Presentation at Regional Hub of Civil Service Workshop
Astana, KazakhstanOctober 2013
Performance Management
Performance Management & Development System in place since 2000
Agreed with Staff associations
In 2005 integrated with increments, promotions and higher pay scales
5 point rating scale
Government Programme
3 year Strategic Statements for each Ministry, Office or Agency
Annual Business Plans
Divisional Plans
Individual role profiles
Individual goals and objectives
Planning Meeting where objectives are set and agreed
Interim Review at mid-year where progress and issues are discussed
Review at year end
Objectives, actions, tasks and timelines are outlined
Training & development plan for 12 months outlined
Self assessment by employee at mid year and at year end
Assessment by supervisor and rating given
Signed off by second supervisor
Recently formalised within the process to facilitate upward feedback where employee has the opportunity to comment on the support received from supervisor
Many managers are uncomfortable with giving feedback, will take time.
1 23
4 5
Great opportunity for achieving clarity around role and objectives
Opportunity to identify blockages or issues that need to be addressed
Opportunity to identify training needs
Points
People at the top must show leadership, support the process and should participate
Importance of training for all involved
Keep documentation simple
Completing paperwork and ticking boxes can become the focus, seen as additional task
Look at “motivating for performance” rather than performance management (OECD)
Open and frank dialogue is key to success
Process should not inhibit authentic dialogue
Need for regular and ongoing dialogue between supervisor and employee
Tendency to over specify formal training & development solutions
New approach being taken to rating system
Calibration across grades within organisation to ensure more even and more realistic distribution of ratings
85.1% compliance across Ministries
Concern about ratings for 2012:
5 Outstanding (6.4%)4 Exceeds Expectations (53.1%) 3 Fully Acceptable (39.6%)2 Needs Improvement (0.8%) 1 Unacceptable (0.1%)
Annual Output Statements
Performance Indicators
Customer Surveys
Customer/Citizen Panels
Value for Money Audits
Clarity of my role, objectives, priorities and timelines
Feedback on how well or otherwise that I am doing
Supports or training available to help me to improve