Performance Appraisal
O r a n g e C o u n t y S h e r i f f ’ s O f f i c e 2 5 0 0 W C o l o n i a l D r .
O r l a n d o , F L 3 2 8 0 2 4 0 7 . 2 5 4 . 7 0 0 0
4 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 4
Joe Galligan & Justin Stevens
CONSULTING
EXCELLENCE
PILLAR OF
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The current appraisal system in use by the Orange County Sheriff’s Office is excellent by
existing standards. The main purpose of the appraisal system is for personal development rather
than for any type of administrative decision-making. Much thought and care is put into the
involvement of employees throughout the process, as well as the feedback given to them.
Employees participate in setting a series of goals and dates for these goals to be achieved, which
allows them to be cognizant of what is expected of them and provides a useful tool for bettering
themselves and their performance.
There are some major highlights of the appraisal system that demonstrate its utility and
effectiveness. In particular, the feedback process, evaluation of those who are raters to improve
their rating abilities, and the Performance Improvement Plan serve to enhance the overall
potential for development and success of the program. However, there are some areas that can be
improved upon. Establishing an organizational climate that views the appraisal system as
worthwhile, honing in on behaviors in each specific job that must be measured for performance,
and increasing the rating scale from a three-item scale to a five-item scale would collectively
assist in establishing the appraisal system as an even better resource than it already is. Despite
these areas for improvement, the overall system is at a good place and much better than many
existing systems of performance appraisal that are being used today.
3
OVERVIEW OF CURRENT PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL
SYSTEM USED BY OCSO
USE OF APPRAISAL
The system currently in use for performance appraisals at the Orange County Sheriff’s
Office (OCSO) is an appraisal used across the entire agency; that is, it is used to evaluate every
single position within the department aside from that of sheriff. Employees holding the rank of
sergeant or sergeant equivalent will perform the evaluation for any employees below their rank.
In the event there is no one designated as sergeant or sergeant equivalent, performance appraisals
shall be conducted by any employee designated as corporal or corporal equivalent. The
immediate supervisor of the sergeant or sergeant equivalent -usually the sheriff - shall complete
their respective performance evaluations.
PURPOSE OF APPRAISAL
As per a document entitled “Orange County Sheriff’s Office General Order”, the purpose
of the performance appraisal is “to serve both management and the individual employee to
document the employee's job performance in order to: support standardized, fair and impartial
personnel decisions; maintain and improve job performance; provide a medium for personnel
counseling and development; facilitate proper decisions regarding probationary employees;
provide an objective and fair means for measurement and recognition of individual job
performance within assignments in accordance with established standards; and identify training
needs.” Essentially, the main purpose of the performance appraisal is to provide an opportunity
for feedback, coaching, and personal development. It is important to note that the stated purpose
makes it clear that this procedure is not to be used for any administrative decisions such as hiring
4
and/or firing with the exception of probationary employees and potentially disqualifying an
employee from the promotion process. The focus of the performance appraisal is identifying
strengths and weaknesses in an employee’s performance and setting goals to improve such
performance for the next evaluation.
FREQUENCY OF APPRAISAL
The current performance appraisal system at OCSO is completed annually to the
anniversary date on which each employee was hired. It is noted that supervisors may complete
period evaluations as they see necessary, but this is rarely ever done, if at all. The only
performance that is to be rated for each employee’s evaluation is performance following said
employee’s previous evaluation; in other words, that performance from the past year.
Performance prior to or after the rating period should not be considered. It is noted that
employees shall be evaluated on the relevant job task analysis and job description for their
respective position within OCSO and that the evaluation criteria shall be both descriptive and
measurable.
TRAINING
Those supervisors in charge of rating must attend an annual managerial/leadership
training that covers all managerial duties, including the basics of performance appraisal; when
educating raters on performance appraisal, the importance of the process is stressed.
