Agenda Why a New Performance Management System?


Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Cover Page - Currently in Graphics Being Designed
  • KEY POINTS: Say: The focus of this briefing is to tell you about FSA’s new Performance Management System that will be implemented on October 1, 2005. Even though this is the focus, at the end of the day, this is really about telling the FSA story and your role in it. Before we get into why we have a new Performance Management System, I want to talk a few minutes about what I mean by “the FSA story.” Turn to next slide
  • KEY POINTS: (Note – this slide has animation) There were two key internal drivers and several external drivers that led to the implementation of a new Performance Management System. Internal Drivers: Strategic Planning: The decision to embark on a more comprehensive Strategic Planning Process ultimately meant that to accomplish the strategic goals set out in the plan meant that there had to be a link between the accomplishment of theses goals and your performance plans. Evaluate Current System: At the same time that FSA began an inclusive process for developing a new Strategic Plan, senior leaders also chartered a Task Force to evaluate the current performance management system. The Task Force surveyed the workforce and, based on an evaluation of the results, made a series of recommendations including a recommendation to revise the existing Pass/Fail performance appraisal process. External Drivers: President’s Management Agenda: The President’s Management Agenda (PMA) laid out five Government-wide initiatives that have become the driving force behind the efforts for the Administration and federal managers to improve government performance.. Performance is the centerpiece of its policies regarding human resources issues. OMB Scorecard: To "keep score," the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) created a "traffic light" scorecard to report on where departments and major agencies stand on each of the five initiatives. The Scorecard Standards of Success in the area of Strategic Human Capital Management include a strong focus on performance management, I.e., focus on results, align performance plans to strategic plan, differentiate between performance , Departmental Mandates: The Department, in response to the PMA required all USDA agencies to align performance plans to the agency’s strategic goals and move to performance management systems that include at least one level above fully successful Internal and External drivers converged and led to decision by FSA Senior Leadership to move to a new Performance Management System
  • KEY POINTS: Say: The new Performance Management System with a 5-Level Summary Rating Appraisal Process and old, familiar tool and much of it is. What is different, however, is the underlying philosophy which will govern how individual performance in FSA is managed. These five elements describe an underlying philosophy that emphasizes the importance of ensuring that everyone in the agency is working in a common direction and on those activities that are most important to the long-term success of FSA. It stresses that all employees are accountable for achieving their part of mission results, and that by differentiating between performance we’ll be able to reward those performers who make significant contributions to the agency mission and goals. While the Pass/Fail system supports some elements of this philosophy, the new Performance Management System is in far better alignment.
  • KEY POINTS (Note: re-writing some of the text for this slide based on a meeting with Karen Malkin and Connie Bieler. Also, this slide is animated, i.e., different parts of the text come in as they are being discussed. Click on slide show to see the animation. ) Key parts of the FSA Story The Past. ( Note : it’s important to acknowledge the contributions the FSA workforce has made to American agriculture. You will need to avoid giving any impression that you’re discounting the past and/or that FSA workforce did not work hard to support farmers. This is a highly dedicated workforce and their dedication and commitment is part of the FSA legacy. In fact, if you have stories about past successes, this is the place to mention a few.) The Present. What brought us to where we are today may not carry us into the future. The 21 st century provides a significant number of challenges, e.g., changing methods of production, demographic`shifts, increased globalization and export competition, that require us to change the we do business to become more performance-based and results-focused. To meet these challenges has launched the FSA Transformation effort of which you are all aware. ( This may not be accurate – need input from Strategic Planning Office.) The FSA Transformation . Need input from Strategic Planning Office Every employee accountable for FSA fulfilling their part of the FSA mission
  • KEY POINTS: Say: We are now going to describe what changed and what stayed with same with implementation of the 5-Level Summary Rating Process and that these are the components you will be describing: Elements and Standards Element Rating Levels Summary Rating Levels Performance Appraisal Form Responsibilities
  • KEY POINTS: Note to Presenter: Point out what changes under the Five-Level Summary Rating Appraisal Process, i.e., Must have at least 1 non-critical element Generic standards must be supplemented with job specific performance measures
  • Note to Presenter: Given that there is now a requirement for a non-critical element be sure to review the definitions of both a critical and non-critical element. This will be especially important for people in the field offices because this system is very new to them.
