civil service performance appraisal in portugal :
DESCRIPTION
Civil Service Performance Appraisal in Portugal : General framework and the specific experience with parliamentary staff Isabel Corte-Real, Vilnius 24 May 2006. SIADAP* Structure of the presentation. Introduction Why a new appraisal system - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
Civil Service Performance Appraisal in Portugal:
General framework and the specific experience with parliamentary staff
Isabel Corte-Real, Vilnius 24 May 2006
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
SIADAP*SIADAP*Structure of the presentationStructure of the presentation
Introduction Why a new appraisal system SIADAP: Principles; requirements ;features; rating system,
quotas; forms; appraisers and other interfering entities; process, managers; transparency ;strengths and weaknesses
Appraisals systems are complex; appraisal systems are useful. Key points for a successful appraisal
Specific experience with parliamentary staff: specific features; other parliaments experiences; inspiring principles; system features; grading system; forms ;first year experience
Conclusion
*Sistema de Avaliação de Desempenho da Administração Pública( performance appraisal system for the civil service)
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
SIADAPSIADAPWhy a new system?Why a new system?
Breaks with a discredited previous system from1983
Responds to new management needs (Efficiency; Quality Management; pay bill control)
Integrates the service (s) annual management cycle
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
SIADAPSIADAPGeneral principlesGeneral principles
Performance appraisal is results/objectives oriented
SIADAP is an universal system , applicable to the civil service as a whole
Enhances managers and subordinates responsibilities;
Staff contributions to the service and motivation are better perceived
Differentiates levels of performance Aims at transparency Integrates HRM system
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
SIADAPSIADAPRequires:Requires:
Annual planning for the next year (taking into account strategic objectives, government programme,
service competences and assignments) Annual setting of service objectives Annual setting of individual objectives
( civil servant or team) Annual reporting Performance appraisal( against
individual objectives)
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
SIADAPSIADAPMain featuresMain features
Applicable to the Civil Service as a whole
Main components: Objectives Competences Personal Attitudes
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
SIADAP SIADAP
ObjectivesObjectives
Each service sets its own objectives Objectives( no more than five , no less than three)
must be agreed upon each subordinate and immediate superior, depending one of them on shared responsibility (team or group)
Each objective has its own weight for the final mark (no less than 15%, no more than 20%)
Grading system: Level five- Exceeds largely the objective Level three-Meets the objective Level one- Does not meet the objective
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
SIADAPSIADAPCompetencesCompetences
Set up against job requirements ( for each professional group)
No less than four, no more than six
The weight of each competence shall not be less than 10%
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
Personal AttitudePersonal Attitude
Evaluates how the job was performed, including aspects as effort, interest and motivation
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
Rating systemRating system
Rating of each component: from one to five The final appraisal of each component
corresponds to the following rating: Excellent :from 4,5 to 5 Very good: From 4 to 4,4 Good: From 3 to 3,9 Needs development: from 2 to 2,9 Unsatisfactory :from 1 to 1,9
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
Final appraisalFinal appraisalresults from the weighted average of results from the weighted average of
each component according to the each component according to the following weightfollowing weight
Group Objective Compet. Attitude
Graduate staff
60% 30% 10%
Administrat. assistants
50% 40% 10%
Blue collars 40% 50% 10%
Supporting staff
20% 60% 20%
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
SIADAPSIADAPQuotas ( forced distribution)Quotas ( forced distribution)
Very good: No more than 20% of the staff
Excellent : No more than 5 % of the staff
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
FormsForms
Forms are legally pre-defined for the all civil service
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
Who interferes in the Who interferes in the appraisal systemappraisal system
Superiors( appraisers) Performance appraisal
coordination committee (P.A.C.C.)
Director General ( top manager) of each service
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
Appraisers( immediate Appraisers( immediate superiors) assignmentssuperiors) assignments
Set up objectives and conduct appraisals
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
Performance appraisal Performance appraisal coordination committeecoordination committee
(P.A.C.C.)(P.A.C.C.) Chaired by the D.G. Composed by other managers Assignments: Sets up orientations Guarantees a selective system ( has
to validate excellent and very good ) Advices the D.G. on claims Proposes the Minister specific
system (s) , according to the law
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
Appraisal processAppraisal processPhasesPhases
Self appraisal Previous appraisal( by the superior) Harmonization of ratings by the P. A C. C.( the
highest ratings have to be signed by all members) Appraisal interview( between superior and
subordinate) Final appraisal approval by the D.G. The subordinate has to acknowledge the final
appraisal. In case of disagreement ,he can present a claim to the D.G. The P.A.C.C. gives advice on claim (s)
The subordinate can still appeal to the minister
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
Managers( iManagers( intermediatentermediate level)level) appraisalsappraisals
Objectives are weighted :75% Competences are
weighted:25% No forced distribution is
established
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
SIADAPSIADAPTransparencyTransparency
A list of names , organized according final grades( Excellent , Very Good, Good, Needs development , Unsatisfactory) is publicized
A SIADAP data base is set up in the Directorate General for the Civil Service
Services can also be assessed
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
SIADAP- Strengths and SIADAP- Strengths and weaknessesweaknesses
Strengths Result/objective oriented Set up within the context of
TQM and MBO Breaks with a discredited
previous system( inflation of high ratings)
Responds to the need of controlling a high pay bill
Weaknesses Time consuming process for setting up
objectives ( from Government Program to individuals) specially within instability scenarios
In 2004 only 18% of services conducted PA . In 2005 no data are available; a new system is being prepared
Heavy work load and paper work( too demanding, ,considering a cost/benefit relationship)
