Performance Rating Distribution Guidelines Leader’s Guide to Performance Calibration Sessions Expectations Session Steps Guidelines Timeframes Educate Calibrate Communicate Key Contributor Results and performance are outstanding. 0 -10% Quality Plus Contributor Results and performance regularly exceed expectations. 15-20% Quality Contributor Results meet, and sometimes exceed expectations. Performance is skilled and dependable. 60-70% Unsatisfactory Results and performance in certain areas are 0 -5% Contribution unsatisfactory and require immediate improvement Documentation of a Performance Improvement Plan is required. Not Rated Employee not in position long enough for rating evaluation It is expected that the combined total of KC and QPC will not exceed 25%. A Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) is required to be implemented for employees with a "UC" rating. A rating of "NR" should only be used when an employee has been in their job for less than 6 months, and the manager does not feel there has been sufficient time in that new job to accurately assess their performance. If the employee only changed organizations, but kept the same job code, they are entitled to a performance rating based on consultation of their managers during the previous year. "NR" ratings are included in the denominator (total number of ratings) for purposes of calculating overall distribution of ratings between the categories. To determine alignment with the guidelines, add the "NR" ratings to the "QC" ratings and compare to the guideline of 60-70% Every organization will hold a calibration session to identify performance differentiators by level and finalize performance ratings. The Corporate Standard is...  Cumulative Guidelines  Ensure input from all applicable managers. Keep discussions focused on performance standards and behaviors. Honor the differentiators and ratings the managers agree to. Facilitators will... Performance Rating Timeframes * December 13, 2005 Year 2005 Self Appraisals completed by directors and above December 31, 2005 Year 2005 Self Appraisals completed by all employees February 3, 2006 2005 Annual Appraisal forms and discussions completed for all directors and above February 14, 2006 2005 Annual Appraisal forms and discussions completed for all employees * Tips, tools, forms and a complete calendar of all Performance Management components can be found at pdc > Hot Links > Performance Management Toolkit Produce ratings that... Are fair and accurate. Meet distribution requirements within the curve for groups of 75 or more. Identify high performers for compensation differentiation. Identify unsatisfactory performance to ensure appropriate action. Calibration Sessions will...

The CALIBRATION SESSION Before the Session Review Performance Ratings: Educate, Calibrate, Communicate in the PDC. Plan for 2-4 hours, depending on your group’s size. Schedule the session with managers of the employees being calibrated. (For example, a Director would facilitate a meeting among his/her C-B band managers to discuss standards and ratings for A and B band employees.) Distribute Participant Prep Sheet in advance of the session. The CALIBRATION SESSION 1 3 Managers should share their preliminary ratings of their employees so participants can see the initial distribution for their organization. One way to do this is: Display 4columns on the board and label them Key Contributor to UC. Write each employee's name on a single Post-it note. Instruct managers to place the Post-it notes of their employees in the column that matches their preliminary performance rating Review the purpose of the session. See Standards (front of this guide.) Review the role of the facilitator: summarize, ensure all voices are heard, ask prompting questions, direct the meeting as appropriate, keep time, manage disagreements. Review the role of the participant. See Participant Prep Sheet. State Your Expectations Review Preliminary Ratings 2 Discuss the behaviors that are expected and those that differentiate high performance. Reference the competency model. What behaviors have been important to your organization this year? What behaviors are expected vs. behaviors that exceed expectations? What other behaviors should you consider? Make level to level comparisons. Regardless of the specific job function, jobs at the same level have equivalent weight and scope of responsibilities. Document and post all standards the group agrees to. 4 CALIBRATE AGAINST... PEERS. Look at each category, discuss employees who seemed misplaced (not grouped with like performers.) HIGH PERFORMANCE DIFFERENTIATORS AND STANDARDS. Do top performers align with agreed-upon differentiators in Step 2? Do low performers fall short of the standards? DISTRIBUTION GUIDELINES. * If more than 25% of the employees are placed above Quality Contributor, can you justify the variance or do you need to revisit the differentiators used for high performers? * If less than 5% are below Quality Contributor, do you need to revisit the standards used for low performers? Agree on placement of individuals in performance categories. Agree on Performance Differentiators Calibrate Ratings After the Session Distribute high performance differentiators to managers. Managers should use this information: When communicating performance ratings to their employees To communicate a consistent message about the behaviors that differentiate high performers.