Occasionally, a half-day training class is required where raters attend classes where they practice
activities such as goal-setting, frame of reference exercises, discuss common problems that occur
during the appraisal process, and also what would happen if a performance appraisal is not
5
completed. This training is also conducted in conjunction with human resources development,
which is supposed to train supervisors on the rating procedure, common ratings errors, the
evaluation meeting, feedback, and goal setting. Additionally, each supervisor is rated annually in
regards to his/her quality of ratings given to their subordinates and the counseling given to
subordinates during the feedback process. This feedback to each rater allows them to take note of
their own strengths and weaknesses in ratings and to improve these abilities.
PERFORMING THE EVALUATION
At the conclusion of the most recent appraisal or at hire, an employee’s immediate
supervisor must meet with all subordinate employees at the beginning of their new rating
periods. During this meeting, the supervisor must address the task of the employee’s current
assignment, the level of performance expected of the employee, the evaluation rating criteria,
and any career development goals of them. Supervisors are also expected to periodically review
these performance expectations with their subordinates throughout the new evaluation period.
Performance appraisal forms can be accessed by raters via the online OCSO portal. For
the first section of the performance appraisal form, the rater is to fill out basic information about
him/her and the employee they are evaluating (name, employee number, date of hire, etc.) In the
next section, raters must indicate which policies and procedures have been reviewed with the
employee and also if they have received any formal discipline during the period for which they
are being evaluated. The third section of the appraisal is to be completed only for those
employees who operate agency-issued vehicles, and is to be skipped if the employee does not
drive a vehicle.
6
The fourth section of the form is the evaluation section, which must be completed for all
employees. They are rated in eleven different areas, which are as follows: Job Knowledge,
Quality of Work, Productivity, Interpersonal Skills, Communication, Teamwork, Accountability,
Judgment/Decision Making, Personal Effectiveness, Leadership, and Employee Development.
Behaviors associated with each rating area can be located on the “rating info” section of the
OCSO portal. Each category is to be rated based on a three-item scale: Exceeds Standards (E),
Meets Standards (M), or Below Standards (B). Those who are rated “E” exceed the established
standards and perform correctly 96 to 100% of the time; those who are rated “M” meet the
established standards and perform correctly 70 to 95% of the time; finally, those who are rated
“B” fall below the established standards and perform correctly 0 to 69% of the time. Only one of
these values can be selected for each rating area.
The fifth section is only completed when the employee being rated supervises other
employees (e.g. when a sheriff is conducting the appraisal for a sergeant or corporal). This
section identifies three supervisory behaviors (Administrative, Supervision, and Supervisor
Interpersonal Skills) that are to be rated based on the same three-item rating scale used in section
four. The next section allows the supervisor to provide feedback in regards to the strengths of the
employee and areas that they can improve in. Raters are required to provide additional comments
in the “comments” section next to these fields. Strengths, areas for improvement, and comments
fields must be filled out for all employees that are evaluated. Once the rater fills out all of these
fields, they are to fill out the “overall rating” of the employee using the three-item rating scale
referenced prior. It is important that this overall rating is not completed before filling out the rest
of the performance appraisal form in its entirety.
7
For each rating area designated a value of “B” in the evaluation form, there is a section to
fill out on a separate form called the Performance Improvement Plan. This form is also found on
the OCSO portal and is used to set goals and make clear to employees what they are to work on
for their evaluation that will take place next year. Within each rating area issued a “B” rating, the
rater is to outline the specific area for improvement, as well as actions they recommend for how
the employee can improve. For example, in the event that the employee is not meeting standards
in the “Quality of Work” rating area, the rater would say that the specific area they need to work
on is preparing documents and reports that are accurate and free of errors. They would also
recommend actions to do so, such as the employee double-checking their work before sending
out documents and attending classes to improve their writing skills. Additionally, a completion
date for each specific area that is to be improved is set. Once these actions have been completed,
the rater will later fill out the date of completion; if they have not been completed or have not
been completed to a satisfactory level, the rater will note areas still in need of further
improvement. The rater does not have to complete the performance improvement plan for rating
areas that received a rating of “E” or “M”.
