Performance Management System Performance Management System Establishing training needs Career planning and development Objectives/ Priorities Planning, implementation, monitoring and results Assessment of civil servants Salary planning and incentives Performance audit Strategic goals PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT STAGES
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. Performance Assessment Components
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
Civil Servants Assessed as Very Good and Unsatisfactory
Distribution of Qualification Classes
Current System Evaluation
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 Q – 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; Q – 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.