1. Performance and Development Review for Reviewees Riham Moawad Human Resources & Andy Wilson Loughborough University

2. Purposes of this session To confirm our understanding of the purposes and procedures of the scheme To identify how to get the most out of the process as a reviewee.

3. Structure of this session Review purposes Confirm procedures Discuss your approach Questions and comments at any time Slides with a green corner disc… …are identical to those for the reviewers.

4. Purposes of the scheme To identify an individual’s level of performance To develop ways of improving that performance To inform reward mechanisms To model a style of management NB “…should not be used to address systemic poor performance…”.

5. Style of management? Management is here to help both individuals and the University Not soft, but a consultative, listening style which, in return, expects improvements in individual and collective performance Not a slavish replication of UK approaches – learn from UK mistakes! A creative combination of the Egyptian and the British.

6. Responsibilities in the scheme Dean determines reviewers with HoDs Dean ensures faculty-level staff development needs are met HoD makes sure that PDRs happen and that subsequent departmental support is provided Staff Development Co-ordinators plus HR address institutional SD needs Reviewers/reviewees have core role.

7. Reviews and reviewers Reviews at least annually Reviewer normally HoD, but… …maximum of 10 reviewees “The function of the reviewer will be to provide clear and constructive feedback, and to help guide the meeting towards a realistic plan of action.”

8. Stages in the scheme Preparation Paperwork from reviewee Both parties review evidence Meeting Assessment Future plans Career and promotion Follow-up Note agreed (ideally) and signed Agreement on addressing development needs Needs across and beyond department shared Actions!

9. Performance levels Outstanding - exceptional/excellent performance Very Good - above average performance in most areas Competent - adequate/acceptable performance Partially Satisfactory - improvement essential in some areas Unsatisfactory - below average performance in most/all areas

10. Time Plan See separate sheet.

11. Questions about the scheme?

12. Reviewers’ skills Encouraging change (telling or helping?) Giving constructive feedback Helping guide the meeting Producing a realistic plan of action Remember, this is not about systemic poor performance! What’s going well? What could go better?

13. Encouraging change Telling Giving one-way feedback Criticising performance Making unilateral judgments Imposing advice Helping Explaining context Aiding reflection Identifying weaknesses Agreeing goals Discussing options Getting commitment Supporting action. A monologue, or a conversation?

14. Which would motivate you? If you were considering changes to your working practices… …which approach – telling or helping – would motivate you more?

15. Realistic plan of action Help the reviewee confront reality Review the options Get their buy-in to their goals Produce SMART actions Specific Measurable Attainable Realistic Timed.

16. What could help you? Use the checklist Be clear about your strengths Consider your weaknesses Identify evidence Evaluate your level of performance Go into the discussion… …knowing what you want to get out of it …prepared to hear feedback …prepared to offer suggestions Don’t whinge!

17. Preparation Talk to a colleague or two about how you can get the most out of your PDR.

18. Any Questions or Comments?

19. Reflections What are you going to make a point of remembering to do in your reviews?