Civil Service Performance Appraisal in Portugal:

1

• Civil Service Performance Appraisal in Portugal
• General framework and the specific experience
  with parliamentary staff
• Isabel Corte-Real, Vilnius 24 May 2006

2
SIADAPStructure 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)

3
SIADAPWhy 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

4
SIADAPGeneral 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

5
SIADAPRequires

• 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)

6
SIADAPMain features

• Applicable to the Civil Service as a whole
• Main components
• Objectives
• Competences
• Personal Attitudes

7
SIADAP Objectives

• 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

8
SIADAPCompetences

• 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

9
Personal Attitude

• Evaluates how the job was performed, including
  aspects as effort, interest and motivation

10
Rating 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

11
Final appraisalresults from the weighted
average of each component according to the
following 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
12
SIADAPQuotas ( forced distribution)

• Very good No more than 20 of the staff
• Excellent No more than 5 of the staff

13
Forms

• Forms are legally pre-defined for the all
  civil service

14
Who interferes in the appraisal system

• Superiors( appraisers)
• Performance appraisal coordination committee
  (P.A.C.C.)
• Director General ( top manager) of each service

15
Appraisers( immediate superiors) assignments

• Set up objectives and conduct appraisals

16
Performance appraisal coordination
committee(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

17
Appraisal processPhases

• 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

18
Managers( intermediate level) appraisals

• Objectives are weighted 75
• Competences are weighted25
• No forced distribution is established

19
SIADAPTransparency

• 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

20
SIADAP- Strengths and weaknesses

• 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)

21
Appraisal systems are 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

22
Appraisal systems are useful

• 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

23
Key points for a successful appraisal scheme
British 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)

24
Specific experience with parliamentary
staffParliaments 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

25
Other parliaments experiences

• 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)

26
SIADARNew 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)

27
SIADAR Features

• 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

28
SIADAR grading(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

29
FormsSummary

1. Job description missions objectives to meet
2. Difficulties encountered by the appraised
3. Results achieved against objectives
4. 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

30
SIADARFirst 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

31
Performance ManagementThe 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