Assessing executive performance using the
                        Key Leadership Competencies
Recognizing and rewarding an...
Consideration of the Key Leadership Competencies can easily be a part of the existing
departmental performance management ...
Option 1:      Evaluating results in the context of how they were achieved

With this approach, evaluating how the executi...
Surpassed                                        Highest amount of
                                                       ...
Purpose of the Tool
This tool is available for use in the Performance Management Program (PMP) for
Executives.

Recognizin...
Guidelines
First rate each competency separately; then rate the competencies as a whole.

1. Rate the demonstration of eac...
e) To ensure fairness and consistency throughout your assessment, consider
         the following factors in deciding on t...
competencies to the point that they need only very minor
                      development on any of the competencies.

  ...
Director Level




VALUES & ETHICS
STRATEGIC THINKING - analysis and ideas
ENGAGEMENT
MANAGEMENT EXCELLENCE – actions, peo...
Director Level

                            Values and Ethics (Integrity and Respect):
Public Service (PS) leaders serve C...
Director Level
                   Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion

    How did the executive’s ach...
Director Level
Analysis                                                  Analysis
• Frames division direction with a thoro...
Director Level
                             Engagement (People, Organizations, Partners):
Public Service leaders engage pe...
Director Level
Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments




DRAFT March 30, 2007                ...
Director Level

  Management Excellence: Action Management, People Management, Financial
                               Ma...
Director Level

Action Management – Design and Execution
                 Effective Behaviours                            ...
Director Level
Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments




   DRAFT March 30, 2007             ...
Director Level

People Management – Individuals and Workforce
                 Effective Behaviours                       ...
Director Level

Financial Management – Budgets and Assets
                Effective Behaviours                            ...
Director General Level


VALUES & ETHICS
STRATEGIC THINKING – Analysis & ideas
ENGAGEMENT
MANAGEMENT EXCELLENCE – action, ...
Director General Level

Values and Ethics (Integrity and Respect): Public Service (PS) leaders serve Canadians, ensuring
i...
Director General Level
Strategic Thinking (Analysis and Ideas):
Public Service leaders advise and plan based on analysis o...
Director General Level
Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments




     DRAFT March 30, 2007   ...
Director General Level

Engagement (People, Organizations, Partners):
Public Service leaders engage people, organizations,...
Director General Level
Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments




   DRAFT March 30, 2007     ...
Director General Level



  Management Excellence: Action Management, People Management, Financial
                       ...
Director General Level

Action Management – Design and Execution
                 Effective Behaviours                    ...
Director General Level




DRAFT March 30, 2007                       28
Director General Level

People Management – Individuals and Workforce
                    Effective Behaviours            ...
Director General Level

Financial Management – Budgets and Assets
                    Effective Behaviours                ...
Assistant Deputy Minister Level


VALUES & ETHICS
STRATEGIC THINKING – Analysis & Ideas
ENGAGEMENT
MANAGEMENT EXCELLENCE -...
Values and Ethics (Integrity and Respect):
Public Service (PS) leaders serve Canadians, ensuring integrity in personal and...
Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion

    How did the executive’s achievement of results reflect the PS...
Strategic Thinking (Analysis and Ideas):
Public Service leaders advise and plan based on analysis of issues and trends, an...
Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion

   How did the executive’s strategies advance the organization’s ...
•   Cultivates effective relationships and networks with central      •   Acts as sole decision maker or
    agencies, oth...
Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion

    How did the executive ensure shared understanding of key stak...
Action Management – Design and Execution
               Effective Behaviours                                    Ineffectiv...
Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion

    In what ways did the executive’s strategies and plans optimiz...
People Management – Individuals and Workforce
                   Effective Behaviours                                    I...
Competency rating
± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency
± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency
± 2...
Financial Management – Budgets and Assets
                     Effective Behaviours                                   Inef...
Competency rating
± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency
± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency
± 2...
Strategic Thinking:
        •   To what extent does the policy contribute to current government priorities?
        •   To...
Assessing Key Leadership Competencies

                                                    Frequency of demonstrated behav...
Purpose of the Tool
This tool is available for use in the Performance Management Program (PMP) for Executives.

Recognizin...
Guidelines
Rate each key leadership competency separately, first rating the behaviours for the competency, then rating the...
i) Rate each key leadership competency using the following scale:
4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency
           •...
•   Were only very minor weaknesses evident in how the results were achieved?
               •   What example(s) would I c...
MS Word
MS Word
MS Word
MS Word
MS Word
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

MS Word

299
-1

Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
299
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

