Transcript Performance & Development Review 2014

Performance & Development Review 2013-14
CoSE session for senior academic reviewers
3 June 2014
Aims for Today
To ensure you have the information you need to manage the
P&DR process within Schools and the College, considering:
•
P&DR in the strategic context & application of new 5
performance assessment levels;
•
Setting SMART Objectives aligned to College & School KPIs;
•
Agreeing the 2013/14 P&DR moderation processes within the
College;
•
Sources of support for reviewers and reviewees.
Changes for P&DR 2013-14 cycle (1)
Cycle:
• SMG & CMG reviews conducted May-June 2014
• All other staff reviews conducted July-September 2014
• Next review period 14 months: 1 May 2014 – 30 June 2015
• Future review periods:
• SMG & CMG = 1 May 2015 – 30 April 2016 etc.
• All other = 1 July 2015 – 30 June 2016 etc.
5 Assessment levels:
• Continue with ‘Outstanding’, ‘High Quality’ and ‘Improved
Performance Required’
• Introducing ‘Excellent’ & ‘Inconsistent’ performance (new box 2
& 4)
• Top 10% ‘Outstanding’: applies to all & monitored for Grade 10
Changes for P&DR 2013-14 cycle (2)
Forms:
• R&T 7-10: commercial income & applications moved from R&S
to KE&I section
• RA6/7: enhanced focus on career management & development
• Zero Hours: 2 new forms targeted at Teaching and Support
• Review impact of previous year’s Development activities
• Objectives section now adds ‘Date’ column
Moderation:
• BoR only focus on referred Grade 10 cases
• Schools can release Grade 9 outcomes after CMG moderation
• Grade 10 outcomes released en masse after BoR by Schools
• Gender representation for CMG moderation….?
Resources:
• SMART Objectives booklet
• Online Moodle L&D units wef. 1 July 2014
• Focussed resources for Reviewers and Reviewees
Timetable
May 2014
May - June 2014
Review period 1 May 2013 – 30 April 2014
May – June 2014
Launch of 2013/2014 PDR Cycle
VP/Heads of College and Secretary of Court brief Reviewers within
Colleges and US
P&DR training for Reviewers available
Web-based guidance consulted by Reviewers
P&DR reviews for SMG, HoS, Deans and College Secretary
July – September 2014
P&DR reviews for all other staff; all complete by 30 September
By 17th October 2013
Schools review P&DR outcomes to (i) moderate at Grades 9-10 and
(ii) approve/amend objectives
By 31st October 2014
CMG review P&DR outcomes and moderate at Grades 9 & 10;
Schools inform Grade 9 staff of moderated outcome by 14th October
18th November 2014
Principal’s Board of Review Meeting to review moderated outcomes
of referred cases at Grade 10
Within 10 days of Board of Review meeting
By 28th November 2014
1st October 2014
30th November 2014
Line managers to inform all Grade 10 staff of P&DR outcomes
following Principal’s Board of Review
Grade 10 staff formally notified of P&DR outcomes by Principal
(regarding performance reward as applicable)
R&R round opens for applications
R&R round closes for applications
University KPI focus
The focus for SMG in the forthcoming year will be:
• Achieving our NSS KPI of 90% overall satisfaction in 2014-15
• Achieving student recruitment targets (RUK & O/S)
• Growing our Research Income/FTE and PGR/FTE against
agreed KPIs
• Developing a research, impact and KE strategy for the next
REF cycle.
Specific circumstances
Specific guidance applies to the following circumstances:
•
New starts;
•
Probationers;
•
ECDP cohort;
•
Long term absences;
•
Resignations
Review Meeting
Looking back:
•
Reflect on performance and development outcomes using
feedback as relevant
•
Realistic assessment of performance over the last year,
evaluating (i) objectives completion (ii) wider outputs
•
Recognise excellence, success, non-completion, constraints
and areas for improvement
Looking forward:
•
Enhanced management of expectations and behaviours
•
Review/adjust balance of activities in T/R/A
•
Refresh/amend School/College/University L&M roles
•
Set SMART objectives aligned to School/College/University
strategy & KPIs
•
Identify career/promotion/retirement goals and action plans
•
Identify learning & development needs & support measures
•
Identify Performance Development/Improvement Plan for
Inconsistent or Improved Performance categories
Objectives, Overall Performance & CPD
Objectives:
• Explore extent to which each was achieved and what factors
influenced or constrained delivery
• Explore extent to which objectives were linked to School,
College, University Strategic Plans and KPIs
Overall Performance:
• Explore extent to which excelled, met expectations or
achieved less than expected
• Explore balance of performance against T/R/A in 6
dimensions noted in Form eg. R&S, KE& I, L&T etc.
