Faculty of AgriSciences GUIDE FOR FORM PB02-C2/3 (LB) Work agreement, Personal Development Plan (PDP) and Performance Monitoring and Evaluation for C2 and C3 staff This guide is aimed primarily for use with form PB02-C2/3. Consult the US Guide for Performance Management of non- academic staff for further details about the broader process, policy, principles and procedures. 1. PURPOSE OF PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT To, in terms of the post level expectations in the description of the post, enter into a fair and achievable work agreement with a member of staff with regard to individual objectives that are in line with the strategic and operational objectives of the US, the Faculty of AgriSciences and the division, as well as with regard to the knowledge and skills that are expected for the staff member’s specific post. To provide the staff member with feedback on a continuous basis with regard to his/her work performance by means of informal feedback and monitoring interviews, but also by means of a formal performance evaluation interview once a year. To enable performance managers and members of staff to identify obstacles that prevent staff from achieving their work objectives at an early stage, and to formulate action plans in this regard. To formulate a meaningful personal development plan (PDP) for each member of staff that is aimed at short-term performance development, as well as at long-term career development. To encourage, acknowledge and reward excellent performance by the staff. The form is used for the following purposes: At the start of a new reporting period to: (i) enter into a work agreement in terms of the content of the post (work outputs) and the requirements of the post (knowledge and skills), and (ii) the creation of a personal development plan (PDP). During the reporting period for: (iii) performance monitoring At the end of a reporting period for: (iv) a performance evaluation of the staff member’s work outputs, as well as knowledge and skills. 2. GUIDELINES FOR COMPLETING THE FORM 2.1 Entering into a work agreement (at the start of the reporting period) The background information that is required is: (i) the vision and mission of the US and the Faculty, as well as the vision, mission and strategic/operational objectives of the division (business plan) and (ii) the description of the post in which the staff member is appointed, from which the expected work outputs of the work agreement are compiled on the basis of the content of the post and the requirements with regard to knowledge and skills. Version: March 2006 Guide PB02-C2/3 (LB) 2 Step 1: Section A1: CONTENT OF THE POST (work outputs) The staff member, in consultation with the chairperson/supervisor, plans and completes the agreed work outputs, which include the following: Key performance areas (KPAs): This is a more detailed description of the overall main functions that are linked to a post, e.g. academic administration, liaison, technical support, etc. The KPAs that are specified in the description of the post (i.e. the content of the post) in which the staff member is appointed, are filled in. There should preferably not be more than five KPAs. The KPA "ad hoc function" can also be added and is applicable to functions/tasks/projects in which the staff member becomes involved and which require time and energy that would usually be expended on normal, day-to-day activities. If this component is added, it makes provision for the possibility that the staff member could receive acknowledgment for it. Each KPA must also be linked to a strategic or operational action of the business plan of the department. Tasks and actions: These provide a description of the outputs that must be performed in terms of a specific KPA, e.g. for technical staff, the preparation of practicals can be a task under the KPA “technical support". Objectives: Objectives are the measurable results/aims that the staff member should achieve within a specific time (reporting period). It should be possible to link the individual’s objectives to the overarching strategies and operational objectives of the environment (US, Faculty and division). Each objective must be linked to a specific function and task that is determined by the KPAs of the post in which the staff member is appointed. The objectives must be described as completely as possible by making use of the SMART formula, viz.: S: specific M: measurable A: action orientated R: realistic T: time based e.g. RESEARCHER: publish 2 (M) articles per year (T) in an accredited journal (S) Must preferably begin with a verb, e.g. supply, develop, establish, attend, manage, produce, communicate, monitor, etc. Time: specific due date, or monthly, quarterly, annually, continuously. Time framework: This provides an indication of the time framework within which a task should be completed. In certain cases there might be a specific due date linked to the completion of a task and in other cases the time framework of the task can be described by terms such as “continuous”, “weekly”, “monthly”, quarterly”, etc. Weighting: A weighting or priority value must be allocated to each KPA (e.g. in terms of the work outputs, the weighting will provide an indication of the estimated time that the staff member will spend on tasks within the KPA). In the case of a KPA that contains tasks with different weightings, a separate weighted value can be assigned to each task, calculated