MS Word

  1. 1. Assessing executive performance using the Key Leadership Competencies Recognizing and rewarding an executive for achieving expected results involves considering not only what results were achieved but also how the executive achieved these results. Both the “what” and the “how” should thus determine the executive’s performance rating and, accordingly, the amount of performance pay that he/she is entitled to. The DM Committee on PS Renewal has recently recommended that deputy heads discuss performance on the management of people as part of executive performance assessment in 2007-08 and that a more formal commitment to people management specifically be included in performance agreements for 2008-09. This commitment, in addition to ongoing and key commitments, will be evaluated using the Key Leadership Competencies. While expectations in terms of the results to be achieved (the “what”) are easily defined in the executive’s performance agreement, expected outcomes in terms of people management and other leadership competencies (the “how”) may not be as easily defined. The Key Leadership Competencies (KLC) profile provides examples of effective and ineffective behaviours for each competency that can be easily observed, assessed and integrated into performance evaluation. These behaviours form the basis for strong leadership at all levels. Considering the Four Key Leadership Competencies in Performance Evaluation Successful and effective leaders demonstrate the four Key Leadership Competencies in their day-to-day work. This means that their behaviour models Values & Ethics, Strategic Thinking, Engagement and Management Excellence (including people, action, and financial management). When assessing performance on a work commitment, both the individual and the immediate manager should consider the behaviours that influenced the individual’s performance. Both effective and ineffective behaviour may have positive and negative impact on the results. The achievement of results should not be rewarded if done at the expense of poor leadership practices. On the other hand, although the achievement of results remains the ultimate goal, partial success in that regard should be reviewed in light of good leadership practices that had a somewhat negative impact on the short-term results. An executive should not be penalized for demonstrating behaviours deemed appropriate. Before signing the “attestation” The PMP directive requires that “…the Key Leadership Competencies be used to assess the performance of executives”. This means that the individual’s performance assessment will take into account both the overall results (the “what”) as well as their Key Leadership Competencies (the “how”). DRAFT March 30, 2007 1
  2. 2. Consideration of the Key Leadership Competencies can easily be a part of the existing departmental performance management process. There are a number of ways to do this, and departments and agencies are free to use their preferred approach and tools. They may have developed their own tools1, or they may choose to use some of the tools provided here. Two approaches are introduced and described below. The management of people can also be assessed using additional sources of data, such as employee survey and departmental HR data (e.g. leave, learning, labour relations statistics). 360-degree tools are not recommended for performance assessment as they may put both assessors and assesses in a difficult situation, thereby making the input less reliable. They are, however, extremely useful for learning and development purposes, and the PSC’s Personnel Psychology Centre provides a number of 360-degree tools for these purposes, as does the Canada School of the Public Service. 1 The Canada Public Service Agency (CPSA) encourages department to share any tools they have developed to assess the Key Leadership Competencies. Please e-mail them to: Pascale.Bourque@cpsa-afpc.gc.ca so that an inventory of innovative tools and practices can be developed. DRAFT March 30, 2007 2
  3. 3. Option 1: Evaluating results in the context of how they were achieved With this approach, evaluating how the executive works toward achieving results is a key part of evaluating the overall result. Overall performance is still assessed against ongoing and key commitments, but for each commitment discussed, the immediate manager must consider how the commitment was achieved (i.e. were values and ethics respected or violated; where partners engaged or ignored; was work-life balance modeled or discouraged?) If there are concerns with the way in which the results were achieved, the immediate manager may consider the impact and lower the rating initially assigned for that particular commitment. These types of considerations allow for a more integrated assessment of performance. The following example provides questions to consider when evaluating results in the context of how the results were achieved. • Example: Evaluating results in the context of how they were achieved The individual or the immediate manager may also wish to identify any effective behaviours that were demonstrated in support of delivering a particular commitment. The list of effective behaviours at the appropriate level (director, DG, ADM) can be used for this. Finally, the list of ineffective behaviours (which are the same for all levels) may be used to identify any behaviours that may have been at the detriment to delivering a particular commitment. The consistent demonstration of ineffective behaviours on the part of an executive should influence the rating they receive, and should be noted as areas for development in their learning plan and performance agreement for the following year. Option 2: Assessing Key Leadership Competencies independently of results Another possible approach to evaluate EX performance consists of assessing the “how” (Key Leadership Competencies) independently of the “what” (results). In this case, the immediate manager establishes a rating for the Key Leadership Competencies separately and may use this rating to adjust the overall performance rating. The following tools can be used for both self-assessment by the individual and for assessment by the immediate manager. Each tool will result in a rating of each competency individually and then overall. The first tool allows for global consideration of effective and ineffective behaviours in order to establish a rating for each competency. • Tool: Assessing the Key Leadership Competencies - Global Consideration The second tool uses a more structured means to calculate a rating based on a specific assessment of the frequency of each effective and ineffective behaviours. • Tool: Assessing the Key Leadership Competencies - Frequency of Behaviours After the ongoing and key commitments have been assessed (the “what”) and the Key Leadership Competencies have been assessed (the “how”), both ratings/assessments must be integrated so that only one overall rating is assigned. As shown in the graph below, the overall performance rating would reflect the two individual ratings (the “what” and the “how”). DRAFT March 30, 2007 3
  4. 4. Surpassed Highest amount of performance pay “WHAT” Met all Average amount of performance pay Met most Less (or no) Did not meet performance pay Did not meet Met most Met all Surpassed “HOW” Assessing Key Leadership Competencies Global Consideration 1 Purpose of the tool 2 Guidelines 3 Assessment tool • Directors • Director Generals • Assistant Deputy Ministers DRAFT March 30, 2007 4
  5. 5. Purpose of the Tool This tool is available for use in the Performance Management Program (PMP) for Executives. Recognizing and rewarding an executive for achieving expected results involves considering not only what results the executive achieved but also how the executive achieved the results. With their focus on observable behaviours, the Key Leadership Competencies provide the means for consistently, fairly, and transparently assessing how results were achieved. Executives and their managers can use this tool when individually considering and/or jointly discussing the executive’s performance. As part of the performance information that is reviewed by each department for their executives, this tool will help you assess each key leadership competency first separately, and then the Key Leadership Competencies as a whole. See guidelines for more help using the tool. Three versions of this tool are attached: one for directors, one for DGs and one for ADMs. DRAFT March 30, 2007 5
  6. 6. Guidelines First rate each competency separately; then rate the competencies as a whole. 1. Rate the demonstration of each key leadership competency separately a) Review the competency definition and the effective and ineffective behaviours b) Consider how the executive demonstrated the competency in delivering key and ongoing commitments. Check any noteworthy behaviours, for example: o effective behaviours that were critical to delivering on particular commitment(s); o effective behaviours that, if demonstrated more frequently or more skilfully, would have a greater effect in producing desired results; o Ineffective behaviours that need attention. c) To facilitate rating the competency, ask yourself questions such as those provided in the tool. For example, for the Values and Ethics competency, ask yourself: “How did the executive’s achievement of results reflect the PS Values and Ethics?”; “Were there significant challenges / roadblocks to demonstrating the PS Values and Ethics? If yes, how were they dealt with?” d) Rate each key leadership competency using the following scale: 4. Exemplifies the key leadership competency • i.e., outstanding demonstration of the competency; virtually no, or only very minor weakness; demonstration of the competency greatly facilitated delivery on commitments 3. Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency • i.e., solidly demonstrated the competency; demonstration of the competency facilitated delivery on commitments 2. Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency • i.e., demonstrated the competency, but delivery on commitments could have been notably enhanced by stronger demonstration 1. Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency • i.e., weakness in demonstrating the competency interfered with delivery on commitments DRAFT March 30, 2007 6
