
1 Response to the Employee Survey Recommendations.
Performance Based Teacher Evaluation March 10, 2006.
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.
Performance Management 2012 Conducting Performance Evaluations Office of Human Resources UMW: “Putting U First”
Faculty & Staff Compensation Programs Board of Regents Meeting
Presentation at Regional Hub of Civil Service Workshop Astana, Kazakhstan October 2013.
Updates from HR Learning & Org. Effectiveness Stanford Employee Survey Results from 2010 Staff Resource Fair in March 2011.
Human Resources Office of 1 Classification and Compensation Redesign Job Family Studies Project Overview.
KCTCS PERFORMANCE REVIEW PROCESS RESULTS OF KCTCS EMPLOYEE PPE SURVEY (Overall 317 faculty and 614 staff responded, a total of 931) Only 6% of.
System Office Performance Management
Joint Staff School Committee Training. Why do we need a JSSC? Provide orderly and professional means of improving educational programs, conditions within.
Tips for Employees on Preparing Self- Evaluations.
Effective Project Management: Traditional, Agile, Extreme
Staff Compensation Program Update
1 14. Project closure n An information system project must be administratively closed once its product is successfully delivered to the customer. n A failed.
Retention Interview Process Training July 2008 Retention Interview Process Training 1.
System Office Performance Management
INTRODUCTION Performance management is a relatively new concept to the field of management.
Performance Management Open Information Session Spring 2009.
PUSD Compensation Project Overview Governing Board Meeting March 14, 2013.
21 st Century Maricopa Review of Process Human Resources Projects Steering Team Meeting May 12, 2010.
Staff Compensation Program – Phase 2 Internal Equity Adjustments October 2005.
Non-Academic Staff Compensation Program Employee Presentation 2013.
Department of Administration Employee Relations Committee 2012 Survey.
Engaging in Effective Performance Discussions June 6, 2013.
The Houston Business Journal’s Best Place to Work list.
Staff Performance Evaluation Process
Intern 2 Learn Program Overview. Intern 2 Learn What is Intern 2 Learn ? Intern 2 Learn is an undergraduate, student employment program designed to: Provide.
Maricopa Priorities Status Update Fall Maricopa Priorities Basics What it isWhat it’s not A regular, cyclical, bottom-up process to: ▫Evaluate everything.
It’s All in the Competencies: Effective Evaluation for Boards and School Leaders National Alliance of Public Charter Schools July 1, 2013 Russ Williams.
2005 Performance Development System Survey Human Resources Staff Meeting March 20, 2006.
College of Agricultural Sciences & Hatfield Marine Science Center Business Center May 7, 2009.
Team Morale Michael Snipas, Lead Technician Desktop Support Service.
P ASTOR AND P ERSONNEL M ANAGEMENT AND E VALUATION Pastor Todd Nelsen Fields of Grace Lutheran Parish.
Force Results – August 2012 Sussex Police Employee Survey 2012.
Hawaiian Airlines Na Leo Survey 2010 Your Results.
WLUSA/OSSTF Annual Performance Review Process Human Resources & WLUSA| 2015.
SPC Advisory Committee Training - TAC Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office 1 Abridged from the SPC Advisory Committee Training on October.
Chapter 9* Managing Meetings. Chapter 10/Managing Meetings Hilgert & Leonard © Explain why meetings, committees, and being able to lead meetings.
Performance Evaluation Training: Phase 1 Spring 2016.
College of Agricultural Sciences & Hatfield Marine Science Center Business Center May 13, 2009.
Employee Satisfaction Survey Results 2015 v Employee Satisfaction Survey Results 2015 v Work Areas 2015 Response Count 2014 Response Count.
Organizational Process The activities conducted by an educational institution or school is called organizational process Which consist of series of steps.
2015/16 Staff Performance Appraisals Webinar for ANR Supervisors Spring 2016.
Management, Supervision, and Decision Making Chapter 2.
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT Appraisal Training for Central Office and Campus-Based Non-Teacher Employees September 2013 HOUSTON INDEPENDENT.
Performance Management
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL PROCESS Daniel Dominguez-Moncada Director of Administration January 12, 2017.
SOESD’s Teacher Evaluation & Support System
Overview – Guide to Developing Safety Improvement Plan
My UI Career Process improvement for more meaningful and
Overview – Guide to Developing Safety Improvement Plan
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK SEPTEMBER 22, 2014 CITY COUNCIL MEETING RESCIND RESOLUTION NO AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE RULES GOVERNING.
UA Workplace Experience Survey - Chime in!
Performance Management Training
2018 Great Colleges Survey for Champlain College
Presentation transcript:

Performance Evaluation Committees’ Report Combined Report from Committee for Professional and Administrative Staff and Committee for Classified Staff 2016

Background TWU has determined that the current performance evaluation process should undergo a committee review to determine if the performance management program is consistent and can be effectively and equitably linked to compensation. Issues: –Form completion is lengthy –The overall process requires too much time for both the reviewer and employee –Current system is not linked to compensation

Goals and Objectives To review current process, recommend a pay model, and recommend a streamlined evaluation process. Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the current performance evaluation program. Prepare drafts of revisions to the current performance evaluation form formats. Design/revise the performance planning and evaluation process to incorporate the desired changes to the plan. Present the proposed performance planning and evaluation program to HR staff.

What the Committees Were Not Charged to Accomplish Compensation – although recommendations will be made regarding merit pay, we have not been charged to address merit pay/compensation in general nor specifics. Job descriptions – although we understand that official job descriptions are vague, we were not charged to modify job descriptions nor recommend changes to job descriptions. Succession planning and career paths – although we were not charged to address either of these, we recognize the importance of each. Address the issue of equality in evaluations – although this issue was mentioned in several responses in our information gathering we were not charged to determine solutions. Determine the score for merit compensation – realizing that this is/will be an issue when/if a merit pay program is implemented we were not charged to make recommendations to address this issue.