from the total for the specific KPA. For example: If a KPA has a weighting of 40, the weighted value of the individual tasks should add up to 40. Performance measures: These are the measuring instruments with which an output can be measured, e.g. feedback (oral or written) correspondence minutes reports budgets statistics, databases, records Version: March 2006 Guide PB02-C2/3 (LB) 3 publications policy documents investigations feedback data teaching portfolios auditing These measuring instruments therefore are the “sources” that can be used by the staff member for the purposes of self-evaluation as proof or illustration in support of achievements that he/she regards as excellent (i.e. above the norm). Performance indicators: These can be used to measure an output, primarily in terms of: quality e.g. accuracy completeness neatness comprehensiveness consistency punctuality percentage errors/deviation fairness appropriateness client satisfaction within policy/guidelines/requirements/law sophistication (of technique) attention to detail innovative predisposition quantity e.g. volume number Step 2: Section A2: REQUIREMENTS OF THE POST (knowledge and skills) By taking into consideration the description of the post and the post level expectations of the post in which the staff member has been appointed, the staff member, in consultation with the chairperson/supervisor, selects the knowledge and skills that are applicable to the staff member’s work outputs (KPAs and tasks or objectives) and allocates a weighted mark to each. If some of the aspects are not applicable to the staff member’s KPAs, a ZERO value is allocated. Step 3: Section A3: PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PDP) The PDP is linked to the development areas (short and medium term), as well as to the career planning (long term) of the member of staff. The aspects that were identified during the previous performance evaluation of the staff member’s post content (work outputs) in Section A1, as well as the requirements of the post (knowledge and skills) in Section A2 that were identified as development actions, form part of the staff member’s work agreement for the current period and are therefore also evaluated in order to determine whether the expected outcomes were achieved. Concise comments should be provided by the supervisor in this regard. The development action that is identified during the current performance evaluation must be included in the PDP of the work agreement for the following period. NB: A mark is not allocated for this section. Step 4: SIGNING THE WORK AGREEMENT Once the content of the work agreement of the staff member has been clarified, the front page of the work agreement form must be signed by both the staff member and the chairperson as confirmation thereof. 2.2 Performance monitoring (during the reporting period) Performance monitoring by means of an informal discussion must take place at least once per year with the purpose of determining whether there has been satisfactory progress with the following: the objectives (work outputs) that were targeted for the reporting period; at this time, the objectives can also be adjusted in the light of circumstances that could not be anticipated at the start of the cycle when the work agreement was entered into. Version: March 2006 Guide PB02-C2/3 (LB) 4 development actions that are set out in the PDP. On completion of the monitoring interview, the chairperson/supervisor and the staff member must both sign the front page of the work agreement and add the date of signature as confirmation that the monitoring interview took place. There is also an option for the chairperson/supervisor to add any general comments or follow-up actions that need to be placed on record as a result of the monitoring interview (Section A4 of the form). 2.3 Performance evaluation (at the end of the reporting period) Step 1: Self-evaluation by staff member with regard to his/her work outputs Section A1: CONTENT OF THE POST (work outputs) The staff member first evaluates his/her own work outputs to determine: (i) if they measure up to the norm (point 3 on the scale); (ii) if they exceed the norm (points 4 or 5 on the scale); (iii) if they do not measure up to the norm (points 1 or 2 on the scale). The section under "Staff member’s self- evaluation comments" must only be completed if the member of staff is of the opinion that: (i) an output exceeds the norm, with thorough motivation and sufficient proof to support the work output/objective achievement – sources such as the performance measures that were specified can be quoted or attached as a performance portfolio OR (ii) an output did not measure up to the norm, with a motivation for the underachievement, specifically if the underachievement can be ascribed to external factors beyond the control of the staff member. NB: It therefore is the responsibility of the staff member to provide proof of work outputs, especially of those outputs that exceed the norm. Step 2: Self-evaluation by staff member with regard to his/her knowledge and skills Section A2: REQUIREMENTS OF THE POST (knowledge and skills) The staff member completes the section "Staff member’s self-evaluation comments" to elucidate those aspects with regard to which he/she is of the opinion that he/she exceeded the norm, or with regard to those aspects in which he/she has a need for development. This can include aspects in which the staff member believes