  • KEY POINTS: Point out the difference in the rating of elements between the two systems. Say: Under Pass/Fail each element was rated either “Results Achieved” or “Results Not Achieved” Under the new system each element will be given one of three ratings: Exceeds, Fully Successful, or Does Not Meet The illustrations at the bottom of each box simply show what this looks like on the appraisal forms for the two different systems.
  • KEY POINTS: Tell participants that the summary rating is the overall rating given to an appraisal. Under Pass/Fail your summary rating was either “Results Achieved” or “Results Not Achieved” Under the new system the overall summary rating can be at one of 5 different levels Outstanding Superior Fully Successful Marginal Unacceptable Point out that under the new system Critical Elements are weighted 2:1 Tell participants that the next few slides will illustrate how to get to each of the 5 summary rating levels
  • Text to be developed (Note: this slide has animation)
  • Text to be developed
  • Text to be developed (Note: this slide has animation)
  • Text to be developed (Note: this slide has animation)
  • KEY POINT: Tell participants that they will be using a different appraisal form under the new system and tell them what it is.
  • KEY POINTS: Note to Presenter: Emphasize that there is no changed to either the rating cycle or the mandatory progress reviews. Stress that while there is only one mandatory progress review during the rating cycle, managers are strongly encouraged to give performance feedback throughout the year.
  • KEY POINTS: ( Note to Presenter: this slide is animated such that the graphic under “Typical Rating Cycle” will be displayed first. Next the boxes outlined in red will come in one at a time. Finally, the grapich at the bottom of the page “Rating Cycle for 2006” will be displayed last.) Say: The “Typical Rating Cycle” displays the timeframes during which certain parts of the appraisal process must be completed. ( Note: review each of those timeframes as you pull in the boxes outlined in red) The Rating Cycle for 2006 merely illustrates that the period to get performance plans in place is extended for this fiscal year because FSA is implementing a new performance management system and supervisors will be getting training beginning November 1. Tell participants that you will tell them more about the training in a later slide
  • KEY POINTS: Note to Presenter: Briefly point out the link between the summary rating and eligibility for a within grade increase and a career ladder promotion. Participants may ask questions about how this new performance management system will impact their retention standing in the event of a RIF. Lolla and Steve will be able to answer those questions.
  • Text to be developed (Note: this slide has animation)
  • Text to be developed
  • Agenda Why a New Performance Management System?

    1. 2. Agenda <ul><li>Why a New Performance Management System? </li></ul><ul><li>5-Level Summary Rating Appraisal Process </li></ul><ul><li>Pay-For-Performance </li></ul><ul><li>What’s Key? </li></ul><ul><li>What Changed/What Stayed The Same? </li></ul><ul><li>Linkage to Other Personnel Actions </li></ul><ul><li>Awards Program </li></ul><ul><li>Training in New Performance Management System </li></ul>
    2. 3. Why A New Performance Management System? New Performance Management System Internal Driver Decision to look at Performance Mgmt System External Driver President’s Mgmt Agenda: Results Focus
    3. 4. 5-Level Summary Rating Appraisal Process Old Tool/New Philosophy New System Align Performance Plans with Agency Goals Focus work on activities most important to mission accomplishment Enhance the achievement of mission results by holding employees more accountable for contributing to outcomes that support mission results and organizational goals Differentiate between high and low performance Align Awards Program with Performance Mgmt System so that individuals and/or teams are rewarded for contributions to Agency Goals      Current System Philosophy  
    4. 5. Pay-For-Performance <ul><li>Trend in Federal government: movement to pay-for-performance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Strengthens accountability for results and recognition of top performance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Links appraisal processes to meaningful distinctions in performance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Aligns individual performance with organizational goals </li></ul></ul><ul><li>5-level appraisal process lays the foundation for movement to a pay-for-performance system </li></ul>
