Perf Appraisal Presentation

1
UMW Administrative and Professional Faculty
Performance Appraisal System Evaluation Year
2008-09
Presented to Administrative/Professional
Faculty Performance Appraisal Project Task
Force April 28, 2008
2
Agenda

• Task Force Members
• Charge
• Underlying Assumptions
• Approach
• Outcomes
• A Process View of the System
• Rating Schemes
• Aligning Appraisal, Compensation, and Recognition
• Next Steps

3
Task Force Members

• Matt Mejia
• Admissions
• Rick Pearce
• Business and Finance
• Cedric Rucker
• Student Affairs
• JoAnn Schrass
• College of Arts Sciences
• Nina Thompson
• University Advancement
• Consultants
• Larry Penwell
• Mark Safferstone

• Ranny Corbin
• University Relations/Communications
• Chip German
• Information Technologies/Libraries
• Debra Harber
• Financial Aid
• Ed Hegmann
• Athletics
• Sabrina Johnson
• Human Resources
• Jeanie Kline
• College of Graduate
• Professional Studies

4
Charge

• Examine the existing Administrative and
  Professional Faculty performance appraisal
  process and develop proposals to revise this
  process.

5
Underlying Assumptions

• Dissatisfaction with the implementation of the
  current system
• Lack of a developmental focus
• Differences between administrative and
  professional faculty
• Potential use of a 360 approach
• Demoralizing effect of performance appraisal
  linked to merit pay

6
ApproachJanuary March

• Held a kick-off meeting to understand the task
• Solicited input from colleagues across the
  University
• Researched performance appraisal practices at
  other institutions
• Reviewed best practices related to conducting
  performance appraisals in academic settings
• Created a blog to provide information and solicit
  input for UMW community http//umw-apfe.blogspot
  .com/
• Held a subsequent task force meeting to compile
  the results of our efforts and to plan the
  off-site retreat
• Participated in a multi-rater leadership
  assessment
• Met off-site to review the leadership assessment
  process, compile our findings, refine our
  thinking, design the system, and address
  pertinent issues
• Developed and tested appraisal forms

7
ApproachMarch June

• Presented project briefing to the CORE Group for
  concept feedback and approval
• Hold forums with administrative and professional
  faculty to obtain feedback
• Obtain CORE Group final approval
• Finalize forms, develop guidelines, and conduct
  training in anticipation of a July 1, 2008,
  implementation date

8
Outcomes

• A new approach to performance appraisal that
  includes
• Supervisors rating of
• Managing people for individual and institutional
  success
• Overall performance
• Individual performance results and process
• A self-evaluation component
• A 360 assessment of work unit performance
• Integration with UMW Careers
• Management tools and resources
• Awareness of SACS Quality Enhancement Plan
  requirement

9
Outcomes(Continued)

• A performance appraisal framework that is based
  on
• An individual position description and work plan
  that delineates
• Up to three mission critical responsibilities
• Related recurring duties
• Unique projects or tasks
• Mid-year professional growth and development
  discussions
• A departmental work plan linked to the UMW
  mission and strategic plan

?
10
A Process View of the System
UMWs Mission and Strategic Plan
July 2008
Mid-Year
June 2009
Departmental Work Plan
360 Assessment of Work Unit Performance
Individual Performance Plan
Supv./Self Developmental Review
11
Rating Schemes

• Rating scheme for results
• Exceeded expectations
• Achieved
• Partially achieved
• Inadequate
• Rating scheme for process
• Generally superior/frequently exceeds
  expectations
• Fully meets standard/makes positive contribution
• Demonstrates room for growth and/or improvement
• Unsatisfactory

12
Comments and Questions
13
Aligning Appraisal, Compensation, and Recognition
(Recommendations of Task Force)

• Compensation
• Across the board cost of living adjustment (COLA)
• Merit pay only under limited and specified
  conditions
• Decentralized bonus pay
• Special assignment stipend
• Recognition
• Term of appointment
• Faculty/Librarian Rank
• Cash award for advanced degrees, certification,
  and licensure
• Cash award and public commendation for
  administrative/professional faculty member of the
  year

14
Next Steps

• Host Administrative and Professional Faculty
  forums April 2008.
• Obtain CORE Group final approval May 2008.
• Make recommended revisions, finalize forms,
  develop implementation guidelines, and conduct
  training June/July 2008.
• Implement effective July 1, 2008.
• Obtain ongoing feedback and evaluate
  effectiveness May 2009.
• Revise as needed for 2009 2010.
• Address the SACS Quality Enhancement Plan
  requirement.

15
Next Step for A/P Faculty

• Provide comments feedback
• At forums
• On blog site http//umw-apfe.blogspot.com
• Via task force members

No Later Than May 2, 2008