In addition to the forms noted above, the employee may complete an optional form called
the Performance Evaluation Preparation Form prior to meeting with their supervisor. The
purpose of this form is to give the employee an opportunity to elaborate on how they achieved
their goals from the previous year. Sections on this form include: strengths, areas for
improvement, what steps can be taken to improve, and any accomplishments and/or activities
that they have participated in that have advanced the agency or helped develop their own
knowledge, skills, and abilities. The employee is to bring this form to their annual performance
meeting to be considered alongside their evaluation forms.
8
DISCUSSION & FEEDBACK OF APPRAISAL
At the conclusion of each employee’s rating period and once all forms have been
completed, the rater is to meet with the subordinate to discuss their evaluation. During this
discussion, the supervisor will review the evaluation itself with the subordinate. The supervisor
will also discuss the level of performance expected, rating criteria, and goals for the new
reporting period that starts at the conclusion of the meeting. The supervisor will also discuss the
Performance Improvement Plan if necessary, in addition to providing career counseling advice
on topics such as advancement and training for the employee’s position. The employee is also
allowed to prepare with the supervisor an optional Career Development Plan if requested. As can
be seen through the various methods of goal-setting and feedback, constructive criticism is of
vital importance to this process. At the conclusion of the meeting, each employee will be asked
to restate his/her understanding of the evaluation and each deficiency in the Performance
Improvement Plan and how to improve it. Employees will also be given the opportunity to attach
comments to the evaluation.
DOCUMENTATION
Following the meeting, employees must sign all documents discussed during the one-on-
one. The supervisor must then make a copy to retain for his/her records, make a copy to give to
the employee, and make a copy that is to be forwarded to the Human Resources Division
(Personnel Services Unit) of OCSO. Employee evaluations must be kept on file and
documentation procedures must be followed carefully. In the event that a legal issue arises
regarding any of the preceding documents, it is important that they can be retrieved.
9
Additionally, in the event that an employee is being considered for a promotion or transfer, their
previous two years of evaluations are reviewed for selection purposes; if these are misplaced, it
could affect an employee’s chances at progression within the department.
APPRAISAL APPEALS PROCESS
There is an appeals process in place for the performance evaluation as well. Supervisors
are to attempt to resolve employee disputes or disagreements on site at the review and meeting of
their evaluation. An employee who still disagrees with his/her evaluation can request in writing
through chain-of-command to his/her Division Commander to appeal. The employee must
elaborate on specific points of disagreements that he/she had with the supervisor who rated
him/her. The decision of the Division Commander is final.
EMPLOYEE PERCEPTIONS OF APPRAISAL
Based on our interview with an SME in the HR department at OCSO, it seems that
managers do not think the current performance appraisal is very effective. It is oftentimes seen as
more of a “rubber stamp”; not a lot of thought or care is put into the evaluation since it is not
used for pay or ranking employees for the sake of promotion, but it must simply be done. Due to
this rubber stamp mentality, the evaluations sometimes do not get completed. Despite the
automated system put into place for reminding supervisors and even their supervisors to
complete the evaluations, they still do not get completed. The HR department has stated that it
almost feels like “pulling teeth” to get supervisors to perform these evaluations.
10
STRENGTHS
The major strengths of the performance appraisal process in use by OCSO are listed
below, from highest to lowest.
EMPHASIS ON FEEDBACK IS GOOD
The feedback mechanisms used and emphasis on feedback itself is something of vital
importance to this process. Due to the fact that the purpose is mainly on development of the
employees, without a good feedback system, the whole appraisal process would be useless.
OCSO puts feedback at the top of the priority list for their employees, ensuring that all
employees go over each portion of their evaluation forms, and if necessary, the Performance
Improvement Plan. The supervisor explains all ratings given to the employee, stating why they
received that score in that area, suggestions to improve, and answering any questions the
employee may have about. The employee and their supervisor attend to all areas in which they
were below standards and review what they must do to improve; following this, they produce
career development goals and are asked to restate what they talked about in order to leave the
meeting knowing that both parties understand what is expected.