  7. 7. e) To ensure fairness and consistency throughout your assessment, consider the following factors in deciding on the rating: o Frequency and the effect of the effective and ineffective behaviours. Avoid letting a few minor incidents colour your assessment. For example, an executive may have failed to share non-critical information once or twice, but otherwise made information readily available. On the other hand, a few instances of failing to share critical information that resulted in notably negative results should not be disregarded. As well, only one occurrence of certain ineffective behaviours might be too much, for example, harassment. o Objectivity: For example, ask yourself whether your judgment about the executive’s leadership competency is affected to some extent by preconceived notions about the person(s) involved or the situation. o Substantiating your assessment: For example, ask yourself if you can substantiate your assessment with concrete examples of how the executive produced outcomes. Jot down one or two examples of how the competency affected delivery of particular commitment(s). 2. Rate the demonstration of the Key Leadership Competencies as a whole a) Rate the executive’s demonstration of the Key Leadership Competencies as a whole using the same rating scale as for the separate competencies: 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competencies (i.e. surpasses expectations) 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competencies (i.e. meets expectations) 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competencies (i.e. meets most expectations) 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competencies (i.e. does not meet expectations) b) If you assigned the same rating to each leadership competency separately, this same rating will apply when you consider the competencies as a whole. If you assigned different ratings across the leadership competencies, consider the following in deciding on your overall rating: If you are thinking of assigning an overall rating of 4, ask yourself: • Would I describe the individual as a role model in demonstrating all four key leadership competencies? • Were only very minor weaknesses evident in how the results were achieved? • What example(s) would I cite to illustrate demonstration of the competencies at this level? • Remember: All executives are expected to model the leadership competencies. However, all have not developed the four DRAFT March 30, 2007 7
  8. 8. competencies to the point that they need only very minor development on any of the competencies. If you are thinking of assigning an overall rating of 3, ask yourself: • Did the executive clearly demonstrate all four Key Leadership Competencies in achieving the results? • Was there evidence that the executive’s values and ethics, engagement of others, strategic thinking and management excellence were instrumental in meeting his / her ongoing and key commitments? • Remember: The need for development in certain aspects of the competencies should not preclude assigning a 3. If you are thinking of assigning an overall rating of 2, ask yourself: • Were definite weaknesses evident in how the results were achieved? • Would the delivery of commitments have been notably enhanced by stronger demonstration of the competencies? • For example, in achieving certain results, did the executive “drive” the team to the point that turnover jeopardized a successful outcome? If such was the case, in the absence of evidence that the executive subsequently addressed this weakness, a rating of 2 should be assigned. If you are thinking of assigning an overall rating of 1, ask yourself: • Were serious, ongoing weaknesses evident in how results were achieved? 3. Integrate the Key Leadership Competencies rating into the overall performance rating Depending on the rating assigned for demonstration of the Key Leadership Competencies as a whole, you may wish to adjust your overall performance rating. A high rating on the competencies may contribute to a higher overall rating while a low rating on the competencies may contribute to a lower overall rating. For example, if an individual receives a 4 on the KLC rating, they could feasibly receive a 4 overall. If an individual received a 3 on the KLC rating, their overall rating will be affected, and as a result, it may no longer be feasible to assign a 4 overall. The diagram below suggests a consistent way to integrate the Key Leadership Competency rating into the overall performance rating. KLC rating Possible overall performance rating 4 1 2 3 4 3 1 2 3 X 2 1 2 X X 1 1 X X X DRAFT March 30, 2007 8
  9. 9. Director Level VALUES & ETHICS STRATEGIC THINKING - analysis and ideas ENGAGEMENT MANAGEMENT EXCELLENCE – actions, people and finance DRAFT March 30, 2007 9
  10. 10. Director Level Values and Ethics (Integrity and Respect): Public Service (PS) leaders serve Canadians, ensuring integrity in personal and organizational practices, and respect people and PS principles, including democratic, professional, ethical, and people values. They build respectful, bilingual, diverse and inclusive workplaces where decisions and transactions are transparent and fair. They hold themselves, their employees, and their organizations accountable for their actions. Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours • Demonstrates Values and Ethics, including the • Attempts to cover up mistakes Code, in personal behaviour • Avoids speaking truth to power • Integrates Values and Ethics, including the • Lays blame on individuals or previous Code, into division practices regimes • Reflects a commitment to citizens and clients • Shows little respect for diverse opinions or in own and division activities beliefs • Fosters a climate of transparency, trust, and • Mistreats others respect within the division and in partnerships • Abuses power • Incorporates equitable practices into HR planning • Tolerates abusive behaviour by others • Creates opportunities for and encourages • Demotivates or offends others through bilingualism and diversity in the division, based cynicism or aggression on Official Language and Employment Equity • Shows favouritism or bias policies • Places personal or organizational goals • Builds and promotes a safe and healthy, ahead of Government of Canada objectives respectful division, free of harassment and discrimination • Allows emotions to sway ethical judgment • Practices transparency and fairness in all transactions, including staffing, contracting, and day-to-day activities DRAFT March 30, 2007 10
  11. 11. Director Level Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  How did the executive’s achievement of results reflect the PS Values and Ethics?  How did the executive foster an organization aligned with PS values (i.e., democratic, professional, ethical, and people values)?  Were there significant challenges / roadblocks in demonstrating the PS Values and Ethics, and how were they dealt with?  How did the executive’s use of power and authority reflect the PS Values and Ethics?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means? (e.g., did the executive tend to make decisions based on narrow organizational interests rather than the public interest?) Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments Strategic Thinking (Analysis and Ideas): Public Service leaders advise and plan based on analysis of issues and trends, and how these link to the responsibilities, capabilities, and potential of their organization. They scan an ever-changing, complex environment in anticipation of emerging crises and opportunities. They develop well-informed advice and strategies that are sensitive to the various needs of multiple stakeholders and partners, reflect the strategic direction of the PS, and position the organization for success. Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours DRAFT March 30, 2007 11
  12. 12. Director Level Analysis Analysis • Frames division direction with a thorough • Depends on a narrow range of expertise and understanding of the directorate’s priorities opinion • Seeks clarification and direction from the DG, • Excludes other levels or partners in framing as required strategy • Integrates information from multiple sources to • Ignores new information or changing form a comprehensive perspective circumstances • Identifies interdependencies in cross- • Demonstrates insensitivity to national, functional projects regional, or PS context • Analyzes setbacks and seeks honest feedback • Does not analyze own strengths and to learn from mistakes weaknesses or listen to feedback Ideas Ideas • Translates vision and policy into concrete work • Abdicates responsibility for guiding or activities contributing to the departmental vision • Develops division strategies, based on the • Designs response to short-term pressures departmental vision and the DG’s direction without consideration of long-term • Designs initiatives to enhance operational implications efficiency • Designs long-term plans without • Encourages and incorporates diverse consideration of short-term implications initiatives and perspectives • Provides a vision, strategy, or advice that is • Redesigns the division’s work activities to not in line with the mandate meet changing departmental needs • Ignores the impact of strategies on • Makes effective recommendations to the DG stakeholders, partners • Teaches and learns from others • Develops or promotes strategies or plans that are too detail-oriented or too abstract Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  How did the executive’s strategies advance the organization’s vision?  In what ways has the executive personally demonstrated or fostered innovative approaches and solutions?  What thorny issues did the executive resolve by adopting a strategic approach?  Were there significant intellectual demands that the executive needed to meet in order to achieve the result?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means? (e.g., did the executive tend to ignore diverse perspectives and new information? Did the executive tend to develop or promote strategies that were too abstract or detail oriented? ) Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments DRAFT March 30, 2007 12
