Rating Performance
A performance review form should be completed once each year for every
employee you superviser. There are two forms from which to choose depending on whether you are evaluating an A&P and/or Classified Manager/Supervisor OR a Classified Non-Supervisory employee. These forms can be found online on the Human Resources Training and Development webpage. It is
divided into several parts, including Performance Levels, Performance Factors, Overall Evaluation, Mutually Understood
Goals, Employee Comments and Signatures.
The Standard Performance Review
Form
To begin, fill in the employee's name, the date, the employee's EMPLID number, and job position. Also, fill in the employee's department
and the operating unit. An example is shown below:
| Name:
Sue Harper
Date:
10/15/05 |
| EMPLD: 110010
Position: Admin. Secretary |
| Department:
Surgery/Neurosurgery
Operating Unit: __MS__ |
Performance Levels Section
The section defines Levels of Performance which you may use to rate each
Performance Factor that applies to the employee. See
sample performance factor ratings.
| (E)xemplary |
Performance consistently far exceeds all expectations; conspicuously
meritorious performance. |
| (D)istinguished |
Performance generally exceeds job requirements; well above average. |
| (C)ompetent |
Meets all job responsibilities in this area. |
| (M)arginal |
Performance is below acceptable standards; requires more than average
guidance. |
| (U)nacceptable |
Performance is well below minimum standards; not performing at a fully
effective level. |
| (NA)Not applicable |
Does not apply to this position/person. |
Preparing to Rate Performance
Before you can rate the level of performance on different factors, you
should consider three things: the job description, performance documentation,
and rating errors.
Using the Job Description
If you begin by defining "competent" performance, it may be easier to
decide what performance meets, exceeds, or falls short of this base level.
The best tool to do this is the job description. A current job description
will include job functions, responsibilities and performance expectations.
Using Performance Documentation
Performance documentation also helps you rate the level of performance.
Throughout the year, you have monitored your employees' performance,
making notes and communicating to them about what they have done well and
things they can improve. You should have records of these meetings
and your discussions.
This, in a sense, is your homework for a meaningful annual review.
You should not have to scratch your head to come up with examples of work
well done or work that needed improvement.
You should have lots of records to draw upon. For example:
- Attendance records
- Complaints or compliments
- Examples of poor or outstanding work
- Activity reports
- Coaching and Counseling notes
Avoiding Ratings Errors
The job description helps you define job competence, and performance
documentation helps you measure job performance. Both tools can help
you remain objective about rating performance, though rating errors can
occur when using generalized rating scales.
Here are some common tendencies which you should avoid when rating the
performance of your employees.
Halo Effect - Rating
(positively or negatively) an employee on one trait or factor and letting
that rating influence your ratings for all the other traits. This
problem often occurs with employees who are especially friendly (or unfriendly)
toward the supervisor or especially strong (or weak) in one skill.
To avoid the halo effect, evaluate all your people on one performance
factor before going to another factor. This way the evaluation is
based on the factors more than an overall impression of one individual.
Leniency or Harshness Errors - When
raters see everything as "good," they are lenient raters. When they
see everything as "bad," they are harsh raters.
Examine your ratings for a leniency or harshness tendency. If
you have this tendency, consider using a normal distribution - 10 percent
of employees exemplary, 20 percent distinguished, 40 percent competent,
20 percent marginal, and 10 percent unacceptable.
Central Tendency - Some raters
avoid using high or low ratings. Central tendency describes what
happens when you tend to put everyone in the middle of the road and rate
all of your subordinates as "competent."
The problem with this tendency is it fails to discriminate between
employees and offers little information for subsequent decisions. If you have this tendency, remember that this kind of rating will not help
you in assessing training needs or making decisions on raises or promotions.
First Impression - Whether your
first impression is positive or negative, this should not be the basis
for performance evaluation.
Again, go back to the job description and performance documentation.
This will take the emphasis away from "gut level" feelings and superficial
impressions and focus your evaluation on facts and behavior.
Personal Bias - This occurs
when a rater gives a higher rating because the employee has qualities similar
to him or her (or a lower rating because the employee has dissimilar qualities). Also, raters can simply like certain employees better than others, giving
them higher ratings because of these feelings.
Some employees are aware of this tendency and will temporarily change
their performance when they know a review is about to take place. If you have used documentation and been involved in daily performance management,
your evaluation will be based on the employee's performance during the
entire time period.
Rating Performance Now you are prepared to rate performance. It's a good idea to
use the comments section to document and justify all your ratings. Any ratings of Exemplary or Unacceptable must be justified in the
comments section. Adding comments makes the ratings more meaningful
- whether you are rating positive performance or performance that needs
improvement. This way your employee will have a specific example
of what you had in mind when you rated him or her a certain way.
This example may either be praise or a suggestion for improvement. You can also attach additional documents if needed.
Performance Factors Section
Knowledge of the Job: Possesses the knowledge
and technical competencies required to perform job responsibilities; understands
relevant policies and procedures and organizational structure and function.
Comments:
|
Quality of Work: Produces work to meet acceptable
standards, including accuracy, neatness, and completeness.
Comments: |
You should assign one of the levels of performance to each performance
factor that applies to the employee. For managerial and supervisory
employees, rate both performance factors and the managerial and supervisory
factors. You may add optional factors in both sections. If the performance does not apply to the position use the (NA) Not Applicable
rating.
Overall Evaluation
Use the performance levels on page one of the Performance Review Form as
a guideline to rate the employee's overall performance. You may also
want to add comments to explain your rating.
|