The first positive aspect of the feedback process is that it is used primarily for
development and not for administrative decisions like pay raises. Some research shows that when
an organization uses an appraisal system for both feedback and administrative decisions like pay
raises, both functions suffer as a result.1 The feedback in this case focuses on both explaining
1 Meyer, H.H., Kay, E., & French, J. (1965) Split roles in performance appraisal. Harvard Business Review, 43, 123-129
11
areas of development and ways to improve. During the process, specific behaviors to improve
must be identified. Generally, feedback that is specific and behaviorally oriented is more useful
than feedback that is general and vague, and feedback is also better for development when it
includes both problem-oriented and solution-oriented information.2
EVALUATION OF RATERS
Another highlight of the appraisal process at OCSO is that the highest supervisors also
rate the supervisors below them. Included in their ratings of these lower-level supervisors is the
ability and skill of the supervisor in ratings subordinates. This feedback on rating ability is
beneficial; if the supervisors are not rating their own employees correctly, it would be difficult to
trust their judgment. Feedback is given to the supervisors on their rating ability and also on how
to improve that ability. Assessment center research has shown that it is beneficial to evaluate
assessors on their ability to rate incumbents, and to provide feedback to them on how to improve
their assessment abilities when they are not up to par.3 It is likely that this observation can also
apply to supervisors rating their employees for performance appraisals.
PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT PLAN
The Performance Improvement Plan is a good extension of the feedback system itself.
The Performance Improvement Plan puts a larger focus on areas that need improvement because
they fell below standards. In addition to highlighting areas of an employee’s behavior that need
2 Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Sage. 3 Thornton III, G. C., & Mueller-Hanson, R. A. (2003). Developing organizational simulations: A guide for practitioners and students. Psychology Press.
12
improvement, the Performance Improvement Plan also sets specific behaviors that should be
done by certain dates in order to improve their own skills in those areas. Essentially, the
Performance Improvement Plan is a process used to set goals for each employee to work on in
order to improve his/her abilities and the organization as a whole. This is important as goal-
setting has been shown to increase motivation to perform well; specific goals that are difficult
but still achievable and have also been agreed upon by employees increase motivation to perform
better even more.4 The current system establishes very specific goals to be accomplished by
certain dates, and thus falls in line with the goal-setting literature. When these goals are set and
an action plan is put in place, the process is more likely to be perceived as accurate and fair. 5
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PREPARATION (EMPLOYEE) FORM
The Performance Evaluation Preparation Form that can be completed by employees is
another benefit of the current appraisal system. As an optional document, it is not a hassle for
employees as they are not required to complete it. However, it does give employees the chance to
do a sort of self-evaluation, explain themselves and the goals they have accomplished since their
last evaluation, and provide some input on the appraisal process. In doing so and involving
employees more in the process, this is likely to increase the employees’ perceptions of fairness of
the process, and thus establish more face validity for the evaluation procedure.
BEHAVIORS LINKED TO EACH RATING FOR REFERENCE
4 Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2008). Essentials of organizational behavior (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. 5 Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Sage.
13
As stated in the section above explaining the appraisal process, supervisors have the
option of clicking a link in the portal when filling out the evaluation form that explains job-
relevant behaviors for each rating area. This is likely to help in determining whether an employee
exceeds, meets, or falls below certain standards in each rating area. More specifically, if there is
some area that a rater is not familiar with (although there should not be because training should
account for this), these behaviors may help in determining what value to assign the employee.
These suggested behaviors for each rating area are in a way parallel to something like a
behavioral checklist. Behavioral checklists have been shown to reduce cognitive load of raters
and increase discriminant validity between the rating areas and dimensions, thus reducing
cognitive errors like halo effect.6 This is especially useful when there are so many rating areas to
develop a score for.