  13. 13. Director Level Engagement (People, Organizations, Partners): Public Service leaders engage people, organizations, and partners in developing goals, executing plans, and delivering results. They lay the groundwork by building coalitions with key players. They mobilize teams, building momentum to get things done by communicating clearly and consistently, investing time and energy to engage the whole organization. They use their negotiation skills and adaptability to encourage recognition of joint concerns, collaboration, and to influence the success of outcomes. They follow and lead across boundaries to engage broad-based stakeholders, partners, and constituencies in a shared agenda and strategy. Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours • Shares information vertically and horizontally • Acts as sole decision maker or stakeholder • Promotes collaboration among managers • Hoards information • Uses persuasion to gain support for initiatives • Abdicates communication responsibilities to • Negotiates compromises other levels • Adapts communications to suit audience and • Fails to work horizontally with key partners forum • Fails to build behind-the-scenes support • Communicates regularly and openly with • Alienates others through anger, aggression, unions and other stakeholders over-confidence, or lack of self-awareness • Demonstrates understanding of and respect • Refuses to consider and incorporate the for stakeholders’ views views of others • Follows through on commitments • Avoids dealing with contentious issues • Solicits input from and listens to staff, partners, and stakeholders • Communicates vision and division plans with clarity and commitment • Establishes regular and comprehensive exchanges of ideas • Promotes and funds team building Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  How did the executive ensure shared understanding of key stakeholders’ needs, viewpoints and concerns?  How did the executive build shared agendas and reconcile stakeholders’ diverse needs, interests and viewpoints?  In what ways did the executive demonstrate personal commitment and how did this inspire others’ commitment?  Were there significant challenges in mobilizing others, and how were they handled?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means? (e.g., did the executive tend to hoard vs. share information? Did the executive tend to avoid dealing with contentions issues and conflicts?) Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency DRAFT March 30, 2007 13
  14. 14. Director Level Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments DRAFT March 30, 2007 14
  15. 15. Director Level Management Excellence: Action Management, People Management, Financial Management PS leaders deliver results by maximizing organizational effectiveness and sustainability. They ensure that people have the support and tools they need and that the workforce as a whole has the capacity and diversity to meet current and longer-term organizational objectives. They align people, work, and systems with the business strategy to harmonize how they work and what they do. They implement rigorous and comprehensive human and financial resources accountability systems consistent with the Management Accountability Framework (MAF). They ensure that the integrity and management of information and knowledge are a responsibility at all levels and a key factor in the design and execution of all policies and programs. DRAFT March 30, 2007 15
  16. 16. Director Level Action Management – Design and Execution Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours • Designs division work plans based on the big picture • Develops an ineffective plan to achieve • Guides division projects and resources to avoid goals obstacles • Retains ineffective structures, systems, or • Delegates appropriately to managers programs • Manages resources to maximize output • Hesitates to make decisions or take • Sets realistic timelines and clear accountabilities for required action managers • Provides insufficient, abstract, or sporadic • Provides structure and momentum for division work direction activities • Sets challenging but realistic goals • Refuses to acknowledge poor results • Identifies division limits and resource requirements • Deals ineffectively with own stress for workload • Focuses on one file or activity to the • Manages the division’s workload through prudent detriment of others resource planning and prioritizing • Backs down in the face of obstacles or • Shifts priorities and adapts division work plans, as challenge required • Focuses solely on crisis management and • Heeds early warning signals and advises the DG and the short term others, as needed • Follows through on the division’s business plan from • Acts impulsively planning, implementing, monitoring, and evaluating • Focuses on turf building rather than to reporting organizational stewardship • Integrates comptrollership, MAF, federal legislation, • Conducts superfluous consultation or regulations, and policies into division practices analysis to avoid taking action or • Manages own and others’ work-life balance responsibility • Responds decisively and quickly to emerging • Micromanages opportunities or risks • Maintains composure in adverse situations to alleviate pressure and maintain momentum Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  In what ways did the executive’s strategies and plans optimize the achievement of results?  Were there significant resource challenges, and how were they handled?  How did the executive’s implementation, monitoring and evaluation of plans contribute to achieving results?  How did the executive perform in the face of significant change, ambiguity or stress?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means (e.g., micromanage, or focus on one file/activity to the detriment of others)? Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency DRAFT March 30, 2007 16
  17. 17. Director Level Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments DRAFT March 30, 2007 17
  18. 18. Director Level People Management – Individuals and Workforce Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours • Works one-on-one with managers • Fails to provide staff with the tools they need to work and/or develop • Deals with ineffective performance • Fails to acknowledge contributions and • Provides regular feedback, acknowledges success successes and the need for improvement • Dwells on mistakes and failures • Coaches, challenges, and provides opportunities for growth • Fails to deal with conflict • Resolves labour relations problems • Builds insufficient workforce capacity • Secures mediation, if required • Abdicates responsibility for HR planning • Balances the needs of employees and the • Does not deliver the hard messages when organization giving feedback • Monitors and addresses workplace well-being • Fails to deal with ineffective staff • Develops and supports career plans and learning • Fails to ensure complementary strengths in opportunities teams, workforce • Develops an HR strategy for division succession • Designs workforce exclusively for short- planning term needs • Secures funding for Official Language and other training • Manages workload • Implements rigorous HR practices and fulfils obligations of HR Management accountabilities Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  In what ways did the executive’s strategic HR management skills contribute to achieving objectives?  How did the executive develop workforce capacity to meet current and future needs?  How did the executive deal within non-performance?  Did the executive address issues regarding workplace well being?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means (e.g., dwell on mistakes and failures, avoid dealing with ineffective staff, or develop the team exclusively for short-term needs)? Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments DRAFT March 30, 2007 18
  19. 19. Director Level Financial Management – Budgets and Assets Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours • Allocates and manages division resources • Continues to invest resources in an transparently unsuccessful course of action • Implements strategies to achieve operational • Fails to integrate financial and management efficiencies and value for money information • Applies and monitors rigorous systems for • Ignores audit or evaluation results financial information management, internal audit, • Fails to ensure integrity of information, analysis, and evaluation and reporting • Fulfils obligations of accountabilities for division • Fails to practice rigorous financial management finance and assets management • Fails to ensure sufficient capacity for sound • Acts on audit, evaluation, and other objective financial practices division performance information Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  How did the executive’s financial management skills contribute to achieving objectives?  How did the executive integrate comptrollership processes and promote due diligence?  In what ways did the executive ensure value for money in achieving results?  How did the executive address audit, evaluation or other objective performance information?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means? (e.g., fail to integrate financial and management information)? Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments DRAFT March 30, 2007 19
