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
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
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
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
Dimension of Success Key Questions
• 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
• 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?
• 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:
Each supervisor is to provide an overall performance rating from the following
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
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