ONLINE FORMAT OF APPRAISAL
We also thought that having the appraisal forms all stored online make them much more
convenient for the supervisors who must do the ratings. The forms are simple and easy to access,
and also easier to fill out online rather than having to do it by hand. The database also provides
an easy way to store the forms so that there is not much effort needed to look for them why they
are needed. It takes away from the hassle of paperwork and having to sort through files in order
to gather materials.
6 Donahue, L. M., Truxillo, D. M., Cornwell, J. M., & Gerrity, M. J. (1997). Assessment center construct validity and behavioral checklists: Some additional findings. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality.
14
OPPORTUNITIES & RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
IMPROVEMENT
The major opportunities to improve of the performance appraisal process in use by OCSO, as
well as recommendations to improve each, are listed below from highest to lowest.
GETTING “BUY-IN”
Based on the feedback we got from our subject matter expert, it seems that supervisors in
the organization are not fond of the appraisal process. It often does not get done because there is
a lack of concern and motivation to perform the appraisals. Organizational climate is the
perception of policies, procedures, and practices in an organization.7 The climate at OCSO seems
to be that performance appraisals are not important, thus establishing a reason for them not to get
done. It seems that the key to improving the procedure and effectiveness of the procedure overall
is to increase motivation to complete appraisals and make the organizational climate surrounding
the performance appraisal system to be pro-appraisal rather than against it.
Employees are often resistant to big and sudden changes in the organization.8 Therefore,
when implementing any changes to the current politics or policies, it is important to do so
gradually. Although supervisors do not like the fact that appraisals have no ties to salary
increases or promotion, we do not recommend changing this due to the literature that shows the
7 Ostroff, C., Kinicki, A. J., & Tamkins, M. M. (2003). Organizational culture and climate. In W. C. Borman, & D. R. Ilgen (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 12, p. 565-593). New York, NY: John Wiley. 8 Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2008). Essentials of organizational behavior (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
15
benefits of keeping such procedures separate from personal development. However, we must
first establish buy-in for these procedures with the people on the top. One way to do so is to
research other sheriff’s departments around the country that value appraisal systems; these could
then be compared to the views on appraisal at the OCSO and results of attributing more value to
the appraisal process can be demonstrated. In doing so, proving to those in charge of rating
employees that completing these appraisals is likely to lead to real changes in performance levels
for both their subordinates and themselves is likely to lead to better results for the organization.
This demonstration of value should not be in the format of an annual meeting, but should
permeate throughout the organization on a daily basis. Perhaps one strategy would be to adopt a
phrase that would highlight the benefits of constant improvement, and also maybe send out a
monthly newsletter that discusses improvement in the organization at both the individual and
organizational level. It is our hope that employees will associate these improvements with the
performance appraisal process and come to place more value upon it.
CONSIDER A SUPPLEMENTAL FORM TO JOB ANALYSES
In the current general order for performance appraisals, it is stated that evaluation criteria
should be descriptive and measurable. As it stands, although the rating areas are observable, they
are not entirely descriptive and measurable or specific to any one job position. It is our
knowledge that a job analysis is conducted for each position at OCSO. Without a form to refer to
evaluate each individual position, it seems that the highest potential in evaluating a position is
lost due to the general nature of the form as it spans across all jobs. One area of opportunity here
is to change this procedure so that there is another form to refer to when evaluating different
positions.
16
Our recommendation is that a supplemental form is constructed for each position in
conjunction with the job analysis for the purpose of providing specific and observable behaviors
during performance evaluation. The general form for performance appraisal would still be used
and would not need to be changed, but depending on the position being evaluated, the
supplemental list would provide the rater with interest to improve accuracy in ratings. Ideally,
the supplemental form would break down the job into the eleven ratings areas from the general
form using information already gathered in the job analysis. For example, the definition of the
rating area of “Job Knowledge” as per the Performance Evaluation Form is that the employee
“demonstrates knowledge [and] skills necessary to perform job effectively”. On the supplemental
form for evaluation for the position of Forensic Firearms Analyst within OCSO, a behavior from
the job analysis that would fall under this category is effectively choosing and using the correct
chemicals in order to restore serial numbers on various firearms. This behavior is both specific
and observable and pertains to a certain position within the department. Research on
categorization in memory has shown that categorization depends on the similarity of the target to
categories given to the rater.9 Therefore, the more categories that are available to the rater, the
more likely they are to rate each employee for each job correctly.