Forced distribution creates inequity and conflicts ( quotas are always fulfilled not on a merit basis .They result from internal negotiations )
Managers and staff had a modest contribution to the system
System misses flexibility ( too universal)
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
Appraisal systems are Appraisal systems are complex complex
In many organization performance measurement and management systems are little more than human resources bureaucracies , with forms, rules and review layers. These paper-driven systems are burdens to managers and hence are completely marginally, if at all. They are typically seen by raters as extra work and by ratees as at best irrelevant, at worst demotivating ( Schneier, Shaw and Beatty)
Inflation of high ratings in civil service is common as civil service has no profit/market regulation
Heavy paper work load and bureaucracies are often associated
The emerging management of conflict takes time and energy
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
Appraisal systems are Appraisal systems are usefuluseful
Recruitment and selection ( validates selection procedures)
Integration of staff in the organization( asses adaptation to the organization)
Training (identifies training needs) Promotion: performance appraisal is a promotion
requirement ( promotion without merit can not receive support and contributes to civil service discredit)
Mobility: Can recommend mobility Career and payment : is the basis for different
tracks in career( slower or faster) with payment impact
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
Key points for a successful Key points for a successful appraisal schemeappraisal scheme
British Advisory and Conciliation Arbitration ServiceBritish Advisory and Conciliation Arbitration Service
Make sure senior managers are fully committed
Consult with managers employees an d trade unions
Give appraisers adequate training( setting objectives and interviews)
Keep the system simple and straight Monitor and update system(s)
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
Specific experience with Specific experience with parliamentary staffparliamentary staff
Parliaments special featuresParliaments special features
General system is not directly applicable to Parliament. Legislation provides for specific rules and regulations
Parliament has no political planning for the legislature ( contrary to what happens with government programme). Main activities come from political/parliamentary control of government performance
Therefore, there is no cascade strategic planning for the services, the departments or the individuals
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
Other parliaments Other parliaments experiencesexperiences
Civil Service general system is not used The general system is adapted in some
cases (Netherlands) Some parliaments have their own model
( France and U.K.) No system is used in some cases ( Spain
and Luxembourg) Annual interviews are conducted to set up
individual objectives , in order to developing h.r.( Denmark and Finland)
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
SIADAR*SIADAR*
New inspiring principles to pursuitNew inspiring principles to pursuit
Development of competences. The main reason for appraisal is the further improvement of performances
Decentralization in H.R.M. Motivation and performance improvement Appraisal :does not replace other demanding H.R.M.
techniques and practices ( specially recruitment) Compensation performance related system Prevention of high ratings inflation and paper overload Clear and straight system Managers role
*Sistema de Avaliação de Desempenho da Assembleia da República- Portuguese Parliament Performance Appraisal System)
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
SIADAR SIADAR FeaturesFeatures
Corresponds to P.A. principles and H.R.M. needs P.A.C.C. sets up annual criteria for appraisals Sets up annual individual objectives by mutual
agreement( subordinate/immediate superior). An Individual Plan for Development of Competences (IPDC) is established . The IPDC is the basis for development of competences and appraisals
Annual interview Annual appraisal report. The subordinate acknowledges the
Report General principal: good performance, with an average impact
in career compensation schemes (ordinary appraisal) Management takes the imitative for exceptional performances
appraisal( positive or negative) P.A.C.C. validates exceptional appraisals Exceptional merit is awarded by the Speaker in a public
ceremony
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
SIADAR gradingSIADAR grading(no marks)(no marks)
Good performance- ordinary appraisal scheme. It is the rating required for standard career development
Insufficient- extraordinary appraisal when the performance is beyond required
Very Good –Excellent performance( reduces six months for promotion), awarded on the basis of facts and/or particular events. In some cases an exceptional merit rating can be awarded. In these cases P.A. reduces one year time required for promotion and abolishes competition
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
FormsFormsSummarySummary
1. Job description; missions ; objectives to meet2. Difficulties encountered by the appraised3. Results achieved against objectives4. Strengths and weaknesses related to attributes (skills and knowledge;
organization and implementation capacity; adaptation and continuous improvement; planning capacity ;team work and coordination; responsibility and commitment; personal attitude such as effort, interest and motivation) .Grading of each attribute : Exceeds objectives, Meets objectives, Needs development, Unsatisfactory
5. Individual Plan for Development of Competences (IPDC) , agreed upon appraiser and appraised. Encompasses the following items: objectives and results to be achieved next year; conditions for developing competences , including training; evolving projects
6. The forms are different for ordinary appraisal ( good performance) and exceptional appraisal ( Excellent or unsatisfactory) and they have attached a performance appraisal guide both to the appraised and the appraiser
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
SIADARSIADARFirst yearFirst year
System design in consultation with Managers, Staff, Trade Union and also ( for approval) with Board of the A.R. and M.P.(s)
Training (appraisers /appraised) Reduced paper work (simple forms, no marks,
simple appraisal criteria; simple attributes) Impact in career( no forced distribution) General principle of good performance was adopted
by the P.A.C.C. No exceptional appraisals were conducted
Second year is now being run. It will be the first appraisal year, taking into account objectives set up by mutual agreement
© OECD
A jo
int
initi
ativ
e of
th
e O
EC
D a
nd t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on,
prin
cipa
lly f
inan
ced
by t
he E
U.
Performance Performance ManagementManagementThe ICL WayThe ICL Way
Performance management is the way forward- for every individual and for the company as a whole. It is therefore vitally important that every individual as a clear understanding of his/her work objectives and responsibilities, because performance will be measured against them