• Ensure praise given and recognised where merited
• Explore extent to which a Performance Development or
Improvement Plan may be relevant in future
CPD:
• Explore what development activities were undertaken, their
benefits and impact
Research & Scholarship
Outputs:
• Explore extent to which volume and quality of outputs
submitted and published fit School norms/targets
• Identify and agree future publication strategy to attain higher
quality outputs in higher quality journals; set stretching targets
aligned to School norms
Applications & Awards:
• Explore extent to which volume, value and quality of those
submitted and awarded fit School norms
• Identify and agree future income growth strategy; set
stretching targets aligned to School norms
• Explore scope to diversify sources and manage risk
• Explore scope for collaborative work and support to enhance
PGR Supervision:
• Explore as above, to grow volume and quality
• Remains a key target to re-profile University and student
population
Knowledge Exchange & Impact
Impact:
• With REF2020 in mind seek to identify any cases which can be
developed
• Explore what impact may exist or can be generated; identify
nature and extent of impact
• Explore nature and extent of public engagement activities
Grant/Contract Applications & Awards:
• As above for Research
Learning & Teaching
• Explore previous L&T workload, performance and quality in
light of EvaSyS feedback and School NSS scores and targets
• Explore future activities and responsibilities, particularly for
course leadership or curriculum development
• Explore scope to specialise in this track if relevant
• Explore scope to contribute to or lead future PGT or TNE
growth opportunities aligned to School goals/targets
• Explore scope to grow scholarship activities?
Internationalisation
:
All academic staff should have one objective chosen from the following 6 key themes of that strategy:
1. Student Experience: To enhance the student experience at Glasgow by offering a culturally
diverse learning environment that prepares students for global employment and citizenship and an
experience built upon a wide range of world class support services, from point of enquiry to post
graduation.
2. Research and Knowledge Transfer: To grow research and knowledge transfer business
internationally to achieve a position in the world’s top 50 research leading universities.
3. Staff: To support effective engagement of staff with the goals of internationalisation and promote a
culturally diverse community.
4. Alumni: To enhance engagement with the University’s international alumni in support of the
University’s strategic objectives.
5. Partnerships: To increase partnership working on a sustainable and mutually beneficial basis.
6. Local Engagement: To work with the city and the West of Scotland region to support social,
cultural and economic development through the international profile and reach of the University.
Leadership & Management and Esteem
Leadership & Management:
• Explore previous L&M activities, performance and quality in
1. support of specialism, School, College and/or University
2. spheres of research, KE or L&T
3. internally and externally
4. nationally and internationally
• Explore future activities and responsibilities for 4 dimensions
above, particularly re: alignment to School and individual goals
as well as balance/distribution of activities
• Explore opportunities to facilitate future promotion or zone
movement goals
Esteem:
• Explore means to diversify and strengthen portfolio of indicators
• Explore what both individual and School/College can do to
enhance them
• Develop an action plan to realise ambitions
SRF: Objectives & Future Development
Future Objectives:
• Identify and agree relevant range of objectives, using
individual’s version as starting point
• Ensure they are SMART
• Maximum 6 objectives
• Ensure aligned to School Plans, KPIs and individual’s goals
• ‘Outstanding’ assessments require challenging objectives
Future Development:
• Explore needs and identify plans, using individual’s version as
starting point
• Explore what both individual and School/College can do to
support them
• Develop an action plan to realise both development and
career ambitions
• Use Promotion Criteria and Zoning Criteria to inform plans
• Explore long term planning, including retirement ambitions
SRF: Overview & Previous Development
Performance Overview:
• Evaluate overall performance in context of:
• extent Objectives achieved and quality of wider
performance in rest of Self-Assessment Form
• Job Description & Job Family Role Profiles
• Promotion or Zoning Criteria and actual Zone Profile
• School KPIs and performance norms/targets
• 5 Performance Assessment levels wording
• ‘Outstanding’ for Top 10% for all & monitored for Grade 10
• Performance Development and Improvement Plans
required for box 4 & 5 respectively
Previous Development:
• Explore and identify activities and ambitions
• Quantify extent of benefit and impact for individual and School
SRF: Performance Assessment Levels (1)
Outstanding (Top 10%):
Performance consistently and substantially exceeds
expectations through outstanding achievements in significant
areas of responsibility. Overall performance in the role is
exceptional and performed at a distinctly superior level of
quality, making a significant contribution to the team, unit and/or
University. Objectives are delivered to an exceptional standard.
