Transcript Slide 1

Union, principally financed by the EU.
A joint initiative of the OECD and the European
Civil Service Performance Assessment
in Lithuania: Current Situations
and Reform Challenges
Osvaldas Šarmavičius
Director of the Civil Service Department
under the Ministry of the Interior
Vilnius, 23-24 May 2006
© OECD
Performance Management System
Establishing training
needs
Salary planning and
incentives
Strategic
goals
Objectives/
Priorities
Planning,
implementation,
monitoring and results
Assessment of
civil servants
Performance
audit
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT STAGES
Career planning
and development
Performance Assessment Components
Assessment process legally regulated;
Assessment goals set;
Scale of assessment indicators developed;
Competencies to be assessed established;
Assessment interviews ensuring feedback between
the immediate superior and the civil servant
regulated;
Training needs identified.
Development of Assessment

1995 – Stage I

1999 – Stage II

2002 – Stage III
Development of Assessment: Stage I
 In 1995 the Law on Civil Service regulated certification of
Level B civil servants. In fact assessment was started in 1997
when the Government approved the certification regulations.
 Assessment goals: to improve work quality and effectiveness of
civil servants; to enhance motivation of civil servants to
perform their official duties; to provide an opportunity for
managers to make more effective decisions.
 In line with recommendations of the Certification Commission
the public manager could: 1) change (reduce or increase) the
amount of official salary of the civil servant, 2) promote or
reduce them in their position or 3) dismiss them.
Development of Assessment: Stage II

After in 1999 the Parliament adopted the Law on
Public Service, new provisions concerning
assessment of civil servants came into force.

The assessment system did not come into force
for the following reasons:
•
•
•
No bylaws were adopted;
Many contradictions within the Law;
Inefficient system was designed.
Development of Assessment: Stage III
 After in 2002 the Parliament adopted a new wording
of the Law on Public Service, the assessment
procedure for official performance of civil servants
was actually implemented.
 System benefits:
•
•
•
•
equal classification;
simple assessment scale and flexible measures of influence;
heads of institutions responsible for the system functioning;
role of assessment commissions of civil servants well
defined.
Principles of Assessment Procedure (1)

Heads of institutions, career civil servants and acting
civil servants are assessed.

3-level assessment scale – very good, good or
unsatisfactory.

Where assessment is very good or unsatisfactory, it is
subject to approval by the assessment commission.
Principles of Assessment Procedure (2)




Having approved the assessment “very good”, the commission may
suggest to the head of the institution granting a qualification class to the
civil servant, promoting them or both promoting and granting them a
qualification class;
Having approved the assessment “unsatisfactory”, the commission may
suggest to the head of the institution improving the qualification of the
civil servant or assigning a lower qualification class to the civil servant, or
reducing the civil servant to a lower position;
Where the civil servant is assessed as unsatisfactory two successive times,
they may be dismissed.
Where the official performance of the civil servant is assessed as good for
two successive years and the civil servant disagrees with such assessment,
they may appeal to the commission and request assessment;
Principles of Assessment Procedure (3)

During an extraordinary assessment where the
civil servant is evaluated as unsatisfactory, the
same measures shall apply thereto as during the
annual assessment.

During an extraordinary assessment, having
approved the suggestion of the immediate
superior, the evaluation commission may propose
granting a qualification class to the civil servant or
promoting them.
Civil Servants Assessed by Commissions
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
Total civil servants
Assessed b y
com m issions
2004
20740
3022
2005
22259
5335
Civil Servants Assessed as Very Good and
Unsatisfactory
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
2004
2005
Total civil servants
20740
22259
Assessed as very good
2991
5278
28
57
Assessed as unsatisfactory
Measures Suggested
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Prom otion
Qualification class
2004
500
877
2005
682
1760
Distribution of Qualification Classes
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Valstybės tarnautojų skaičius
Qualification
class I
Qualification
class II
Qualification
class III
351
1691
5454
Current System Evaluation
76%
80%
70%
60%
50%
24%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Partially satisfactory but to
be improved
Satisfactory
Drawbacks of the Evaluation System
 Job descriptions do not meet the needs of the
assessment process.
 Position assessment criteria are not systemised.
 Too narrow and insufficiently defined
assessment scale.
 Assessment criteria not specified.
Problems of the System




Assessment is often associated with financial
capacities of the institution and not with real
assessment of civil service performance.
The new procedure of assessment of newly recruited
civil servants and civil servants having restored to
status and moved to another position in another unit or
moved out of official necessity is not defined.
The coherence of granting qualification classes is not
established.
The procedure of cancelling qualification classes
when promoting or reducing them is not clear.
Necessary Changes. What Is
Suggested?





