Date post: | 27-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | jeffry-lewis |
View: | 213 times |
Download: | 0 times |
1
Performance Management System for Non-Supervisory
Employees
OFFICE OF HUMAN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
2
New Performance System for Non-Supervisory Employees
DOE’s Proud to Be commitments to OMB & OPM Supports Human Capital Management items
under the President’s Management Agenda Cascades from the performance management
systems in place for SES and Managers and Supervisors
Strategic Alignment - DOE missions Accountability – and Rewards
3
Goals:
Identify performance distinctions among non-supervisory employeesIncorporate strategic plans and mission objectives with accountability for achieving such objectivesProvide substantial financial rewards commensurate with top performanceProvide proportionately less rewards for lesser ratings
4
Coverage:
DOE Non-Supervisory Employees in Competitive Service General Schedule and Excepted Service positions
5
General Requirements
Performance plans in place no later than 30 days from the start of the performance appraisal period.
At least one progress review annually.
Minimum performance appraisal period - 90 calendar days.
6
General Requirements (cont.)
Recognition and rewards must be provided to top performers.
Assistance must be provided to employees in improving unacceptable performance.
Action must be taken to reassign, reduce in grade, or remove employees who continue to have unacceptable performance after an opportunity to demonstrate acceptable performance.
7
Key Features Being Cascaded
Fiscal Year Appraisal Cycle
Plans Linked to Organizational Strategic and Mission Objectives
Direct Linkage between Performance Ratings and Awards
Significant Awards to Top Performers
8
Key Features Being Cascaded (cont.)
Four-Level Performance Appraisal System:Significantly Exceeds ExpectationsMeets ExpectationsNeeds ImprovementFails to Meet Expectations
9
Key Features Being Cascaded (cont.)
Two to Five Critical Elements assigned variable weights to reflect their relative degree of importance:
1. Specific Job ResponsibilitiesOne – Four Critical Elements
2. Employee Attributes – Critical ElementFive Attributes
10
Critical Elements 1 - 4 – Specific Job Responsibilities
Specific Job Responsibility Critical Elements are assigned weights to reflect differences in importance.
At least one specific job responsibility critical element must be linked to an organizational goal and/or mission objective
Organizational goals/mission objectives must be achievable and include measurable outcomes.
11
Employee Attributes Critical Element
Attribute 1 – Responsibility and Accountability
Attribute 2 – Communication
Attribute 3 – Teamwork
Attribute 4 – Innovation/Quality Improvements
Attribute 5 – Customer Service
12
Additional Features
Performance Standards Written at the “Meets Expectations” Level
Variable Weights Assigned to Individual Critical Elements and Individual Employee Attributes
13
Employee Responsibilities
Participate in the development of planReport on the status of assignments including any problems which may prevent their successful completionMaintain complete records on work outputs for use during progress reviewsInclude training as required for professional development and performance of responsibilities
14
Rating/Reviewing Official Responsibilities
Involve subordinates in the development of performance plans
Conduct one or more progress reviews with subordinates and provide interim assessments of their performance.
Assure that the organization’s performance ratings correspond to organizational productivity or effectiveness
16
Total weight assigned to all critical elements must equal 100 by using the following proportions:Specific Job Responsibilities Critical
Elements = 90Employee Attributes Critical Element = 10
Assigning Weights to Critical Elements
17
Assigning Weights to Critical Elements (cont.)
Examples of factors to consider in the assignment of weights:Relative importance as related to mission
objectivesComplexity of assignments, risk factorsCosts, both in terms of resources and staff
time Impact on the organization or the
Department as a whole
18
Assigning Weights to Critical Elements (cont)
Weights initially assigned during the plan development stage
Weights may be adjusted, along with other related factors, during the progress review stage
Rating officials are expected to discuss with the employee the impact of assigned weights on the determination of the employee’s final performance rating
19
Computing the Summary Performance Rating
Each Element has a numerical weighting
Each rating level has an assigned point value
Multiplying these gives score for each element
Similar “sub” process for Attributes
Add resulting #s to get a total
Total score dictates summary rating (unless an element was rated FME)
20
Computing the Summary Performance Rating (cont.)