  20. 20. Director General Level VALUES & ETHICS STRATEGIC THINKING – Analysis & ideas ENGAGEMENT MANAGEMENT EXCELLENCE – action, people & finance DRAFT March 30, 2007 20
  21. 21. Director General Level Values and Ethics (Integrity and Respect): Public Service (PS) leaders serve Canadians, ensuring integrity in personal and organizational practices, and respect people and PS principles, including democratic, professional, ethical, and people values. They build respectful, bilingual, diverse and inclusive workplaces where decisions and transactions are transparent and fair. They hold themselves, their employees, and their organizations accountable for their actions. Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours • Demonstrates Values and Ethics, including the • Attempts to cover up mistakes Code, in personal behaviour • Avoids speaking truth to power • Integrates Values and Ethics, including the • Lays blame on individuals or previous Code, into directorate practices regimes • Builds departmental values into directorate • Shows little respect for diverse opinions or policies and programs beliefs • Reflects a commitment to citizens and clients • Mistreats others in own and directorate activities • Abuses power • Builds and promotes a safe and healthy, respectful directorate, free of harassment and • Tolerates abusive behaviour by others discrimination • Demotivates or offends others through • Promotes transparency and fairness cynicism or aggression • Creates opportunities for and encourages • Shows favouritism or bias bilingualism and diversity in the directorate, • Places personal or organizational goals based on OL and EE policies ahead of Government of Canada objectives • Allows emotions to sway ethical judgment Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  How did the executive’s achievement of results reflect the PS Values and Ethics?  How did the executive foster an organization aligned with PS values (i.e., democratic, professional, ethical, and people values)?  Were there significant challenges / roadblocks in demonstrating the PS Values and Ethics, and how were they dealt with?  How did the executive’s use of power and authority reflect the PS Values and Ethics?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means? (e.g., did the executive tend to make decisions based on narrow organizational interests rather than the public interest?) Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments DRAFT March 30, 2007 21
  22. 22. Director General Level Strategic Thinking (Analysis and Ideas): Public Service leaders advise and plan based on analysis of issues and trends, and how these link to the responsibilities, capabilities, and potential of their organization. They scan an ever-changing, complex environment in anticipation of emerging crises and opportunities. They develop well-informed advice and strategies that are sensitive to the various needs of multiple stakeholders and partners, reflect the strategic direction of the PS, and position the organization for success. Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours Analysis Analysis • Frames questions and analyses with a thorough • Depends on a narrow range of expertise and understanding of sectoral and policy issues opinion • Seeks clarification and direction from the ADM • Excludes other levels or partners in framing • Conducts strategic analysis of trends within the strategy directorate, organization, and external environment • Ignores new information or changing • Integrates multiple domains of information and circumstances identifies the links • Demonstrates insensitivity to national, regional, • Seeks broad perspectives and expertise or PS context • Tracks changing organizational dynamics • Does not analyze own strengths and • Analyzes setbacks and seeks honest feedback to weaknesses or listen to feedback learn from mistakes Ideas • Identifies key elements of the vision and implications for the directorate • Translates vision and policy into concrete direction Ideas and plans • Abdicates responsibility for guiding or • Links directorate programs and services to contributing to the departmental vision department and branch policies • Designs response to short-term pressure • Makes effective recommendations to the ADM without consideration of long-term implications • Seeks input of staff to create plans and solutions • Designs long-term plans without consideration • Encourages constructive questioning of practices of short-term implications • Encourages experimentation to maximize potential • Provides a vision, strategy, or advice that is not for innovation in line with the mandate • Identifies solutions, alternatives, and • Ignores the impact of strategies on consequences stakeholders, partners • Develops or promotes strategies or plans that are too detail-oriented or too abstract • Teaches and learns from others Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  How did the executive’s strategies advance the organization’s vision?  In what ways has the executive personally demonstrated or fostered innovative approaches and solutions?  What thorny issues did the executive resolve by adopting a strategic approach?  Were there significant intellectual demands that the executive needed to meet in order to achieve results?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means? (e.g., did the executive tend to ignore diverse perspectives and new information? Did the executive tend to develop or promote strategies that were too abstract or detail oriented? ) Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency DRAFT March 30, 2007 22
  23. 23. Director General Level Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments DRAFT March 30, 2007 23
  24. 24. Director General Level Engagement (People, Organizations, Partners): Public Service leaders engage people, organizations, and partners in developing goals, executing plans, and delivering results. They lay the groundwork by building coalitions with key players. They mobilize teams, building momentum to get things done by communicating clearly and consistently, investing time and energy to engage the whole organization. They use their negotiation skills and adaptability to encourage recognition of joint concerns, collaboration, and to influence the success of outcomes. They follow and lead across boundaries to engage broad-based stakeholders, partners, and constituencies in a shared agenda and strategy. Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours • Implements inclusive, cooperative approaches with • Acts as sole decision maker or stakeholder peers, staff, and superiors • Hoards information • Fosters an inclusive and sensitive interpersonal • Abdicates communication responsibilities to climate other levels • Promotes consensus across diverse groups, • Fails to work horizontally with key partners interests, and opinions • Fails to build behind-the-scenes support • Solicits and listens to ideas and concerns of staff, unions, and other stakeholders • Alienates others through anger, aggression, over-confidence, or lack of self-awareness • Mobilizes the team to achieve directorate and departmental goals • Refuses to consider and incorporate the views of others • Communicates and supports corporate decisions • Avoids dealing with contentious issues • Fosters enthusiasm and common purpose • Shares information with staff regularly and as it becomes available • Follows through on commitments • Communicates vision and information with clarity and commitment • Manages relationships between stakeholders Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  How did the executive ensure shared understanding of key stakeholders’ needs, viewpoints and concerns?  How did the executive build shared agendas and reconcile stakeholders’ diverse needs, interests and viewpoints?  In what ways did the executive demonstrate personal commitment and how did this inspire others’ commitment?  Were there significant challenges in mobilizing others, and how were they handled?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means? (e.g., did the executive tend to hoard vs. share information? Did the executive tend to avoid dealing with contentious issues and conflicts?) Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency DRAFT March 30, 2007 24
  25. 25. Director General Level Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments DRAFT March 30, 2007 25
  26. 26. Director General Level Management Excellence: Action Management, People Management, Financial Management PS leaders deliver results by maximizing organizational effectiveness and sustainability. They ensure that people have the support and tools they need and that the workforce as a whole has the capacity and diversity to meet current and longer-term organizational objectives. They align people, work, and systems with the business strategy to harmonize how they work and what they do. They implement rigorous and comprehensive human and financial resources accountability systems consistent with the Management Accountability Framework (MAF). They ensure that the integrity and management of information and knowledge are a responsibility at all levels and a key factor in the design and execution of all policies and programs. DRAFT March 30, 2007 26