Different assessment goals and different assessment criteria are set
for career civil servants and public managers. Through different
assessment goals and criteria the specific contribution of civil
servants will be associated with strategic goals of the institution.
The coherence of granting qualification classes is regulated.
The assessment procedure period is corrected: the suggestion is to
perform assessment for the previous calendar year at the beginning
of the following calendar year.
Concepts unified: assessment of official performance of the civil
servant and of the civil servant are suggested to be replaced by the
single concept of “assessment of the civil servant”.
The assessment scale is specified and supplemented with an
additional value “satisfactory”.
Assessment Scale
Assessment “very good” – activities in excess of
requirements;
 Assessment “good” – activities in line with
requirements;
 Assessment “satisfactory” – activities not fully in
line with requirements, certain gaps in skills are
identified;
 Assessment “unsatisfactory” – unacceptable
activities, significant gaps in skills are identified.

Public Manager Assessment Criteria





Managerial competencies/skills to organise the
activities of the institution and task formulation;
Strategic thinking/planning and result assurance;
Abilities to manage human resources/number of staff,
experience;
Abilities to manage financial resources/budget
volume, effectiveness;
Communication skills/impact and influence.
New Assessment Algorithm (1)
Possible measures following the assessment of the public
manager and the career civil servant as very good:






grant Class III to the public manager or the career civil servant;
consistently grant a higher class to the public manager or the career civil
servant;
promote the career civil servant (in the same institution);
promote the career civil servant and grant them a class;
leave the same (top) class for the career civil servant where this public
or municipal institution does not have a possibility to offer a higher
career civil servant position and grant them a lump-sum monetary
benefit;
leave the same (top) class for the public manager and grant them a
lump-sum monetary benefit.
New Assessment Algorithm (2)

Possible measures following assessment of the civil
servant as satisfactory:

Consistently grant a lower qualification class or
cancel Qualification Class III granted and improve
qualification.

Where no qualification class is held, the civil servant
is offered to improve their qualification.
New Assessment Algorithm (3)
Possible measures following assessment of the civil
servant as unsatisfactory:




cancel the class held by the public manager or the career
civil servant and improve their qualification;
reduce the career civil servant to a lower position of the
career civil servant;
reduce the career civil servant to a lower position of the
career civil servant and improve their qualification;
dismiss the civil servant from their position where they are
assessed as unsatisfactory two times in a row.
Assessment Algorithm for Acting Civil
Servants (4)

After the acting civil servant is assessed as very
good, the suggestion is to grant them Qualification
Class III or pay them a lump-sum benefit where
they already hold Qualification Class III.

Where the assessment is unsatisfactory, the
suggestion is to dismiss the acting civil servant
from their position.
Other Suggestions

Where the civil servant is assessed by the assessment
commission at their own request, the assessment commission
may not assess the civil servant lower than they have been
assessed by their immediate superior.
 After the person recruiting the civil servant makes a motivated
decision not to implement the recommendation of the
assessment commission, the legal status of the civil servant held
thereby before the assessment remains unchanged.
 Extraordinary assessments are suggested to be performed no
more frequently than once per calendar year and no earlier than
in 6 months following the recruitment or transfer to another
position of the civil servant.
Future Projects
Q4 2006 – amendments to the Law on Public
Service;
 In 6 months following amendments to the LPS –
draft amendment to the Procedure for Assessment
of Civil Servants;
 Q4 2006 – draft amendment to the Methodology
for Job Description and Assessment of Civil
Servants;
 2007 – necessary methodological materials for
assessors and the assessed and broad training for
immediate superiors.

Directions for Improving the Position Assessment
Methodology

To define the position assessment criteria more
clearly;

To actualise purposes of positions given changes
in the strategic goals of the institution;

To unify special requirements to/competencies of
positions.
Assessment Criteria for Managerial Positions





Personnel management;
Responsibility;
Ability to make decisions;
Ability to have impact and influence;
Professional competence.
Assessment Criteria for Specialist Positions






Professional competence;
Legal competence;
Ability to plan and organise;
Ability to communicate with customers and
colleagues;
Foreign language skills;
IT skills.
Prospective Reforms

To reform the system for setting salaries and
categories.

To revise the concept of qualification classes and
adapt it to the career promotion system without
linking it with additional remuneration.
THANK YOU.
LET US HAVE A
DISCUSSION.