Transcript THE CSC PMS-OPES MODEL

A look at the prescribed standard that guides the
development of the TESDA PEG Performance
Management System
“What is not measured,
cannot be managed.”
Securing a
Unified
ROPOTI
CO
COHERENCE
• Policy Development/
formulation/review
HARMONY
• Policy/Program
implementation
development/review
CADENCE
• Programming
• Performance
Setting/Evaluation
• Driver of Excellence
(ISO 9001:2000)
Purposive
TESDA
community
advocacy
ICTenabled
core TESD
processes
• Geo strategic
planning
•
Common
understanding/harmonizing
of goals
•
Converting strategic policies/
plans to action
•
Problem solving
• Area Management
•
Innovating/benchmarking/
modeling/sharing
• Corporate Excellence
•
Regular reporting/feed backing
evaluating
•
Co-creating values
CSC PMSOPES
Model
installed &
enforced
• Field coordination
-
TDI- SDP
linked with
OD
“Making
Plan
Do
Check
Act
a daily
habit “
Response to
Gaps in
Excellence thru
TechnologyEnabled
Service
Delivery and
Accountability
Medium Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP)
Agency Strategic Plan
Organizational Performance Indicators Framework
(OPIF)
Agency Performance Management System (PMS)
Career Executive Service Performance Evaluation System (CESPES)
Office Performance Evaluation System (OPES)
Performance Evaluation System (PES)
CSC – Performance Management System
Introduction of OFFICE Performance
Evaluation System
OPES
Career Executive Service – Performance
Evaluation System (CESPES)
Office Performance Evaluation System
for Units and Division Chiefs
Performance Evaluation System (PES)
for Individual Staff
CSC – Performance Management System
Why measure office performance?



Directly translates the agency’s strategic
direction into more specific and
measurable objectives
Serves as mechanism for better alignment
of individual objectives to agency
objectives
Enhances objectivity of individual
performance evaluations
CSC – Performance Management System
OPES Features





Measures the collective performance of an
office
Focuses on outputs
Uses a standard unit of measure
Allows comparison of performance across
offices or function
Applies to smallest output-producing units,
i.e., divisions or sections
CSC – Performance Management System
OPES Features

Standard unit of measure through a point
system
◦ Each output is assigned a number of points
◦ Points are based on the length of time it takes
one person to produce the output
◦ Points are exclusive of rank/position
CSC – Performance Management System
OPES Reference Table



A list of the major final outputs of an office
given its functions
Indicates corresponding points that an
output would earn when completed
Defines the standards that must be met for
completed outputs to earn points
CSC – Performance Management System
Sample
OPES Reference Table
FUNCTION
Project
Proposal
Preparation
OUTPUT
PERFORMANCE
INDICATOR
OPERATIONAL
DEFINITION
POINTS
Project
Overview
Number of
Project
Overviews
8
Project
Proposal
Number of
Project
Proposals
25
Paper defining the need,
problem or opportunity to
be addressed by the
project, project goals and
objectives, preliminary
resources, assumptions
and risks. Must be
approved by the Head of
Office.
Proposal includes Work
Breakdown Structure,
Project Network, and
Critical Path. Must be
approved by the
Commission.
CSC – Performance Management System
OPES as the critical link
in the PMS Cycle
PMS
CSC – Performance Management System
Determining Outputs
Every office has a mix of quantifiable and
non-quantifiable outputs:


QUANTIFIABLE outputs refer to measurable
results
NON-QUANTIFIABLE outputs refer to everything
that consumes time but output of which is not
measurable e.g., meetings, office
programs/ceremonies, filing, phone calls, and
other support functions
CSC – Performance Management System
Determining the Percentage of
Non-quantifiable Activities




Proportion of quantifiable and non-quantifiable hours is
determined by the agency
Considerations in determining this proportion:
◦ Overall proportion of support staff to technical staff
◦ Hours spent on non-quantifiable activities typical to the
agency
◦ Nature of agency work
Quantifiable hours could be more than 50%, e.g., if office
has fairly routine or automated processes and therefore
higher productivity and volume of output is expected
Non-quantifiable hours should not be more than 50%!
CSC – Performance Management System
Total Target Points



Each unit computes its annual target points by
multiplying the annual target points by the
number of personnel.
The number of personnel in an office/division
determines the collective target output of that
division/office for the year.
Similar outputs earn the same points, regardless
of division, area of expertise and geographical
location. This shall provide performance
standards.
CSC – Performance Management System
Total Target Points: CSC-CO
Less
Less
Less
X
LESS
365 Days in a year
104
Saturdays and Sundays
10
Legal Holidays
8
Mandatory and Special Leave
-------243
working days in a year
8
hours in a day
-------1944
working hours in a year
50% estimated non-quantifiable outputs
=====
972 points x no. of staff = Total Target Points for
Central Office
CSC – Performance Management System
Total Target Points: CSC-RO
Less
Less
Less
X
365 Days in a year
104
Saturdays and Sundays
10
Legal Holidays
8
Mandatory and Special Leave
-------243
working days in a year
8
hours in a day
-------1944
working hours in a year
1360.8 points x no. of staff = Total
Target Points for Regional Offices
CSC – Performance Management System
Considerations

Organizational Performance Indicators
Framework (OPIF)
◦ Spells out agency commitments in terms of major
final outputs (MFO)
◦ Total Target Points in OPES should be consistent
with committed MFOs
CSC – Performance Management System
Work and Financial Plan Form
KRA
KPI
Output
OPES
Pts
Target
Qty
Pts
Budget
CSC – Performance Management System
Deadline
Staff
Resp.
Using OPES Table
in Evaluation
Outputs
OPES-based Office Work Plan
Points
Required Number
Total
Manual
120
10
1200
Training
40
150
6000
Post Training Report
16
150
2400
120
1
120
Annual Training Report
Total Target Points
Outputs
Actual Office Performance
Points
Actual Number
completed
Total
Manual
120
8
960
Training
40
175
7000
Post Training Report
16
175
2800
120
1
120
Annual Training Report
Actual Points
Delivered
10880
CSC – Performance Management System
9720
Target
exceeded!
Using OPES Table
in Evaluation

Compare performance across offices
◦ Sample
Office
Number of
Employees
Total Target
Points
Actual Points
Delivered
%
A
10
9,720
10,453
108%
B
16
15,552
20,478
132%
C
200
194,400
211,284
109%
D
96
93,312
86,794
93%
CSC – Performance Management System
Most
productive
Least
productive
The CSC PMSOPES model
is a practical
translation of
a good
performance
management
system. As
such, its
OPES pointscoring
feature is
adopted in
the TESDA
PEG PMS
PEG KPIs
(what we intend
to track &
monitor based
on OPESanchored WFP)
COROPOTI
Decision-Maker
(makes change
needed to bring
performance
attuned to goal or
standard set)
MoNet -Based
Scorecard
(measures &
displays real-time
COROPOTI
performance in
terms of PEG KPIs)
Goal/Standard
(desired &
defined in the
PEG guideline).
TESDA Employee (s)
(compares actual
performance with goal or
standard; if difference
warrants action, reports
to responsible decisionmaker).