Transcript PERFORMANCE – ORIENTED PAYMENT IN PUBLIC SERVICE Kerstin Georg,

PERFORMANCE – ORIENTED
PAYMENT IN PUBLIC SERVICE
Kerstin Georg,
University of Applied Administrative Studies of North-Rhine-Westphalia
Would you try to work more faster, harder, better for
more money?
Regulatory framework
The TVÖD –
the collective
bargaining
law of civil
service



•
•
•
•
Since 2007 government agencies have to implement and use the
instrument of perfomance-based payment.
It applies to all public employees but not for public
servants.
So far public employees and public servants were
payed only according to
their age
their family status
number of their children
Length of service and the function in their job
But now it seems like a new age has
begun…
Practical implementation
•
•
•
What is performance?
What do we need performance-oriented
payment for?
How can you make performace
measureable?
What assets and drawbacks do we have to
face?
•
Concrete example: Pilot project within the City council of
the City of Cologne…
The City Council of the City of Cologne




Cologne is the 4th biggest city of Germany
The City Council of Cologne engages
employees (4.300 public servants)
15.300
At least 1 Million customers (the inhabitants of Cologne)
2007 Pilot Project to implement the performance-oriented
payment with a budget of 2,8 Million €
Performance-oriented payment within
the Cologne City Council
Performance is the achievement of objectives and the
compliance of defined requirements and assignments.




Expectations on performace-oriented payment:
Improvement of the official attendance
Enhancement of the motivation of the
employees
Getting a new management tool
Management by objetives







Management tool - based on voluntary agreements
between manager and their employees
SMART- Conditions for voluntary agreements
Specific
Measureable
Abitious
Realistic
Terminated
Examples for Management by objectives
Advancement of profitability
-Increase of cost recovery by x %
Advancement of effectiveness and efficiency
-Decrease of non-conformity by x %, Shortening of the processingtime by x%
Advancement of the service quality
- Decrease of affliction by x %
Systematic performance evaluation

Establishment agreements define evaluation criterias,
which have to be:
measurable
verifiable
transparent
understandable for every employee

Difference to Management by objectives:




Employees have no voice
Example for systematic performance
evaluation criterias
Categories
Example
Quality of work
Correctness
Quantity of work
Amount of work
Attitude/ Teamwork
Ability to work in team
Management
Delegation
Profitability
Economical handling with
material
Flexibility
Initiative
Chances of perfomance-oriented
payment in public service

Equitable incentive pay

Advancement of a cooperative leadership

Problems get earlier to the fore

Positive effects on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation factors

Increased personal responsibility of the employees

Consolidation of leadership skills

Transparent assessment criteria

Performance improvement by the employees
Risks of perfomance oriented payment in
public service

Problems with the measurability of performace

Increase of the expenditure of time for planning and matching the
work cycle

Political decissions can affect the agreement of objectives negatively

Increase of bureaucracy and administration effort

Additional expenses for employee trainings and information
Thank you for your attention…..