performance reviews and awards town hall · pdf file · 2012-09-05•individual...
Post on 13-Mar-2018
215 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Today’s Objectives
•Share information about 2012 performanceevaluations
•Discuss how performance scores change as rolesand responsibilities change
•Review the performance award process for FY12
•Answer your questions
What Determines Performance
•SWAT Goal performance (50%)
•Individual behaviors consistent with ourcore values (25%)
•Your ability to complete your day to day jobcompetencies (25%)
2011 vs. 2012 Evaluations2011 2012
2011 Section
Name
2011
Weight
2011 Rating Scale 2012 Section
Name
2012
Weight
2012 Rating Scale
Expectations 40% 5: Exceptional
4: Exceeds Expectations
3: Meets Expectations
2: Improvement Needed
1: Unsatisfactory
Job
Competencies
25% 5: Expert
4: Advanced
3: Proficient
2: Basic
1: Limited
Goals 40% 5: Exceptional
4: Exceeds Expectations
3: Meets Expectations
2: Improvement Needed
1: Unsatisfactory
SWAT Goals 50% 5: Top Performer
4: Strong Performer
3: Solid Performer
2: Inconsistent Performer
1: Unsatisfactory Performer
Organizational
Competencies
(Mission, Values,
Performance
Improvement)
20% 5: Exceptional
4: Exceeds Expectations
3: Meets Expectations
2: Improvement Needed
1: Unsatisfactory
Core ValuesTeamwork
Patient-Centered
Accountability
Excellence
Pride
Innovation
25% 5: Top Performer
4: Strong Performer
3: Solid Performer
2: Inconsistent Performer
1: Unsatisfactory Performer
Performance
Evaluation
Score Matrix
100% High Performer: 4.00 – 5.00
Middle Performer: 3.00- 3.99
Low Performer: 1.00 – 2.99
Overall
Performance
Score Matrix
100% Top Performer: 4.50 – 5.00
Strong Performer: 3.50 – 4.49
Solid Performer: 2.50 – 3.49
Inconsistent Performer: 1.50 – 2.49
Unsatisfactory Performer: 1.00 – 1.49
Guide/Tool
New Performance Rating System
The following guidelines apply for standard scoring across all sections of the evaluation:
RatingLevel
Job Competencies Goals & Values In other words…
5 Expert Top Performer “BUILDS IT”
4 Advanced Strong Performer “ENCOURAGES IT”
3 Proficient Solid Performer “DOES IT”
2 Basic Inconsistent Performer “CAN DO IT”
1 Limited UnsatisfactoryPerformer
PerformanceImprovement Plan
Job CompetenciesExpert Possesses Specialist/Authority level knowledge of the
competencies required to be successful in the position andapplies/demonstrates the competencies in daily work (totalmastery).
Advanced Possesses highly developed knowledge and understandingof competencies required to be successful in the position, aswell as the ability to apply them.
Proficient Possesses detailed knowledge and understanding ofcompetencies required to be successful in the position,and can apply the competencies in daily work.
Basic Possesses basic understanding or knowledge needed for thejob.
Limited Competency has been minimally demonstrated.
SWAT GoalsTop Performer No higher level of performance can be obtained.
Strong Performer Achievement clearly and consistently exceeds thegoals/targets/criteria.
Solid Performer Consistently achieves goals/targets/criteria.
Inconsistent Performer Fails to consistently meet goals/targets/criteria.
UnsatisfactoryPerformer
Fails to meet goals/targets/criteria.
Core Values: TeamworkTop Performer Seeks opportunities to build collaborative partnerships with
internal and external team members to impart systemknowledge and to advance the system.
StrongPerformer
Frequently uses opportunities to work with others, shareknowledge, and help others succeed.
Solid Performer Consistently works with others to accomplish teamgoals and tasks.
InconsistentPerformer
Occasionally isolates oneself from others while workingtoward team goals and objectives.
UnsatisfactoryPerformer
Isolates oneself from others instead of working toward teamgoals and objectives.
Overall PerformanceTop Performer Performance was superior in terms of completeness,
timeliness, and independence; mastery of skills and tasksinvolved was demonstrated.
StrongPerformer
Performance was what can be expected of a fully qualifiedand experienced person in this position.