that he/she did not measure up to the standard expectation, as well as aspects in which he/she did meet the standard expectation but in which he/she has a need to develop further. Step 3: Evaluation of staff member’s work outputs by chairperson/supervisor Section A1: CONTENT OF THE POST (work outputs) The work outputs of the staff member are evaluated on the basis of a 5-point scale (the scaled points are described in Part 3.1 of this guide). The section, "Evaluation comments by Chairperson/Dean", are only used for comments in support of good performance or weak points, as well as the for the development actions that are linked to the latter. These development actions must also added to the staff member’s PDP in his/her work agreement for the following reporting period. A scaled mark out of 5 is allocated to each KPA. The final KPA mark is calculated on the basis of a certain formula (an explanation of the formula is provided in the form in Section A1). Step 4: Evaluation of staff member’s knowledge and skills by the chairperson/supervisor, as well as of the outcomes of his/her previous PDP Section A2: REQUIREMENTS OF THE POST (knowledge and skills) The staff member’s knowledge and skills are evaluated on the basis of a 5-point scale (the points on the scale are described in Section 3.2 of this guide). The evaluation must take place by taking into consideration the description of the post and the post level expectations of the post in which the staff member is appointed, as well as the comments made by the staff member as part of the self- evaluation in the column, "Staff member’s self-evaluation comments". Under "Evaluation comments by Chairperson/Dean”, aspects can be mentioned in terms of which the staff member is evaluated as exception, although this section should be used specifically to point out development actions, including those identified by the staff member, and these must also be added to the staff member’s PDP for the following reporting period. The weighting and scaled marks are then added to the points table in the performance evaluation form (Section B). Version: March 2006 Guide PB02-C2/3 (LB) 5 Section A3. PDP The supervisor provides brief comments on the PDP with regard to the outcomes of the performance or career development actions that are targeted for the work evaluation period. Step 5: Completion of the performance evaluation form Section B: PERFORMANCE EVALUATION FORM The staff member’s biographical information must be completed, as well as the processing of the marks and the final performance mark. Step 6: Additional comments and signing by the staff member, supervisor and chairperson FRONT PAGE OF WORK AGREEMENT FORM The performance evaluation section on the front page must be signed by the supervisor, the chairperson and the member of staff. The signing of the performance evaluation by the staff member does not imply that he/she agrees with the performance evaluation, but only that he/she conforms that the performance evaluation interview was held with him/her. If the staff member does not agree with the agreement, the performance mark or the process, the onus is on him/her to make use of the appeal process. Section B: PERFORMANCE EVALUATION FORM The staff member’s biographical information must be completed, as well as the processing of the marks and the final performance mark. The performance evaluation form must be signed by the staff member and the chairperson and there is also an option for additional comments by both the staff member and the chairperson. For example, the staff member can make comments on how he/she experienced the evaluation process and whether he/she regards the performance mark as a true reflection of his/her performance during the preceding reporting period (positive or negative), as well as on any aspect relating to the performance management process that has been followed since entering into his/her current work agreement. If a staff member wants to follow the appeal process provided by the US, this can also be noted here. The chairperson can use it for any additional comments that he/she would like to make on the staff member’s performance evaluation, including if he/she wants to recommend that the member of staff should be considered for a performance reward or promotion. A copy of the signed Section B is sent to the Dean’s Office as feedback on the performance evaluation of the member of staff. Take note: the date of the performance evaluation, as well as the signatures, must be placed on the front page of the work agreement. 3. DESCRIPTION OF SCALE AND PERFORMANCE MARKS 3.1 Scaled points for work outputs The work outputs of the staff member are evaluated in terms of the following scale: 5 Consistently excellent, significantly exceeds the required standards of the position. Dynamic and creative work performance. Requires no guidance and supervision. 4 Consistently exceeds the required standards of the position. Produces very good work. Requires minimal guidance and supervision. 3 Consistently meets the required standards of the position. Produces good work that is up to date. Requires normal guidance and supervision. 2 Consistently does not meet the required standards of the position. Attempts must be made to improve work. Requires more than the normal guidance and supervision. 