THE RATING SCALE
The current rating scale in use is a three-item scale: Exceeds Standards (E), Meets
Standards (M), or Below Standards (B). The current breakdown seems to cover way too much in
some areas, and too little in other areas. For example, a below standards worker is someone who
9 Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17
falls below established standards and performs correctly only 0 to 69% of the time. On the other
hand, there is a very small percentage for those who exceed standards, being only those who
perform correctly 96 to 100% of the time. It is therefore very easy to fall into one category and
very difficult to achieve the other; additionally, this leaves no room to distinguish between two
employees in some areas. For example, it would be difficult to distinguish between an extremely
poor employee who performs well 0% of the time and one who performs well 65% of the time
due to the fact that they would both be assigned the rating of “below standards” regardless.
Score sensitivity states that a procedure for measuring must be sensitive enough to
distinguish between real differences that exist in attributes.10 The current system of measurement
may fail to distinguish accurately between varying levels of performance between employees,
especially for those who fall below standards. Our proposition is to change the three-item scale
to a five-item scale as follows:
Below Standards (“B”): Fall below the established standards and performs correctly 0 to
50% of the time
Somewhat Below Standards (“SB”): Fall below the established standards on some
behaviors in the rating area and performs correctly 51 to 69% of the time
Meets Standards (“M”): Meet the established standards and performs correctly 70 to 80%
of the time
Somewhat Exceeds Standards (“SE”): Exceeds the established standards on some
behaviors in the rating area and performs correctly 81 to 90% of the time
10 Furr, R. M., & Bacharach, V. R. (2013). Psychometrics: an introduction. Sage.
18
Exceeds Standards (“E”): Exceed the established standards and performs correctly 90 to
100% of the time
This new rating scale would allow raters to easily distinguish between poor and very poor
employees, and also to give other employees a rating of exceeding standards, but not quite
exceeding all standards within a rating area.
TRAINING OF RATERS
As it stands, raters are provided with training on what seems like a random basis.
Currently, raters are to attend training classes when they occur. These rating classes do focus on
teaching frame-of-reference skills to easily classify and rate behaviors, education on cognitive
biases and cognitive errors that may influence ratings, and other techniques for observing
behaviors and evaluating employees. Training in all of the techniques mentioned have been
shown to improve rater accuracy when performing evaluations.11
Our suggestion here is simple; rather than do the frame-of-referencing and cognitive
biases training randomly, set a date to do this training course annually. Doing so would allow
raters to practice these skills and remind them each year of what to watch for when performing
evaluations. As it stands, the class is currently only a half-day training course for one day when it
takes place anyway, so it is really not too much to ask for to require the course once each year.
Additionally, it seems it would only be helpful to do the course once a year as a refresher course.
BIANNUAL APPRAISALS
11 Thornton III, G. C., & Rupp, D. E. (2006). Assessment centers in human resource management: Strategies for prediction, diagnosis, and development. Psychology Press.
19
The current system of performance appraisal that is in place is set up so that appraisals
are done on an annual basis. Although supervisors are told to keep information in mind and note
behavior of employees over the course of that year (or rating period), it is likely that some
information is forgotten or lost along the way. It is noted that information committed to long-
term memory is not “lost”; however, it is possible that the passage of time and activities that fall
between storing knowledge and retrieving it may interfere with the ability to recall the
information when it comes time for evaluations to take place.12
Our suggestion to combat this potential issue is to increase the frequency of the
evaluations to twice a year rather than once a year. By making evaluations biannual rather than
annual, it would help raters recall behaviors and information relevant to evaluation more easily.