Solid Performer Performance is at the level expected for this position:effective, consistent, and reliable. Valued contributor.
InconsistentPerformer
Performance needs improvement, or staff member is new tothis position and is still learning.
UnsatisfactoryPerformer
Immediate improvement is essential, and a performanceimprovement plan is required.
What is Performance Calibration?
•A process for leaders to discuss and comparestaff’s performance ratings with the goal ofmaking sure leaders apply similar standards forall staff and eliminate biases to the greatestextent possible.
– Inter-rater reliability
•This year at Scott & White:– Beginning to calibrate (At regional level)
– Provide tools to leaders to guide through process
Why Calibrate?
•Individual performance must align withsystem performance/results
•Creates more accurate performance scores
•Identifies growth opportunities for staff andorganization
•Establishes more fair results
Expected Distribution
Based on Staff count of 100
Time Spent
Pro
jects
Wo
rke
dO
n
Get Familiar
AchieveMastery
Performance Progression
GetExperienced
Summary• New Rating Scale for Performance Reviews
– Affects everyone
– SWAT Goals met equals Solid Performer
• Calibration of Performance Scores – Completed by Region
– September 1 – 21: Evaluations Completed and SAVED
– September 24 – 26
• Top Performers – 10%
• Strong Performers – 20%
• Solid Performers – 50%
• Inconsistent Performers – 15%
• Unsatisfactory Performers – 5%
• Performance Conversations
– October 1 – 12
– Individuals must accept/reject performance evaluation by October 12th
Q & A
•Question 1:– I’ve always been a 5, now I’m a 3.8. Why
doesn’t S&W appreciate me anymore?
•Question 2:– My manager set tougher SWAT goals than
many other managers. Shouldn’t that countfor something?
Q & A
•Question 3:– My manager told me that he thinks I’m a 5 but
HR told him to rate me a 3. Is that true?
•Question 4:– Why didn’t you tell us this at the beginning of
the year…why are you (HR) always changingthe rules at the end of the game?
2012 Performance Awards
2011 Actual
7.5% (829 Staff Members)
2012 Goal
30% (3300 Staff Members)
92.50%
7.50%
Staff MembersNot ReceivingAward
StaffReceivingAward
70.00%
20.00%
10%
Staff MembersNot ReceivingAward
StrongPerformerAward(11%-30%)
Top PerformerAward(up to 10%)
Increase the percentage of total staff receiving award from 7% to 30%
Based on meeting $50 million dollar challenge
Who is eligible?
• Eligible:– Full-time and part-time staff (Directors to front line)
• hired on or before 06/04/2012
– Directors will not receive additional bonus
– Must have completed (accept/reject) 2012 Performance Review
– Employed on date of payout
• Not Eligible:– PRN staff (based on status as of 8/31/2012)
– Residents
– Senior and Executive Staff (SWC payroll)
Payout Matrix 2012 Targets• Top performers will receive 2.5% of FY12 actual base
earnings
• Strong performers will receive 1.25% of FY12 actual baseearnings
• Examples:– $37,500 base pay
• Top Performer: $37,500 X 2.5% = $937.50*
• Strong Performer: $37,500 X 1.25% = $468.75*
– $55,000 base pay
• Top Performer: $55,000 X 2.5% = $1,375.00*
• Strong Performer: $55,000 X 1.25% = $687.50*
*Taxable Income – post calibration
Summation
PerformanceEvaluation tobe completedby manager
Dashboardscreated and
sent toleadership
Calibrationby leaders
Conversationswith StaffMembers
All reviewsaccepted/rejectedby Staff Members
AwardPayout Date
Sep22 - 23
Sep1 – 21
Nov23
Sep24 - 26
Oct1 - 12
Oct12
Sep27
Scores adjustedin PeopleSoft
Q & A
•Question 1:– When will I know how I was rated and if
I receive a Performance Award?
•Question 2:– My department has already taken care
of getting rid of our low performers andwe are now a department of highperformers. Why can I only have 30%when they are all high performers?
•Question 3:– What if I only have five employees?
•Question 4:– Who will be making the decision on my
performance award? Last year theperson who made the decision didn’teven know who I was.
Q & A
Questions
top related