1 Insufficient and below the required standards of the position. Performance at this level is unacceptable. Serious attempts need to be made to improve work. Consistently required guidance and supervision, and staff member does not react to this. Version: March 2006 Guide PB02-C2/3 (LB) 6 3.2 Scaled points for knowledge and skills The knowledge and skills of the staff member are evaluated in terms of the following scale: 5 Consistently excellent, significantly exceeds the required standards of the position. 4 Consistently exceeds the required standards of the position. 3 Consistently meets the required standards of the position. 2 Consistently does not meet the required standards of the position. 1 Insufficient and below the required standards of the position. 3.3 Staff categories in terms of performance mark On the basis of the final performance mark, the staff member is placed in one of five categories: A 91-100% The staff member’s performance in terms of his/her post content and requirements have exceeded the post level expectations by far. The staff member qualifies for a salary adjustment that is higher than the average salary adjustment of the Faculty, other relevant forms of performance reward, as well as for a performance bonus. B 71-90% The staff member’s performance in terms of his/her post content and requirements exceeded the post level expectations. The staff member qualifies for a salary adjustment that is higher than the average salary adjustment of the Faculty, as well as for other relevant forms of performance reward. C 51-70% The staff member’s performance in terms of his/her post content and requirements meets the post level expectations. The staff member therefore qualifies for relevant forms of performance reward. D 11-50% The staff member’s performance in terms of his/her post content and requirements does not meet the post level expectations. The staff member could be considered for a limited form of performance reward. E 0-10% The staff member’s performance in terms of his/her post level and requirements does not at all meet the post level expectations. The staff member therefore does not qualify for any form of performance reward. 4. TERMINOLOGY Weighted mark The mark that is calculated if it is linked to a weighting (viz. the weighted mark x the point on the scale). Weighting This is a value out of 100 that is allocated to an aspect (e.g. KPA or task). The weighting provides an indication of the priority value of an aspect or the time that the employee spends on the respective tasks of the key performance areas. Key performance area These are the overall key performance areas (main functions) of a post (e.g. liaison, (KPA) secretarial support, financial administration, etc.) and are therefore linked to the staff member’s work outputs. Staff member The person whose performance is being managed. Personal Development This is a development plan that is compiled for a staff member and that focuses on Plan (PDP) the performance development areas that are linked to the staff member’s knowledge and skills, as well as the career planning of the member of staff. Description of the post The description of what is expected from a post in terms of the content of the post (key performance areas and tasks) and requirements of the post (qualifications, knowledge and skills). Performance management This is the instrument used for entering into the work agreement (including the form personal development plan) and for the performance evaluation of the staff member. Performance indicators Factors with which the value of an output can be determined in terms of quality, quantity, time and cost. Performance measures These are the sources from which concrete proof can be obtained of a staff member’s progress in achieving his/her objectives measured against the specific performance standards, e.g. feedback or documentation (reports, budgets, etc.). Performance standard This is the standard against which an output (achievement of objectives) and skill can be evaluated against the background of the standard required from the specific post (level), i.e. how well a task should be performed to be in line with the post level expectations. Scaled points This are the measures that are used for the evaluation of a staff member’s work Version: March 2006 Guide PB02-C2/3 (LB) 7 outputs (e.g. a 5-point scale). Task This is the output that must be performed in terms of the key performance area and is subdivided into various actions. Supervisor A person who is officially responsible for the performance management of a staff member. Performance This refers to “work performance”, in other words the work outputs performed by a member of staff, which can be good or bad performance. NB: In performance management, “performance” must therefore be interpreted within a neutral context and not exclusively as “excellent performance”. Performance evaluation The process by which a staff member’s work outputs, work ability and work behaviour is evaluated. Work agreement An agreement for a specific period between a staff member and his/her supervisor with regard to what is expected from a specific member of staff in terms of work outputs, linked to performance indicators and measures, as well as weightings. This agreement is based on the content and requirements of the post as set out in the description of the post. Reporting period This is the period on which the member of staff must report in terms of his/her work outputs, as agreed to in the work agreement, and which is therefore evaluated (it should preferably extend over one academic year).