We propose that this mid-year evaluation (to be held at 6 months since the last evaluation) need
not be a formal evaluation, but simply a sit-down meeting where progress so far is discussed.
The supervisor may also wish to reevaluate the Performance Improvement Plan that was set for
the employee and see if he/she is on track to attain goals that were set. This meeting should still
be documented as taking place, and the employee should be required to sign off on it as well.
JUSTIFY MEETING OR EXCEEDING STANDARDS IN PIP
As of now, the Performance Improvement Plan is only to be completed for those ratings
areas that fall “below standards”. Due to the fact that performance appraisals are already viewed
as a hassle for supervisors to complete, adding this form only adds to it. It may be the possibility
that due to this fact, and that the form only needs to be completed for each rating area that falls
12 Tulving, E. (1983). Essentials of episodic memory. New York: Oxford University Press.
20
“below standards”, it is likely that supervisors are more likely to rate employees at a “meets” or
“exceeds” level simply to avoid filling out the form and adding on more to their workload.
We suggest that the Performance Improvement Plan be filled out regardless of the ratings
an employee received in each rating area. If an employee was ranked as “exceeds” or “meets”,
we think that an explanation (even if one to two sentences) should be made. In doing so, this
assures that each rating area is covered on the form, and also that supervisors are more likely to
be honest in their ratings since they have to justify the rating regardless of what the outcome was.
If this new system was to be used with our proposed new rating scale as well, we suggest that
areas for improvement are made both for those employees who are below standards (“B”) and
somewhat below standards (“SB”).
MAKE ALL FORMS CONSISTENT
Our last suggestion is simply to make sure that all forms are consistent with one another
and up-to-date. The process of changing an appraisal is an ongoing one, so it is not expected that
everything will be up-to-date right away. However, we observed some inconsistencies in our
review of the existing materials. For example, the instructions for the Performance Evaluation
Form state that there is a score of “Meets Standards/Needs Improvement”, or “N”, but this
response does not exist on the actual Performance Evaluation Form. Although this is a small
detail and not something that would destroy the appraisal process, it is important that all forms
and documents are consistent with one another for both the rater and employee being rated, as
well as legal reasons.
WHAT WE LEARNED
21
We learned that performance appraisal is often a game of what seems like trade-offs. The
ideal situation and ideal approach to appraisal is often unrealistic; compromises must be made in
order to honor the integrity of the evaluation but also to encourage participation in the process as
well. A lot of thought goes into the process, and to make changes and improvements to an
existing system of appraisal requires a lot of care, attention, consideration, and time. Employees
are not likely to jump on board to a new idea without giving reason to first.
Another thing we learned is that people often do not like the performance appraisal
process and simply do not like doing performance appraisals. Establishing rapport with
employees and gaining support for the performance appraisal system is very difficult. Despite the
fact that OCSO has an excellent appraisal in place, employees still do not like it. It seems
although lots of research and theory have been proposed in regards to performance appraisals,
there is no perfect system; the best appraisal system is highly dependent on both the organization
and the purpose for the appraisal itself.