Rating Levels: Point Ranges
SE 80 - 100
ME 50 - 79
NI 49 and below
FME any score with at least 1
critical element rated FME
21
Computing the Summary Performance Rating (cont)
Specific Job Responsibilities Critical Element Rating Levels and Assigned Point Values: Significantly Exceeds Expectations (SE) =
1 pointMeets Expectations (ME) = .5 pointNeeds Improvement (NI) = 0 pointsFails to Meet Expectations (FME) =
Results in a Summary Rating of FME
22
Assigning Weights to Individual Employee Attributes
Similar to that used to assign weights to Job Specific Responsibilities Critical Elements:An individual weight is assigned to each
Employee Attribute ranging from 1 to 3 points
Individual weights must total 10 for the overall Employee Attributes Critical Element
23
ORO Elements and Weights for Non-Bargaining Unit Employees
4 Job-Specific ElementsWeights: 30, 30, 15, & 15
Employee AttributesWeights: All weighted at 2 points
24
Computing Summary Performance Ratings
Example #1-a Job Specific
Critical Element Rating Weight Pts Score
Recruitment SE 30 1 30
Classification ME 30 .5 15
E/LMR SE 15 1 15
HR E-Systems ME15 .5 7.5
25
Computing Attribute Ratings Scores
Example #1-b Employee Attributes Element
Attribute Rating Weight Pts ScoreResp & Acc’t SE 2 1 2Communication SE 2 1 2Teamwork ME 2 .5 1Innov/ Qual Imp. ME 2 .5 1Cust Svc ME 2 .5 1
Totals 10 7pts
26
Computing Summary Performance Ratings
Example #1-c
Job Specific Critical Element Rating Weight Pts Score Recruitment SE 30 1 30 Classification ME 30 .5 15 E/LMR SE 15 1 15 HR E-Systems ME15 .5 7.5 Attributes 10 7
Totals 100 74.5pts
27
Overall Performance Ratings
Rating Levels: Point Ranges
SE 80 - 100
ME 50 - 79
NI 49 and below
FME any score with at least 1
critical element rated FME
28
Performance Awards Eligibility
Mandatory Awards: SE
Discretionary Awards: ME
No Awards: NI or FME
29
Performance Award Amounts
Awards to employees rated Significantly Exceeds Expectations:System recommends 5 to 10% of base pay
for highest SE levels Maximum of $7,500Mangement discretion (w/ HQ approval) for
lower amounts based on funding shortfalls
30
Performance Award Amounts (cont.)
Sample Performance Awards % Payouts:
Ratings/Scores Opt A Opt B Opt C Opt DSE/95-100 pts 10% 7.5% 5% 5%SE/80-94 pts 8 6 4 3ME/70-79pts 6 4.5 3 1ME/60-69pts * 4 3 2 0ME/50-59pts * 2 1.5 1 0
31
TimetableDecember 31, 2005 – Deadline for implementation of the new performance management systemMarch 1, 2006 – Start date for progress reviewsSeptember 30, 2006 – End of first rating cycleOctober 15, 2006 – Deadline for finalizing performance ratingsDecember 31, 2006 – Deadline for payment of FY 2006 performance awards
32
ORO Implementation
Non-bargaining unit employees:
by December 31, 2005
Bargaining unit employees:
maybe by December 31, 2005
33
If you have any questions about this new performance management system, please contact your assigned Human Resources Specialist for assistance.
34
HR Assigned Specialists
Office of Manager Adolphus Brown – 576-4757Public Affairs Office Carol Aytes – 576-9586Diversity Programs Carol Aytes – 576-9586Partnerships & Program Development Phil Barker – 574-2636Office of Chief Counsel Carol Aytes – 576-9586AM Security & Emergency Management Phil Barker – 574-2636Office of Nuclear Fuel Supply Edward Dunbar – 576-0670AM Administration Jill Stephenson – 576-0677AM Environmental Management Edward Dunbar – 576-0670Office of Chief Financial Officer Phil Barker – 574-2636AM Science Jill Stephenson – 576-0677AM Environment, Safety & Health Carol Aytes – 576-9586OSTI Adolphus Brown – 576-4757PNSO Adolphus Brown – 576-4757TJSO Adolphus Brown – 576-4757