    5. 6. What’s Key? Your Strong Commitment and Contributions <ul><li>Performance-Based </li></ul><ul><li>Results-Focused </li></ul><ul><li>FSA Strategic Goals </li></ul><ul><li>Supporting productive </li></ul><ul><li>farms and ranches – for </li></ul><ul><li>American farmers and ranchers </li></ul><ul><li>Supporting secure, affordable </li></ul><ul><li>food and fiber – for domestic </li></ul><ul><li>consumers </li></ul><ul><li>Conserving natural resources </li></ul><ul><li>and enhancing the environment – </li></ul><ul><li>for all present and future </li></ul><ul><li>generations </li></ul>Equitably serving all farmers, Ranchers, and agricultural Partners by delivering Effective, efficient agricultural Programs for all Americans FSA Mission FSA Mission & Organizational Goals Work Unit Products & Services YOUR Individual Products and Contributions YOUR Performance Objectives
    6. 7. What Changed/What Stayed the Same? <ul><li>Elements and Standards </li></ul><ul><li>Element Rating Levels </li></ul><ul><li>Summary Rating Levels </li></ul><ul><li>Responsibilities </li></ul><ul><li>Performance Appraisal Form </li></ul><ul><li>Rating Cycle and Progress Reviews </li></ul>
    7. 8. Elements and Standards Two Level (Pass/Fail) Five-Level A Menu of 12 Generic Elements & Standards w/option to add more elements Same Same <ul><li>Required Elements: </li></ul><ul><li>EEO/Civil Rights </li></ul><ul><li>Link to Mission Results </li></ul><ul><li>Same as under Pass/Fail – and - </li></ul><ul><li>“ Supervision” for all supervisors </li></ul>At least 1 Non-Critical Element Supplement Generic Standards with Job Specific Performance Measures Supplement Generic Standards as needed All Elements Critical Minimum of 3 Elements/ Maximum of 5
    8. 9. Critical/Non-Critical Elements <ul><li>Critical Element: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A critical element is an assignment or responsibility of such importance that unacceptable performance in that element would result in a determination that the employee’s overall performance is unacceptable. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Non-Critical Element: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A non-critical element is a responsibility that is specific to the position, but not necessarily critical to the goals of the office. At least one element must be non-critical. </li></ul></ul>
    9. 10. Element Rating Levels Two Level (Pass/Fail) <ul><li>Two Element Rating Levels: </li></ul><ul><li>Results Achieved </li></ul><ul><li>Results Not Achieved </li></ul>Element: Execution of Duties Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Results Achieved Results Not Achieved Example: Five Level Summary Rating Five Level <ul><li>Three Element Rating Levels: </li></ul><ul><li>Exceeds </li></ul><ul><li>Fully Successful </li></ul><ul><li>Does Not Meet </li></ul>Element Rating: Exceeds Fully Successful Does Not Meet Example:
    10. 11. Summary Rating Levels Five Level Summary Rating Five Level <ul><li>Five-Level Summary Rating: </li></ul><ul><li>Outstanding </li></ul><ul><li>Superior </li></ul><ul><li>Fully Successful </li></ul><ul><li>Marginal </li></ul><ul><li>Unacceptable </li></ul><ul><li>Critical Elements Weighted 2:1 </li></ul>Two Level (Pass/Fail) <ul><li>Two-Level Summary Rating: </li></ul><ul><li>Results Achieved </li></ul><ul><li>Results Not Achieved </li></ul>Summary Rating: Results Achieved All Elements Rating “Results Achieved” Summary Rating: Results Not Achieved One or More Elements Rated “ Results Not Achieved”
    11. 12. Summary Rating Examples – 5 Level <ul><li>Superior Summary Rating </li></ul><ul><li>No element rated “Does Not Meet” (DNM) </li></ul><ul><li>At least one element rated “Fully Successful” </li></ul><ul><li>Total # of points under “Exceeds” greater </li></ul><ul><li>than points under “FS” </li></ul>C = Critical NC = Non-Critical Total 4 Element E FS DNM Element 1 (C) Element 2 (C) Element 3 (NC) Element 4 (NC) 1 1 2 2 2 Outstanding Summary Rating All elements rated “Exceeds” Element 3 (NC) 2 2 Total 6 1 1 Element E FS DNM Element 1 (C) Element 2 (C) Element 4 (NC) E = Exceeds FS = Fully Successful DNM = Does Not Meet
    12. 13. Summary Rating Examples – 5 Level <ul><li>Fully Successful Summary Rating </li></ul><ul><li>If none of the above apply </li></ul><ul><li>As a minimum: </li></ul><ul><li>At least one element rated at “Fully </li></ul><ul><li>Successful” (FS) </li></ul><ul><li>Total # of points for “FS” greater than or </li></ul><ul><li>equal to total points for “Exceeds” </li></ul><ul><li>No critical element rated “Does Not Meet” </li></ul>Element E FS DNM Element 1 (C) Element 2 (C) Element 3 (NC) Element 4 (NC) 1 1 2 2 Total 2 4
