G2 master

1
CIT 2008 Supervisor Performance Review Overview
2
Agenda

• New this year
• The Performance Evaluation Process
• Feedback from others
• Employee self-evaluations
• Writing the review
• The discussion
• Rebuttals
• Next steps
• QA

3
New This Year

• Leading Cornell Results
• Change in CIT philosophy

4
New This Year CIT Study

• Leading Cornell Program - Performance Review
  Process Project.
• CIT study - team interviewed and surveyed 23 CIT
  employees including staff and supervisors.
• Good news - the CIT process had many parts cited
  as best practice - which are now part of the
  pilot across campus.

5
New This Year Leading Cornell Recommends

• Talent Review Process - demystify and train
  supervisors.
• Clearer examples of rating criteria.
• Level the playing field between managers in terms
  of employee advocation.
• Clarify a path to success (how to get a higher
  rating).
• Make performance management a true year round
  effort.

6
New This Year Strengths

• Additionally, based on a new organizational
  philosophy, we want to move from a remedial
  management to a strengths based management
  approach.
• This will help to make this a more positive
  process.

7
Talent Review Process

• The purpose of talent review is twofold  
• To calibrate the performance evaluations across
  CIT.
• To identify outstanding individuals on whom we
  need to focus leadership development
  opportunities.
• Polley clarified this in her email on 11/11/08.

8
Talent Review Process

• Talent review was begun 4 years ago to for
  directors to talk about WHY they were
  provisionally considering a rating of "exceeds
  expectations" or "meets expectations" etc.. for
  individuals.  Other directors listened, and
  thought about whether the REASONS being used in
  each case were similar to the reasons they were
  using.

9
Myths to Debunk

• Myth 1 Due to funding limitations, we can only
  allocate a certain number of 4s 5s.
• Truth Our funding is not at all related to the
  number of 4s and 5s we give out. We believe
  people should get the rating that represents
  their performance for the year. We do not have
  any arbitrary caps on ratings at all.

10
Myths to Debunk
Myth 2 Performance ratings are determined
during the talent review meetings - even before
the evaluation is written. Truth The talent
review does NOT set final ratings because the
review process is incomplete at talent review
time and because the conversation at talent
review is not as well informed of specifics as is
the direct supervisor and director.  The point is
not about the rating of an individual but
development of a common set of criteria that
divisions will use.
11
Clearer Rating Criteria

• Result of the Talent Review meeting is a set of
  rating criteria, refined more with each
  iteration.
• This is meant as a tool for supervisors to use to
  explain overall ratings.
• Refer to Program Contributions set for the year
  and Position Descriptions as a reference point.

12
Making Your Case for Rating

• Remember, there are two key aspects of meeting
  expectations to consider. What is accomplished
  and how it was accomplished. Both are important.
• Results
• Integrity
• Community
• Innovation
• Respect

13
Making Your Case for Rating

• Contact people whom you believe each employee has
  worked most closely with for the review period
  (may want to ask employee).
• Collect any emails, value cards or other feedback
  you have received about the employee throughout
  the year.
• Your own files/observations on the employee.
• Employee self-evaluation

14
Making Your Case for Rating

• Compare data collected against the employees
  position description and program contributions.
• Think about the how as well - noting anything
  that stands out.
• Was he/she instrumental in helping others to
  achieve their results? How?
• Read over rating criteria behaviors to see which
  ones align with all the data collected. Have
  specific examples in mind.

15
Making Your Case Example

• Employee B
• Deliverable Represent Unit on CIT Cross
  Divisional Team
• Result Participated
• Rating 4
• Behaviors
• Attended all meetings and volunteered to create/
  maintain Confluence site for team.
• Provided updates to entire unit at unit town
  meeting.
• Helped to write and present team updates at CIT
  Town Meeting.
• Asked others in unit for input on discussion
  areas to bring feedback to meetings.

• Employee A
• Deliverable Represent Unit on CIT Cross
  Divisional Team
• Result Participated
• Rating 3
• Behaviors
• Attended all meetings
• Shared info about meetings with work group.

16
Making Your Case

• This exercise can help you in a few ways
• Provide good information for supporting your
  ratings to your supervisor.
• Explains the rating to the employee.
• If your employee asks, you can give them examples
  of the types of behaviors/ results that can help
  them to achieve a higher rating next year.

17
Making Your Case

• Cornells expectations for CIT keep changing -
  the bar is continually rising.
• We are expected to do more with less - working
  smarter.
• Likewise, our bar is rising for meeting
  expectations each year.
• Employees who are not making these changes will
  not meet expectations over time.

18
Performance Management All Year

• Good performance management means providing
  feedback all year - so there are no surprises at
  performance evaluation time.
• Feedback should be timely - as close to the event
  as possible is most effective.
• At review time, the only new news should be new
  information you have received through the
  feedback gathering process.

19
Building on Strengths

• The Business Case for a Strengths Based Approach

20
Areas for Development

• Traditionally we have focused on writing areas we
  have seen below expectation performance.
• In cases where an employee has a weakness that
  does or may impact their overall performance, you
  need to point these areas out so the employee can
  be successful.

21
Areas for Development

• When the employee is fully meeting expectations -
  focus development on building strengths. For
  employees with performance issues, focus on
  developing around strengths too.
• Work together to create more opportunities for
  the person to play to their strengths in their
  day to day work, where possible.