  27. 27. Director General Level Action Management – Design and Execution Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours • Identifies and communicates priorities, • Develops an ineffective plan to achieve goals milestones, timelines, performance measures, clear accountabilities, and performance • Retains ineffective structures, systems, or agreements for directors programs • Coordinates and manages across multiple • Hesitates to make decisions or take required directorate programs and projects action • Ensures necessary resources, processes, and • Provides insufficient, abstract, or sporadic systems are in place direction • Develops process with management team to set • Refuses to acknowledge poor results priorities, make decisions • Performs risk analysis to assess viability of • Deals ineffectively with own stress opportunities • Focuses on one file or activity to the detriment • Coordinates activities within directorate to assign of others accountability and avoid duplication • Backs down in the face of obstacles or • Seeks and heeds early warning signs, adapting challenge plans and strategies as required • Focuses solely on crisis management and the • Follows through on the directorate’s business short term plan from planning, implementing, monitoring, and evaluating to reporting • Acts impulsively • Integrates comptrollership, MAF, federal • Focuses on turf building rather than legislation, regulations, and policies into organizational stewardship directorate practices • Conducts superfluous consultation or analysis • Manages own and others’ work-life balance to avoid taking action or responsibility • Responds decisively and quickly to emerging opportunities or risks • Micromanages • Maintains sound judgment and decision making in demanding or stressful situations Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  In what ways did the executive’s strategies and plans optimize the achievement of results?  Were there significant resource challenges, and how were they handled?  How did the executive’s implementation, monitoring and evaluation of plans contribute to achieving results?  How did the executive perform in the face of significant change, ambiguity or stress?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means (e.g., turf building, micromanaging, or focusing on one file/activity to the detriment of others)? Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments DRAFT March 30, 2007 27
  28. 28. Director General Level DRAFT March 30, 2007 28
  29. 29. Director General Level People Management – Individuals and Workforce Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours • Implements HR strategy to ensure workforce • Fails to provide staff with the tools they need capacity and diversity to meet current and future to work and/or develop directorate needs • Fails to acknowledge contributions and • Coaches, challenges, and provides opportunities successes for growth • Dwells on mistakes and failures • Sets clear expectations and provides clear • Fails to deal with conflict direction • Builds insufficient workforce capacity • Manages staff workload • Abdicates responsibility for HR Planning • Builds complementary teams • Does not deliver the hard messages when • Provides honest, straightforward feedback and giving feedback manages non-performance • Fails to deal with ineffective staff • Recognizes and acknowledges good work • Fails to ensure complementary strengths in • Acts as a role model for directors teams, workforce • Develops strategies to reduce stress within the • Designs workforce exclusively for short-term directorate needs • Secures funding for Official Language and other training • Implements rigorous HR practices and fulfils obligations of HR management accountabilities Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  In what ways did the executive’s strategic HRM skills contribute to achieving objectives?  How did the executive develop workforce capacity to meet current and future needs?  How did the executive deal within non-performance?  Did the executive address issues regarding workplace well being?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means (e.g., dwell on mistakes and failures, avoid dealing with ineffective staff, or develop the team exclusively for short-term needs)? Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments DRAFT March 30, 2007 29
  30. 30. Director General Level Financial Management – Budgets and Assets Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours • Allocates and manages directorate resources • Continues to invest resources in an transparently unsuccessful course of action • Implements strategies to achieve operational • Fails to integrate financial and management efficiencies and value for money information • Operates and monitors rigorous systems for • Ignores audit or evaluation results financial information management, internal audit, • Fails to ensure integrity of information, and evaluation analysis, and reporting • Fulfils obligations of accountabilities for • Fails to practice rigorous financial directorate finance and assets management management • Acts on audit, evaluation, and other objective • Fails to ensure sufficient capacity for sound directorate performance information financial practices Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  How did the executive’s financial management skills contribute to achieving objectives?  How did the executive integrate comptrollership processes and promote due diligence?  In what ways did the executive ensure value for money in achieving results?  How did the executive address audit, evaluation or other objective performance information?  How were shifting priorities identified and addressed so as to avoid surplus or deficit situations?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means? (e.g., fail to integrate financial and management information)? Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments DRAFT March 30, 2007 30
  31. 31. Assistant Deputy Minister Level VALUES & ETHICS STRATEGIC THINKING – Analysis & Ideas ENGAGEMENT MANAGEMENT EXCELLENCE - Action, people & finances DRAFT March 30, 2007 31
  32. 32. Values and Ethics (Integrity and Respect): Public Service (PS) leaders serve Canadians, ensuring integrity in personal and organizational practices, and respect people and PS principles, including democratic, professional, ethical, and people values. They build respectful, bilingual, diverse and inclusive workplaces where decisions and transactions are transparent and fair. They hold themselves, their employees, and their organizations accountable for their actions. Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours • Demonstrates Values and Ethics, including the • Attempts to cover up mistakes Code, in personal behaviour • Avoids speaking truth to power • Integrates Values and Ethics, including the Code, • Lays blame on individuals or previous into branch practices regimes • Reflects a commitment to citizens and clients in • Shows little respect for diverse opinions or own and branch activities beliefs • Provides fearless advice and acts with the • Mistreats others courage of his or her convictions • Abuses power • Builds departmental values into branch policies and programs • Tolerates abusive behaviour by others • Demotivates or offends others through • Builds and promotes a bilingual, diverse, cynicism or aggression inclusive branch, based on Official Language and Employment Equity policies • Shows favouritism or bias • Builds and promotes a safe and healthy, • Places personal or organizational goals respectful branch, free of harassment and ahead of Government of Canada objectives discrimination • Allows emotions to sway ethical judgment • Models transparency and fairness
  33. 33. Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  How did the executive’s achievement of results reflect the PS Values and Ethics?  How did the executive foster an organization aligned with PS values (i.e., democratic, professional, ethical, and people values)?  Were there significant challenges / roadblocks in demonstrating the PS Values and Ethics, and how were they dealt with?  How did the executive’s use of power and authority reflect the PS Values and Ethics?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means? (e.g., did the executive tend to make decisions based on narrow organizational interests rather than the public interest?) Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments DRAFT March 30, 2007 33
  34. 34. Strategic Thinking (Analysis and Ideas): Public Service leaders advise and plan based on analysis of issues and trends, and how these link to the responsibilities, capabilities, and potential of their organization. They scan an ever-changing, complex environment in anticipation of emerging crises and opportunities. They develop well-informed advice and strategies that are sensitive to the various needs of multiple stakeholders and partners, reflect the strategic direction of the PS, and position the organization for success. Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours Analysis Analysis • Frames questions and analyses with a thorough • Depends on a narrow range of expertise and understanding of legislation and the ADM role opinion • Seeks DM, government, national, regional, global, • Excludes other levels or partners in framing and technical perspectives on sector issues strategy • Recognizes critical or sensitive issues and makes • Ignores new information or changing links to priorities circumstances • Distinguishes between critical and trivial factors in • Demonstrates insensitivity to national, making judgments regional, or PS context • Analyzes setbacks and seeks honest feedback to • Does not analyze own strengths and learn from mistakes weaknesses or listen to feedback Ideas Ideas • Provides quality judgment and policy advice to the • Abdicates responsibility for guiding or DM contributing to the departmental vision • Contributes to the elaboration of the collective/DM • Designs response to short-term pressure vision without consideration of long-term implications • Articulates the vision in terms of own mandate • Designs long-term plans without consideration • Develops innovative solutions to non-traditional of short-term implications problems • Provides a vision, strategy, or advice that is • Develops strategies to manage the scope and pace not in line with the mandate of change • Ignores the impact of strategies on • Develops strategies that are effective in the short stakeholders, partners and longer term • Develops or promotes strategies or plans that • Encourages constructive questioning of policies are too detail-oriented or too abstract • Envisions possibilities without detailed information • Exercises sound professional judgment based on analysis and consultation, as needed • Teaches and learns from others DRAFT March 30, 2007 34