    13. 14. Summary Rating Examples – 5 Level Unacceptable Summary Rating If any critical element is rated “DNM” Element E FS DNM Element 1 (C) Element 2 (C) Element 3 (NC) 2 2 1 <ul><li>Marginal Summary Rating </li></ul><ul><li>No critical element rated “Does Not </li></ul><ul><li>Meet” (DNM) Fully Successful </li></ul><ul><li>Total number of points for “DNM” greater </li></ul><ul><li>than total number of points for “Exceeds” </li></ul>Element E FS DNM Element 1 (C) Element 2 (C) Element 3 (NC) Element 4 (NC) Element 5 (NC) 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 Total
    14. 15. Responsibilities Explain the link between the work unit outputs, the employee’s duties, and the Agency goals Ask employee to provide input into development of his/her Performance plan Provide informal feedback throughout the rating year Conduct/Document at least one formal progress review during rating year Complete year-end performance rating Employee (No Change) Rating Official (No change) Reviewing Official (New) Provide input into the development of your Performance Plan Check your understanding of expectations Communicate with supervisor throughout the rating cycle Provide input on Accomplishments Assist in identifying Training needs to enhance performance Review and Approve employee’s performance standards as submitted by supervisors to ensure consistency across work unit Review and Approve end-of-year performance rating Note: Reviewing Official approves performance plans and year-end ratings before supervisor (rating official) gives rating to employees
    15. 16. Performance Appraisal Form Five Level Summary Rating Two Level (Pass/Fail) Five Level AD-2000 <ul><li>AD-435A </li></ul><ul><li>- Signature Sheet </li></ul><ul><li>- Elements/Standards/ </li></ul><ul><li>Performance measures </li></ul><ul><li>AD-435B </li></ul><ul><li>- Elements/Standards/ </li></ul><ul><li>Performance Measures </li></ul><ul><li>AD-435 </li></ul><ul><li>Rating Sheet </li></ul>
    16. 17. Rating Cycle and Progress Reviews Two Level (Pass/Fail) <ul><li>Rating Period: </li></ul><ul><li>October 1 – September 30 </li></ul><ul><li>Progress Reviews: </li></ul><ul><li>Mandatory – at least one </li></ul><ul><li>during the 12-months </li></ul><ul><li>period </li></ul><ul><li>Periodic optional </li></ul><ul><li>progress reviews throughout </li></ul><ul><li>the year strongly </li></ul><ul><li>encouraged </li></ul>Five Level Summary Rating Five Level Same as Current Process
    17. 18. Rating Cycle Performance Plans Put In Place Conduct and Document Formal Progress Review Formal Perf Rating Typical Rating Cycle Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 10/1 to 10/31 4/1 to 6/30 10/1 – 10/31 Rating Cycle for 2006 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 10/1 through 12/31 10/1 – 10/31 4/1 to 6/30
    18. 19. Linkage to Other Personnel Actions <ul><li>“ Fully Successful” Summary Rating required for: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Within Grade Increase </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Career Ladder Promotion </li></ul></ul>
    19. 20. Awards Program <ul><li>FY06 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No Change to current program </li></ul></ul><ul><li>FY07 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Implementation of new Awards Program </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>07 monies used to reward 06 performance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>75% of awards budget to recognize ‘06 performance </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>25% of awards budget used to recognize performance throughout ‘07 </li></ul></ul>
    20. 21. Training in New Performance Management System <ul><li>Briefings to workforce </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Why a new performance management system </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What changed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Link to agency mission and organizational goals </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Computer-Based Training (CBT) for supervisors </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Overall performance management system </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Developing performance measures </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Evaluating employees against measures </li></ul></ul><ul><li>CBT available through AgLearn beginning 11/1/05 </li></ul>