1. Performance Management Subcommittee University of North Carolina Wilmington Jenny Payne Matthew Kunic PLS50211/30/05

2. Purpose To review, access, and make recommendations regarding changes to the performance review process of SPA employees at UNCW

3. TimelineActivity JuneJuneJuneJune J ul y AugAugAugAug SepSepSepSep OctOctOctOct NovNovNovNov DecDecDecDec JanJanJanJan FebFebFebFebMarch Decide on questions for focus groupsX Determine focus group compositionX Identify focus group facilitators X Conduct focus groups XX Review focus group results XX Agree on research questions XX Develop survey instrument X Finalize survey instrument XX Distribute survey X IR Office interprets results XX Committee recommendations for changes to performance appraisal process X

4. Focus Group Questions Can you describe how the SPA performance management process is handled in your office? Can you describe how the SPA performance management process is handled in your office? What works well in your office? What doesn’t work well? What works well in your office? What doesn’t work well? Do you feel the work plan is a useful tool and does it accurately reflect the work that you or your employee perform? Do you feel the work plan is a useful tool and does it accurately reflect the work that you or your employee perform? Do you believe that performance is accurately reflected by the current system? If not, why? Do you believe that performance is accurately reflected by the current system? If not, why? Do you use the “Self-Assessment” questionnaire during your reviews? If yes, is it useful? Do you use the “Self-Assessment” questionnaire during your reviews? If yes, is it useful? Are the problems you identify a result of the design of the instrument or process itself, or a result of inadequate training? Are the problems you identify a result of the design of the instrument or process itself, or a result of inadequate training? If you could make one change to the SPA performance management process, what would it be? If you could make one change to the SPA performance management process, what would it be?

5. Focus Group Results Process not administered consistently across campus Process not administered consistently across campus Perceived value of performance review process has diminished because results do not reflect salary increases Perceived value of performance review process has diminished because results do not reflect salary increases Work plans and self-assessment tools are not used in all cases Work plans and self-assessment tools are not used in all cases Review process is cumbersome- would be helpful to have online process to streamline paperwork Review process is cumbersome- would be helpful to have online process to streamline paperwork Concerns about rating system Concerns about rating system Forms are seen as more of a way to document poor performance rather than for growth and development Forms are seen as more of a way to document poor performance rather than for growth and development Consistent feedback needed- do not wait until “evaluation time” Consistent feedback needed- do not wait until “evaluation time” Process is too subjective Process is too subjective

6. Best Practices to Improve Performance Appraisal Process Six Fundamental Rules 1. Evaluate performance- failure to do so assumes acceptable performance 2. Measure Tasks Performed 3. Avoid Inflating Evaluation 4. Give Employees an Opportunity to Comment on and Sign the Review 5. Do Your Homework- before conducting the evaluation, supervisors should consider examination of previous reviews, actual performance, attendance, or productivity levels to determine what work and performance trends have developed 6. Maintain Files Properly www.cupahr.org Six Fundamental Rules of Performance Evaluations Fall 1999/Winter 2000, Vol. 50, Nos. 3,4

7. Best Practices to Improve Performance Appraisal Process Conversations, Not Evaluations Conversations Documents encourage open conversation about shared goals throughout the year and do not result in appraisals that are biased toward future performance. Characteristics of the Conversations Document include: -Feedback should be given frequently, not once a year -Create the right context for discussion -Ask the employee to rate his/her performance before the session -Recognize effective performance through praise -Focus on solving problems when they happen -Focus feedback on behavior or results, not on the person -Minimize criticism -Agree to specific goals and set a date to review the process www.cupahr.org Conversations, Not Evaluations: An Alternative Model of Performance Management Spring 2003, Vol. 54, No. 1

8. Best Practices to Improve Performance Appraisal Process Invigorating Morale in Higher Education The morale of employees in higher education has plummeted in recent years due to fiscal crisis, program cuts, staff reduction, and bulging enrollments. The following motivating strategies can boost morale and improve work culture: -Confront problem behaviors as they occur and communicate clearly that they will not be tolerated. -Allow others in your organization open access to yourself so that ideas and problems can be communicated freely. -Communicate what you stand for, have a clear sense of purpose, and manage with honesty and authenticity. -Learning new professional knowledge -Job Enrichment/ Job Enhancement www.cupahr.org Ideas for Invigorating Morale in Higher Education Summer 2003, Vol. 54, No. 2

9. Suggestions for Best Practices: UNC-Wilmington Employees -Honor birthdays each month -Supervisor recognition of employee of the month -Have “just because” days to take team to lunch -Give employees a performance evaluation schedule so documentation is held throughout year -Send regular and personal congratulations e-mails when a job is well done -Advise employees of training opportunities for superior performance

10. Survey Discussion Rough Draft Rough Draft Final Draft Final Draft Justification for survey alteration (scale changes, loaded questions, open vs. closed) Justification for survey alteration (scale changes, loaded questions, open vs. closed) Implementation Strategy Implementation Strategy Survey software and Interpretation of Results Survey software and Interpretation of Results

11. Questions?

12. Special Thanks To: UNCW Performance Management Subcommittee UNCW Performance Management Subcommittee Heather Smith, Assistant Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs Heather Smith, Assistant Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs Lisa Castellino, Director, UNCW Office of Institutional Research Lisa Castellino, Director, UNCW Office of Institutional Research Dr. Tom Barth, Dean, UNCW Masters of Public Administration program Dr. Tom Barth, Dean, UNCW Masters of Public Administration program Liz Grimes, Director, Staff Development and Employee Relations Liz Grimes, Director, Staff Development and Employee Relations