  35. 35. Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  How did the executive’s strategies advance the organization’s vision?  In what ways has the executive personally demonstrated or fostered innovative approaches and solutions?  What thorny issues did the executive resolve by adopting a strategic approach?  Were there significant intellectual demands that the executive needed to meet in order to achieve results?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means? (e.g., did the executive tend to ignore diverse perspectives and new information? Did the executive tend to develop or promote strategies that were too abstract or detail oriented? ) Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments Engagement (People, Organizations, Partners): Public Service leaders engage people, organizations, and partners in developing goals, executing plans, and delivering results. They lay the groundwork by building coalitions with key players. They mobilize teams, building momentum to get things done by communicating clearly and consistently, investing time and energy to engage the whole organization. They use their negotiation skills and adaptability to encourage recognition of joint concerns, collaboration, and to influence the success of outcomes. They follow and lead across boundaries to engage broad-based stakeholders, partners, and constituencies in a shared agenda and strategy. Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours DRAFT March 30, 2007 35
  36. 36. • Cultivates effective relationships and networks with central • Acts as sole decision maker or agencies, other departments, clients, citizens, unions, central stakeholder and regional employees, and other levels of government • Hoards information • Provides communication links up, down, and throughout the • Abdicates communication organization and networks responsibilities to other levels • Communicates with and encourages candour and clarity • Fails to work horizontally with key • Communicates and interprets external contexts to position partners branch, team, and individual contributions • Fails to build behind-the-scenes • Demonstrates and elicits trust by seeking and providing support honest and constructive feedback • Alienates others through anger, • Actively listens to and understands impact on others aggression, over-confidence, or lack of self-awareness • Influences outcomes by negotiating win-win solutions and compromises, and resolving conflict • Refuses to consider and incorporate the views of others • Tailors approach to context, e.g., collaborative for consensus building, directive in crisis • Avoids dealing with contentious issues • Inspires a commitment to excellence by demonstrating passionate personal commitment • Works with the departmental and PS-wide ADM community to deliver on shared objectives • Creates an open, positive environment to stimulate open discussion DRAFT March 30, 2007 36
  37. 37. Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  How did the executive ensure shared understanding of key stakeholders’ needs, viewpoints and concerns?  How did the executive build shared agendas and reconcile stakeholders’ diverse needs, interests and viewpoints?  In what ways did the executive demonstrate personal commitment and how did this inspire others’ commitment?  Were there significant challenges in mobilizing others, and how were they handled?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means? (e.g., did the executive tend to hoard vs. share information? Did the executive tend to avoid dealing with contentious issues and conflicts?) Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments Management Excellence: Action Management, People Management, Financial Management PS leaders deliver results by maximizing organizational effectiveness and sustainability. They ensure that people have the support and tools they need and that the workforce as a whole has the capacity and diversity to meet current and longer-term organizational objectives. They align people, work, and systems with the business strategy to harmonize how they work and what they do. They implement rigorous and comprehensive human and financial resources accountability systems consistent with the Management Accountability Framework (MAF). They ensure that the integrity and management of information and knowledge are a responsibility at all levels and a key factor in the design and execution of all policies and programs. DRAFT March 30, 2007 37
  38. 38. Action Management – Design and Execution Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours • Leads change that maximizes results in the • Develops an ineffective plan to achieve goals branch, departmentally, and in the sector • Retains ineffective structures, systems, or • Acts as a steward for the entire department, not programs just his or her own branch • Identifies and communicates priorities, • Hesitates to make decisions or take required milestones, timelines, performance measures, action clear accountabilities, and performance • Provides insufficient, abstract, or sporadic agreements for DGs direction • Designs and manages a strategic risk • Refuses to acknowledge poor results management framework • Coordinates national and regional priorities, • Deals ineffectively with own stress planning, and performance • Focuses on one file or activity to the detriment • Aligns priorities and resources of others • Follows through on the branch business plan • Backs down in the face of obstacles or from planning, implementing, monitoring, and challenge evaluating to reporting • Focuses solely on crisis management and the • Integrates comptrollership, MAF, federal short term legislation, regulations, and policies into branch practices • Acts impulsively • Fulfils obligations of branch management • Focuses on turf building rather than accountabilities organizational stewardship • Integrates HR, finance, IT, IM, and • Conducts superfluous consultation or analysis communications issues into planning and actions to avoid taking action or responsibility • Revises goals and plans to reflect changing priorities or conditions • Micromanages • Commits to a course of action despite incomplete information, if required • Makes decisions, initiates urgent actions, and remains calm in crisis situations • Recognizes and acknowledges errors and makes corrections DRAFT March 30, 2007 38
  39. 39. Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  In what ways did the executive’s strategies and plans optimize the achievement of results?  Were there significant resource challenges, and how were they handled?  How did the executive’s implementation, monitoring and evaluation of plans contribute to achieving results?  How did the executive perform in the face of significant change, ambiguity or stress?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means (e.g., micromanage, or focus on one file/activity to the detriment of others)? Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments DRAFT March 30, 2007 39
  40. 40. People Management – Individuals and Workforce Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours • Develops HR strategy for succession planning • Fails to provide staff with the tools they need • Creates expert teams to address specific or crisis to work and/or develop issues • Fails to acknowledge contributions and • Sets clear expectations, monitors, evaluates, successes rewards, and develops performance • Dwells on mistakes and failures • Recognizes people’s accomplishments and best efforts • Fails to deal with conflict • Gives honest feedback, encourages learning, and • Builds insufficient workforce capacity manages non-performance • Abdicates responsibility for HR planning • Deals with HR problems decisively and effectively • Recognizes the importance of and supports the DG • Does not deliver the hard messages when community giving feedback • Balances complementary strengths in teams • Fails to deal with ineffective staff • Builds leadership throughout the branch • Fails to ensure complementary strengths in • Guides and develops people through appraisals, teams, workforce career planning, and development • Designs workforce exclusively for short-term • Consults with support services prior to changing needs HR protocols • Implements rigorous HR systems and fulfils obligations of HR management accountabilities Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  In what ways did the executive’s strategic HR management skills contribute to achieving objectives?  How did the executive develop workforce capacity to meet current and future needs?  How did the executive deal within non-performance?  Did the executive address issues regarding workplace well-being?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means (e.g., dwell on mistakes and failures, avoid dealing with ineffective staff, or develop the team exclusively for short-term needs)? DRAFT March 30, 2007 40
  41. 41. Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments DRAFT March 30, 2007 41
  42. 42. Financial Management – Budgets and Assets Effective Behaviours Ineffective Behaviours • Allocates resources transparently and establishes • Continues to invest resources in an a culture of ongoing re-allocation unsuccessful course of action • Aligns business drivers with financial management • Fails to integrate financial and management regime information • Promotes innovative approaches to deal with fiscal • Ignores audit or evaluation results restraint • Fails to ensure integrity of information, • Integrates comptrollership processes and promotes analysis, and reporting due diligence • Fails to practice rigorous financial • Reviews and reacts to the results of audits and management evaluations • Fails to ensure sufficient capacity for sound • Monitors performance and seeks efficiencies financial practices continuously • Fulfils obligations of accountabilities for branch financial management • Provides objective, credible, and timely reporting to the DM • Consults with support services prior to changing financial protocols Sample questions to facilitate reflection & discussion  How did the executive’s financial management skills contribute to achieving objectives?  How did the executive integrate comptrollership processes and promote due diligence?  In what ways did the executive ensure value for money in achieving results?  How did the executive address audit, evaluation or other objective performance information?  Did the executive achieve results partly through inappropriate means? (e.g., fail to integrate financial and management information)? DRAFT March 30, 2007 42