22
Name: Date of Report: Employee #: OCSO Hire Date: Sworn Date: Period covered by this report:
Rater Name: Rater Signature ______________________________________________________Date ____________
Rater Supervisor Name: Rater Supervisor Signature ____________________________________________Date ____________
Captain Name: Captain Signature ____________________________________________________Date ____________
Employee Signature ___________________________________________________Date ____________ I agree with the ratings I do not agree with the ratings (I have attached explanation)
Overall Rating: (Below Standards rating requires Performance Improvement Plan) Scheduled Date: Review Type: Next Review Date: Next Review Type:
KEY
E = Exceeds Standards M = Meets Standards B = Below Standards
E M B Job Knowledge: Demonstrates knowledge & skills necessary to perform job effectively Quality of Work: Accurately & thoroughly completes work Productivity: Effectively completes the specified amount of work within established guidelines Interpersonal Skills: Exercises courtesy & tact in dealing with others Communication: Effectively shares information with co-workers & citizens Teamwork: Maintains effective working relationships with others Accountability: Accepts responsibility for performance & behavior Judgment/Decision Making: Makes sound & logical decisions Personal Effectiveness: Maintains appropriate physical conditioning, hygiene & appearance
Orange County Sheriff’s Office Performance Evaluation Form
23
Leadership: Contributes to & respects the contributions of others in achieving Agency goals Employee Development: Strives to grow personally & professionally
Must be filled out for all employees that supervise other employees
KEY
E = Exceeds Standards M = Meets Standards B = Below Standards
E M B Administrative: Successfully performs general supervisory duties Supervision: Successfully supervises employee job performance Supervisor Interpersonal Skills: Exercises courtesy & tact in dealing with subordinates
Has employee had formal discipline in the rating period: yes no
Emergency Notification Form on file Current Home Phone Number & Address on file
Reviewed with supervisor:
GO 4.6.1 Anti-Discrimination & Equal Employment Opportunity GO 8.1.6 Use of Force (Sworn Only)
GO 4.7.2 Exposure Control Program (Sworn/designated Civilians) GO 8.1.7 Vehicle Apprehension/Pursuit (Sworn Only)
Critical Incident Management Guide
Date of last:
Sworn Block Training/Civilian Four Hour Training:
Firearm Qualification:
Biennial Physical (Sworn/designated Civilians):
Must be filled out for all employees that operate agency vehicles
Driver’s License #: Expiration Date: Valid: yes no
LEVO Training Date Completed:
Must be filled out for all employees
Strengths Areas for improvement
24
Comments __________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Employee requests Career Development Plan yes no
Performance Improvement Plan Completed yes no (Below Standards rating requires Performance Improvement Plan)
Orange County Sheriff’s Office Performance Improvement Plan Name Date of Report Employee # Next Review Date Next Review Type Rater Signature/Date ______________________________________________________ Rater Supervisor Signature ______________________________________________________ Captain Signature/Date ______________________________________________________ Employee Signature/Date ______________________________________________________
Job knowledge: Demonstrates knowledge & skills necessary to perform job effectively Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments
Quality of Work: Accurately and thoroughly completes work Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments
Productivity: Effectively completes the specified amount of work within established guidelines Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date
25
Comments
Interpersonal skills: Exercises courtesy & tact in dealing with others Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments
Communication: Effectively shares information with co-workers & citizens Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments
Teamwork: Maintains effective working relationships with others Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments
Accountability: Accepts responsibility for performance & behavior Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments
Judgment/Decision Making: Makes sound & logical decisions Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments
Personal Effectiveness: Maintains appropriate physical conditioning, hygiene & appearance Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments
Leadership: Contributes to & respects the contributions of others in achieving Agency goals Specific area for Improvement
26
Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments
Employee Development: Strives to grow personally & professionally Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments
Administrative: Successfully performs general supervisory administrative duties Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments
Supervision: Successfully supervises employee job performance Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments
Supervisor Interpersonal Skills: Exercises courtesy & tact in dealing with subordinates
Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments
27
Orange County Sheriff’s Office Performance Evaluation Preparation Form
This form is optional. Employees may complete prior to evaluation meeting with supervisor. Employee Name Date Position Section/Division Supervisor Evaluation Period Covered
Strengths: What are your strengths?
Areas for Improvement: What areas are in need of improvement? What steps would be beneficial or have you already taken to improve these areas?
Accomplishments/Activities: Describe the activities in which you have participated that have enhanced the agency and/or developed your knowledge, skills, and abilities (e.g., prepared for and participated in the DFC Exam, prepared for and competed in the Transfer Review Board, cross-trained in specialty
units, attended training/seminars):