22
Identifying Strengths

• Employees are the best at identifying their own
  strengths.
• Strengths are activities that make a person feel
  strong.

23
Identifying Strengths - SIGNs

• S Success. (When you do it, you feel effective)
• I Instinct. (Before you do it, you actively
  look forward to it)
• G Growth. (While doing it, you feel inquisitive
  and focused)
• N Needs. (After youve done it, you feel
  fulfilled and authentic)

24
The Process

• CIT-All request for feedback (Polley sent
  11/11/08).
• SRM Talent Review Meeting.
• Ask employee to fill out self-evaluation (as a
  meeting tool only not permanent file).
• Write the first draft evaluation.
• Review with your manager.
• Set up a mutually convenient discussion time.
• Have the discussion be open and listen to each
  other.
• If no revisions sign if revisions revise and
  sign
• Discuss any job-related development next steps.

25
Employee Self Evaluations

• Another piece of information for the final
  review.
• Remember, you may not have seen everything your
  employee has done all year. This is an
  opportunity to make sure you have the full
  picture.
• Helps you to understand where potential
  misperceptions may exist where you may need to
  find out more information.

26
Writing Evaluations

• Provide explanation of ratings using job
  examples
• Do not use generalizations rather use
  behaviors
• Be careful not to use language that may be
  legally misconstrued
• Be consistent in assigning ratings with overall
  ratings
• Differentiate between employees performance
  levels

27
Ratings Supported with Examples

• This is particularly important when ratings are
  on either of the extreme ends. The more specific
  these examples are the better. The best examples
  include
• Who was involved
• What was expected
• What was accomplished (or not)
• What was the impact (or not)
• How it was accomplished
• Supporting feedback from others

28
Generalizations vs. Behaviors

• Attitude. Joe has a positive attitude. Others
  really enjoy working with him. He always accepts
  new assignments even things that are not
  included on his job description. He is a real
  pleasure to have on my team.
• Joe always demonstrates a positive attitude
  which makes others want to work with him.
  Recently he and a few other members of the team
  were assigned to the office move project which
  was one of many assignments he willing accepted
  this year. He came to every meeting, was willing
  to take and distribute minutes for the rest of
  the team and personally walked around the new
  floor plan to every member of the team to discuss
  their needs in the new space. Not only was he
  integral in creating the new plan, but he really
  helped to convert others from being extremely
  negative about the move to being very supportive
  because of his upbeat nature, and keen listening
  skills. This is just one of several examples I
  could mention.

29
Why Specific Examples are so Critical

• They show employees that you care and notice what
  they are doing
• They help to clearly demonstrate specifics of
  what an employee should continue/discontinue
  doing
• Its hard to argue behaviors vs. judgments
• They protect legally and in government audits

30
Legal Language

• It is very important to avoid language that could
  potentially be used against CIT or a supervisor
  in a lawsuit. A performance evaluation is
  something almost always subpoenaed in a lawsuit.
• Topics to avoid gender, race, religion, marital
  status, kids, disability, illness, age, sexual
  orientation, national origin and/or other
  personal life situations.
• Something like receives too many personal
  calls is ok as a general statement since it
  is a work related policy issue. When in doubt,
  ask HR.

31
Consistent Ratings

• Consistency in ratings means that the narrative
  and ratings should match as well as the final
  overall rating should be supported in the early
  ratings. Inconsistencies can create problems
  both with employee perception and potentially
  legally.
• It is also very important to use the same rating
  standards for people with the same level of
  responsibility for the same reasons as stated
  above.

32
Rating Biases

• Halo Effect
• Recency Effect
• Middle of the Road
• Significant Event(s)
• Favoritism

33
The Meeting

• Ask the employee to start the meeting talking
  about things he/she felt went well and things
  he/she felt could have gone better. Ask how you
  can help.
• Use I feel, I believe rather than you
  language where possible particularly if areas
  are sensitive/conflict laden.
• Listen to the employee and check for
  clarification.
• Agree to disagree be respectful.
• Ask what you can do better.
• Thank the employee.

34
Rebuttals

• Every employee has the right to write a rebuttal
  to the evaluation which will become part of the
  employees permanent file. An employee can
• Provide the rebuttal back to his/her supervisor
  before signing the final evaluation for further
  discussion.
• Send the rebuttal directly to HR for inclusion in
  the file. We do look at all rebuttals.

35
Next Steps

• Final evaluation signed copies made for you,
  the employee and the original is sent to HR for
  the employee file by no later than January 31,
  2008.
• Work with employee to identify areas of strength
  and talk about ways to focus on growing those
  areas.
• If there are areas of concern in an employees
  performance discuss development strategies and
  expectations with the employee.
• If an employees overall rating is 2 or lower,
  you will need to contact HR and create a
  development plan.

36
Development Plans

• Our goal is to very quickly partner with
  employees to get them back on track.
• States the specific areas of concerns
• States expectations
• Possible development strategies outlined
• Follow-up date determined

37
SIP

• Feb/March - CU Compensation sends proposed SIP
  percentage/guidelines
• March/April - CIT determines proposed share
  for each unit - based on of salaries.
• Base SIP is set for all CIT 3s and units
  allocate their share across their people.
• Proposed allocations/budget is submitted to OHR
  Finance in April
• Late May/Early June Board of Trustees review
  budget
• Mid-June communicate SIP Awards
• July 1st SIP increases go into effect