2016 Performance Evaluation Planning PEP Update Employee Organizational

  • Slides: 14
Download presentation
2016 Performance Evaluation & Planning (PEP) Update Employee & Organizational Development

2016 Performance Evaluation & Planning (PEP) Update Employee & Organizational Development

2016 Process Update • Last year, 1600+ employees in more than 40 departments piloted

2016 Process Update • Last year, 1600+ employees in more than 40 departments piloted a new form / process for staff performance evaluation discussions • Based on positive feedback, the new form / process will be used universitywide effective this performance evaluation season (evaluation of 2016’s performance done in 2016 / 2017)

Why Make a Change? UNM employee feedback, supported by industry research, shows that performance

Why Make a Change? UNM employee feedback, supported by industry research, shows that performance evaluations can: o Create anxiety – for both managers and employees o Be time-consuming and cumbersome o Focus only on the past year’s performance o Be difficult to rate subjectivity

What’s Changing? You’ll see: o A shortened form o A cleaner look and feel

What’s Changing? You’ll see: o A shortened form o A cleaner look and feel o Improved rating options & overall scores o Clearer job responsibility categories o An emphasis on planning future goals o An emphasis on addressing unsuccessful or exceptionally successful areas o Change to self-evaluation expectation * • No longer required EXCEPT for US-UNM eligible employees and if required by an individual’s manager

Why Do We Even Do Performance Evaluations? To: o Increase the quality of employee

Why Do We Even Do Performance Evaluations? To: o Increase the quality of employee and manager feedback / discussions o Encourage a participatory conversation around performance and goals o Align with university and corporate best practices

Does The New Process Work? Pilot feedback shows that: • 78% of managers found

Does The New Process Work? Pilot feedback shows that: • 78% of managers found the changes made it easier to rate employee performance • Only 3% found that the PEP was more difficult than previously • 86% experienced a reduction in time needed to complete the PEP process • <1% of managers found that discussing and establishing upcoming year goals had a negative effect on the process

Does The New Process Work? Direct comments from pilot participants: • ‘Discussing the employee’s

Does The New Process Work? Direct comments from pilot participants: • ‘Discussing the employee’s future goals was the most constructive part of the process. . . ‘ • ‘Employee evaluation seemed less like something to dread and more like an opportunity’ • ‘Greatly improved process that relies on direct interaction and communication’ • ‘We focused on the things that needed discussing more quickly’

PEP: The New Form Sections • Focus on Previous Year’s Performance • • •

PEP: The New Form Sections • Focus on Previous Year’s Performance • • • Demographic Information Comments & Overall Job Responsibility Rating Evaluation of Goals • Focus on Upcoming Year’s Goals • Future Goal Planning • Acknowledgements • • Employee and Supervisor Comments Signatures

PEP Pilot: The New Form Demographics Evaluation type Eval of Job Responsibilities

PEP Pilot: The New Form Demographics Evaluation type Eval of Job Responsibilities

PEP Pilot: The New Form Job Resp. Comments Prior Yr. Goal Evaluation Coming Year

PEP Pilot: The New Form Job Resp. Comments Prior Yr. Goal Evaluation Coming Year Goal Planning

PEP: The New Form Evaluation Acknowledgement Comments Signatures

PEP: The New Form Evaluation Acknowledgement Comments Signatures

Timeline • November • Voluntary/required self-assessments begin • December • • Voluntary/required self-assessment forms

Timeline • November • Voluntary/required self-assessments begin • December • • Voluntary/required self-assessment forms completed Preparation for performance evaluation begins • January • • Supervisor/manager begins completing form(s) Supervisor/manager schedules review meetings • February • Supervisor/manager completes review process and submits signed forms to HR • March 1 st • Performance forms due to HR by 5: 00 PM on Wednesday, March 1, 2017

Best Practices • Engage in regular one-on-one meetings • • Meet with each direct

Best Practices • Engage in regular one-on-one meetings • • Meet with each direct report Give these meetings top priority • Listen more than you speak • Be specific and timely • • Use specific language and examples Focus on what’s happened / is new since your last meeting • Get the whole picture - ask your direct report’s clients and peers for feedback • Focus on actionable next steps

Questions or Feedback? Visit: https: //hr. unm. edu/performance-review Contact: • • Your HR Agent

Questions or Feedback? Visit: https: //hr. unm. edu/performance-review Contact: • • Your HR Agent and/or Client Services Consultant EOD Dept. / eod@unm. edu / 505 -277 -1555