Excellent:
Performance exceeds expectations in most aspects of the role
and consistently meets expectations in all other essential areas
of responsibility. Overall performance in the role is consistently of
an excellent quality and exceeds requirements on a regular
basis. Key objectives are delivered to a high standard.
High Quality:
Performance consistently meets expectations in essential areas
of responsibility. Overall performance in the role and key
objectives are consistently delivered to the required standard.
SRF: Performance Assessment Levels (2)
High Quality:
Performance consistently meets expectations in essential areas
of responsibility. Overall performance in the role and key objectives
are consistently delivered to the required standard.
Inconsistent:
Performance is inconsistent and a clear Performance
Development Plan is required. Expectations are met in some, but
not all, essential areas of responsibility and further development
is required. Overall performance in the role is variable and some
key objectives may not have been delivered to the required
standard.
Improved Performance Required:
Performance does not meet expectations and significant
performance improvement is required. Overall performance in the
role is of an unacceptable quality and key objectives have not
have been delivered to the required standard. A Performance
Improvement Plan to support and improve the level of performance
is required.
Moderation (1)
For grades 1 to 8 staff there is no moderation, however…..
• Statistical Analysis and Random Sampling by College HR Team to
determine level of consistency and quality of P&DR process and
assessment of performance levels.
• Statistical analysis evaluates OPA distributions by School in
comparison to College overall, for all grades, grouped grades and
gender
• College level Random Sampling of 10 forms for grades 1-5 and 10
forms each from grades 6, 7, 8
• Sampling explores: if objectives SMART, Self-Assessment Form and
Summary Review Form aligned, assessment merits OPA awarded
• Report to CMG in November 2014 and Principal’s Board of Review
on18thNovember2014.
Moderation (2)
For grade 9 and 10 staff there is Moderation at School level prior to
CMG Moderation.
• School Moderation Panel = HoS + senior School reviewers.
• Assess (i)
(ii)
(iii)
Provisional Performance Assessment levels
Objectives = SMART & appropriate role/grade
Highlight to CMG cases on ‘boundary’ of
Assessment levels.
• Thereafter College moderation will take place to ensure consistency
across College and among Schools. Moderation involves Head of
College, Heads of School, College Head of HR, College Deans,
functional Vice-Principal Internationalisation and Director/Deputy
Director of HR
• CMG assess all Grade 10 and highlighted Grade 9 cases; all forms
available to CMG for review and comment
• Board of Review only assess referred Grade 10 cases requiring
decisions on OPA awarded
Reference Material
•
•
•
•
•
P&DR Forms, Process & Reference Guide
Academic & Support staff Promotion Criteria
Professorial Zoning Descriptors
Job Family Role Profiles
University/College/School Strategic Plans
http://www.gla.ac.uk/services/humanresources/staff/all/pay/pdr/
http://www.gla.ac.uk/services/humanresources/staff/all/pay/promotion/
http://www.gla.ac.uk/services/humanresources/staff/all/pay/promotion/profz
onemovement/
http://www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_166899_en.pdf
http://www.gla.ac.uk/colleges/scienceengineering/information/staff/strategy/
Additional support from Staff Development Service
For Reviewers (90 mins)
Giving Constructive Feedback (Date TBC)
For Reviewees (90 mins)
Receiving Constructive Feedback (Date TBC)
For all staff (60-90 mins)
• Introduction to P&DR Process: R&T 17 June; Support 26 June
• Setting SMART Objectives: R&T 25 June; Support 18 June
• Development Planning: R&T 25 June; Support 18 June
SDS P&DR pages:
http://www.gla.ac.uk:443/services/humanresources/staffdevelopm
ent/training/programme.php?groupname=Performance%20%26%
20Development%20Review%20(P%26DR)
Questions for CMG
School Moderation:
• Continue as last year or have School A moderate School B?
• Schools moderate Objectives quality & extent SMART or
College HR assess?
CMG Gender Representation:
• Supplement as last year or rely on CMG composition and
HoS substitution solely to achieve?
Performance Assessment:
• Notify provisional outcomes for Grades 9 & 10 in Review
meeting or continue to do so only after School moderation?
• Interpretation of Assessment levels….?