Administrator Performance Review Plan

Document Sample
Administrator Performance Review Plan Powered By Docstoc
					                   Administrator Performance Review Plan


Again this year, we will try the streamlined approach for administrative performance
reviews. Administrators, in consultation with their supervisor are to prepare and
submit a 2 to 3 page memorandum regarding their individual performance. For
2008-2009, the memorandum should underscore the issue of rewards, recognition
and professional development of the staff reporting in the units. In addition, the
document should:

      1) highlight accomplishments and achievement of 2008-2009 objectives;

      2) identify areas of concern (gaps between supervisor and administrator self-
         review ratings of core competencies);

      3) outline objectives for the 2009-2010 year, including opportunities for
         development; and

      4) provide an overall performance rating.

The compilation of information and preparation of the memorandum is to serve as a
summary of the critical performance and coaching conversations that should take
place between the administrator and his/her supervisor. Individuals are encouraged
to use the Administrative Performance Review Manual and corresponding forms as
tools to assist in compiling information for the summary memorandum. The only 360
feedback process and form to be used is the one in the Administrative Review Forms
and Procedures Manual. The manual and forms are accessible via the Human
Resources website at: http://www.montgomerycollege.edu/ohr/administrativePR.html


Evaluation Criteria

In evaluating performance, individuals and supervisors should take into
consideration the achievement of performance objectives and the demonstration of
individual job knowledge, skill, and the College’s Core Competencies based on three (3)
critical dimensions of success: results, process, and relationship.

Effective leaders at Montgomery College know that achieving outstanding results is
only one dimension of success. Success can also be measured in terms of how the
work gets done (process) and the way people interact and treat each other in the
workplace (relationship). Because administrators are accountable for results, some may
have the tendency to focus their energy and attention on reaching the goal quickly.
Consequently, we inadvertently undermine the long-term success of our endeavors.
Effective leader balance their focus across all three dimensions and ask key questions
for each in their effort to meet desired outcomes:
Dimension of Success Key Questions

                                                                                       1 
 
Dimension of Success                                       Key Questions

Results

    •   Completion of the task, outcome                Are the results of high quality?
    •   Achievement of the goal, objective             Are the results timely?
                                                       Do the results meet requirements
                                                       and expectations?

Process

    •   How the work gets done                         Is the process clear and logical?
        How the work is designed and                   Is the process efficient?
        managed                                        Is the process appropriate for the
    •   How the work is monitored and                  task?
        evaluated

Relationship

    •   How people experience each other               Do team members feel supported?
    •   How people relate to the organization          Do team members trust each other?
    •   How people feel about their involve-           Do team members feel valued?
        ment and contribution

Additional criteria and resources for evaluating performance can be found in the
Competencies section of the Annual Performance Review form at:
http://www.montgomerycollege.edu/ohr/docs/administrativePR/admin_perf_rev_ap
pendix_a.doc.




Overall Rating

Each supervisor is to provide an overall performance rating from the following
options:

        Far Exceeds Expectations = consistently and significantly exceeds
        departmental Annual Objectives and demonstrates all of the expected
        behaviors necessary to achieve the standards for excellence associated
        with the required core competencies.

        Exceeds Expectations = consistently exceeds departmental Annual
        Objectives and demonstrates most of the expected behaviors necessary
        to achieve the standards for excellence associated with the required core
        competencies.


                                                                                            2 
 
        Meets Expectations = meets departmental Annual Objectives with no critical
        misses and demonstrates many of the expected behaviors necessary to achieve the
        standards for excellence associated with the required core competencies.

        Needs Improvement = meets some departmental Annual Objectives
        and demonstrates some of the expected behaviors necessary to achieve
        the standards for excellence associated with the required core competencies.

        No Rating = to be provided to employees with less than six months service when there
        has not been sufficient opportunity to observe behaviors associated with the Standard.
        The memorandum should be completed and a session held as a developmental meeting
        only, with no formal review rating given.




      Timelines for 2008 – 2009 Administrator Performance Reviews
Task or Activity Deadline
Administrative performance reviews are                    Internal deadlines are established to
conducted within administrative units                     ensure timely processing

Memorandum w/performance rating and
Recommendation submitted to the appropriate
direct report (i.e. President, Executive VP for
Academic & Student Services, Senior VP for
Administrative & Fiscal Services, or VP for
 Institutional Advancement).                              May 1, 2009

Executive VP for Academic & Student Services,
Senior VP for Administrative & Fiscal Services,
and VP for Institutional Advancement make
recommendations to the President                          May 22, 2009

Salary improvement recommendations for all
administrators are approved and provided to the
Chief Human Resources Officer                             June 5, 2009

Salary improvement is effective for all
administrative staff                                      July 1, 2009




OHR-1/2009




                                                                                               3 
 

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Description: performance-review-format pdf