  43. 43. Competency rating ± 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency ± 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency ± 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency ± 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency Examples of demonstrating the competency in delivering commitments Assessing how results were achieved using the Key Leadership Competencies Assessment of performance should consider the actual results (“what” was achieved) as well as the competencies (“how” it was achieved). Below is a sample performance commitment followed by several questions to consider in order to assess whether results were achieved in a way that demonstrated the Key Leadership Competencies. Example performance commitment: Develop a policy that has an effect on outside government client groups as well as horizontal implications for 2 other departments. Questions to Consider: Values & Ethics: • Was the policy developed in a manner that reconciled competing values? • Was the process leading to the development of the policy and the end result citizen-focused and serving the public good? • Were the advice provided and the decisions made throughout the development process unbiased? DRAFT March 30, 2007 43
  44. 44. Strategic Thinking: • To what extent does the policy contribute to current government priorities? • To what extent were client groups concerns as well as regional and horizontal issues considered? • Is the policy grounded on solid research and analysis? • Is the policy innovative and will it stand the test of time? Engagement: • Were partners engaged in an effective manner throughout the policy development process? • What efforts were made to support collaboration? • Was a strong communications strategy developed to address stakeholders’ concerns? Management Excellence: • To what extent was work-life balance modeled and encouraged of others? • Were risks managed in a way that maximized innovation? • Were plans developed, adjusted and followed to ensure maximum efficiency and focus? • Were resources managed transparently and with an emphasis on value for money? DRAFT March 30, 2007 44
  45. 45. Assessing Key Leadership Competencies Frequency of demonstrated behaviours 4 Purpose of the tool 5 Guidelines 6 Assessment tool • Directors • Director Generals • Assistant Deputy Ministers DRAFT March 30, 2007 45
  46. 46. Purpose of the Tool This tool is available for use in the Performance Management Program (PMP) for Executives. Recognizing and rewarding an executive for achieving expected results involves considering not only what results the executive achieved but also how the executive achieved the results. With their focus on observable behaviours, the Key Leadership Competencies provide the means for consistently, fairly, and transparently assessing how results were achieved. Executives and their managers can use this tool when individually considering and/or jointly discussing the executive’s performance. Regardless of whether this tool or another approach is used to assess the Key Leadership Competencies, an overall assessment of the Key Leadership Competencies is required for each executive as part of the performance information that is reviewed by each department. Two versions of the tool are available. In this version, the effective and ineffective behaviours for each competency are assessed first individually, and then each of the four competencies is rated. Finally, an overall rating is provided on the Key Leadership Competencies as a whole. In the alternate version of the tool, the effective and ineffective behaviours are not assessed individually, but are considered globally to determine a rating for each competency. Rather, each leadership competency is assessed separately, and then the Key Leadership Competencies as a whole are assessed. Three forms of this version of the tool are attached: one for directors, one for DGs and one for ADMs. DRAFT March 30, 2007 46
  47. 47. Guidelines Rate each key leadership competency separately, first rating the behaviours for the competency, then rating the competency a whole. After you have rated each competency, rate all the competencies as a whole. 1. Rate the demonstration of each key leadership competency separately f) Review the competency definition. g) Rate each of the effective and ineffective behaviours for the competency, using the following scale: o Effective behaviours 4 consistently demonstrates the behaviour 3 frequently demonstrates the behaviour 2 occasionally demonstrates the behaviour 1 rarely or almost never demonstrates the behaviour o Ineffective behaviours 1 consistently demonstrates the behaviour 2 frequently demonstrates the behaviour 3 occasionally demonstrates the behaviour 4 rarely or almost never demonstrates the behaviour h) After you have rated each behaviour for the competency, consider the competency as a whole. Consider the ratings you assigned to the behaviours. Also, step back and consider how the executive demonstrated the competency overall in delivering key and ongoing commitments. For example:  Were certain effective behaviours particularly critical to delivering on particular commitment(s)?  Would certain effective behaviours have had a greater effect in producing desired results if demonstrated more frequently and/or more skilfully?  Were some effective behaviour neglected behind the apparent success of result achieved?  Did certain ineffective behaviours detract from, or interfere with, the delivery of key commitments?  Were certain ineffective behaviours used to facilitate the achievement of results? To facilitate rating the competency, ask yourself questions such as those provided in the tool. For example, for the Values and Ethics competency, ask yourself: “How did the executive’s achievement of results reflect the PS Values and Ethics?”; “Were there significant challenges / roadblocks to demonstrating the PS Values and Ethics? If yes, how were they dealt with?” DRAFT March 30, 2007 47
  48. 48. i) Rate each key leadership competency using the following scale: 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competency • i.e., outstanding demonstration of the competency; virtually no, or only very minor weaknesses; demonstration of the competency greatly facilitated delivery on commitments 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competency • i.e., consistently demonstrated the competency; demonstration of the competency facilitated delivery of commitments 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competency • i.e., demonstrated the competency, but delivery of commitments could have been notably enhanced by stronger demonstration 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competency • i.e., weakness in demonstrating the competency interfered with delivery of commitments To ensure fairness and consistency, consider the following factors in deciding on the rating: o Frequency and the effect of the leadership behaviours. Avoid letting a few minor incidents colour your assessment. For example, an executive may have failed to share non-critical information once or twice, but otherwise made information readily available. On the other hand, a few instances of failing to share critical information that resulted in notably negative results should not be disregarded. As well, only one occurrence of certain ineffective behaviours might be too much, for example, harassment. o Objectivity: For example, ask yourself whether your judgment about the executive’s leadership competency is affected to some extent by preconceived notions about the person(s) involved or the situation. o Substantiating your assessment: For example, ask yourself if you can substantiate your assessment with concrete examples of how the executive produced outcomes. Jot down one or two examples of how the competency affected delivery on particular commitment(s). 2. Rate the demonstration of the Key Leadership Competencies as a whole Rate the executive’s demonstration of the Key Leadership Competencies as a whole using the same rating scale as for the separate competencies: 4 Exemplifies the key leadership competencies (i.e. surpasses expectations) 3 Clearly demonstrates the key leadership competencies (i.e. meets all expectations) 2 Needs to show improvement in demonstrating the key leadership competencies (i.e. meets most expectations) 1 Ongoing difficulty in demonstrating the key leadership competencies (i.e. does not meet expectations) If you assigned the same rating to each leadership competency separately, this same rating will apply when you consider the competencies as a whole. If you assigned different ratings across the leadership competencies, consider the following in deciding on your overall rating: If you are thinking of assigning an overall rating of 4, ask yourself: • Would I describe the individual as a role model in demonstrating all four key leadership competencies? DRAFT March 30, 2007 48
  49. 49. • Were only very minor weaknesses evident in how the results were achieved? • What example(s) would I cite to illustrate demonstration of the competencies at this level? • Remember: All executives are expected to model the leadership competencies. However, all have not developed the four competencies to the point that they need only very minor development on any of the competencies. DRAFT March 30, 2007 49

×