Our Process Held a series of weekly/bi-weekly meetings with cross-sectional committee. Reviewed the current TWU forms and forms from other institutions: Tarleton State University, University of North Texas, Texas A&M University System, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Developed the best forms and process considering feedback and consensus of opinion from committee members. Solicited feedback regarding forms and process from: Anonymous survey, Town Hall meeting, and Staff Council.

Apply Information to Charge Considered and incorporated, where appropriate, feedback into final DRAFT version of document for management consideration. Revised evaluation forms using suggestions from committee and best formats from review of other college and university evaluation forms. Coordinated process and output with the other sub- committee addressing review of classified employee documents.

Survey Feedback Questions: Job Classification of respondents. Campus location of respondents. Years Employed at TWU. Were you evaluated last year? Do you evaluate all direct reports annually? Benefits of evaluation process as employee. Benefits of evaluation process as supervisor. Other benefits of evaluation process. Comments from survey. Rating for current performance system. Explanation of Ratings (Top10). What would you change? Non-cost performance based perks and benefits (Top 10).

Job Classification –Professional and Administrative Staff223(68%) –Clerical 78(23.8%) –Custodial, grounds-keeping, maintenance 11(3.4%) –Health Care Professionals 10(3%) –Commissioned Police Officers 1(.3%) –Do not know 5(1.5%) –Number of Participants328(100%)

Campus –Denton281(87.8%) –Dallas 21(6.6%) –Houston 18(5.6%) –Total320(100%)

Years Employed at TWU –Less than 1 year 24(7.3%) –1-5 years120(36.5%) –6-10 years 79(24%) –11-15 years 48(14.6%) –16-20 years 27(8.2%) –21-25 years 19(5.8%) –More than 25 years 12(3.6%) –Total329(100%)

Were you evaluated last year by your supervisor? –Yes258(78.4%) –No 71(21.6%) –Total329(100%)

Do you evaluate all direct reports annually? –Yes90(61.6%) –No42(28.8%) –Not a supervisor14(9.6%) –Total146(100%)

Benefits of evaluation process as employee (checked yes) Provides direct feedback from supervisor – 72.4% Provides an opportunity for me to provide input – 61.3% Provides opportunity to set goals and priorities – 67.9%

Benefits of evaluation process as supervisor (checked yes) Provides an opportunity to provide feedback to employee – 74.0% Provides an opportunity to receive feedback from employee – 73.8% Provides an opportunity to set goals and priorities with employee – 76.2%

Other benefits (54 Reponses) No benefit33 Learning opportunity8 Merit raises5 Tracking development4 Communication2 Evaluate current roles1 Other1 Total54

Comments From Survey Recognition and motivation for future personal and professional improvements Formal and intentional discussions about current and future growth as a professional Provides opportunity to support employee in their careers and understand their needs and struggles. Not applicable. We have ongoing feedback exchange in our office. Annual reviews are not necessary if Supervisor meets regularly with the employee throughout the year I do not perceive any benefits. Only a rubber stamp process nothing more Difficult. I have been instructed to keep evaluations on a positive note First one is the only one recorded on the current process, other two are important to have A formal process to inform the employee of what is expected of them Supervision happens daily - not just annually. Employees should never be caught off guard in evaluation Get great ideas from my team members! Puts us all on the same page with regard to coaching and/or training needed, growth and opportunity. Provides an opportunity to document where staff is not measuring up. Assist in terminating non-performing employees Designated communication time Provides an opportunity to get on the same page. Find out what the employees & supervisor do & don't like and how we can change

Rating for Current Performance System 1(low) 95(31.1%) 2 65(21.3%) 3100(32.8%) 4 36(11.8%) 5 (high) 9(3.0%) Total305(100%)

Explanation of Rating (Top10) 1.No merit raises 2.No benefit 3.Too lengthy 4.Lack flexibility 5.Gives feedback 6.Too complex 7.Good if used effectively 8.Not been evaluated 9.Issue with goals 10.Too subjective

What would you change? (Top 10) 1.Merit based pay 2.Customized evaluation 3.Nothing 4.Shorter 5.Meaningful 6.Merit based benefits 7.Two-way evaluation 8.Simplify 9.More frequent reviews 10.Merit based promotions

Non-cost Performance Based Perks and Benefits (Top 10) 1.Additional paid time off 2.Tuition/fee reimbursement/discount, audit classes 3.Flex schedule 4.Fitness center free 5.Parking free 6.Do not know/none/doesn’t matter 7.Gift cards, free/discounted lunch at Student Union 8.Training/professional development 9.Parking for employee of the month 10.Telecommuting

Assumptions/Recommendations/Concerns Review year will continue to coincide with calendar year. (assumption) Evaluation due dates range from March through April to accommodate different departmental “life cycles”. (recommendation) Merit pay increases for staff be a permanent line item in the budget. (recommendation)

Assumptions/Recommendations/Concerns Divisional management allocates merit pay. (recommendation) Merit pay distributions be transparent by department not person. (recommendation) Supervisors be evaluated anonymously by direct reports. (recommendation) Process be entirely electronic. (recommendation)

Assumptions/Recommendations/Concerns Extensive training for supervisors to ensure appropriate evaluations and distribution of merit. (concern and recommendation) Training for employees to seek timely feedback and formal review and to better understand rationale for merit distribution. (concern and recommendation)

Committee Recommendations for Merit Pay! Merit pay be included as a permanent item in the budget. Merit pay be added to the base pay or as a one time payment (depending on reason for merit pay). Additional paid time off (implementation at present time).