Civil Service Performance Appraisal in Portugal :

Civil Service Performance Appraisal in Portugal: General framework and the specific experience with parliamentary staff • Isabel Corte-Real, Vilnius 24 May 2006

SIADAP*Structure of the presentation • Introduction • Why a new appraisal system • SIADAP: Principles; requirements ;features; rating system, quotas; forms; appraisers and other interfering entities; process, managers; transparency ;strengths and weaknesses • Appraisals systems are complex; appraisal systems are useful. Key points for a successful appraisal • Specific experience with parliamentary staff: specific features; other parliaments experiences; inspiring principles; system features; grading system; forms ;first year experience • Conclusion *Sistema de Avaliação de Desempenho da Administração Pública( performance appraisal system for the civil service)

SIADAPWhy a new system? • Breaks with a discredited previous system from1983 • Responds to new management needs (Efficiency; Quality Management; pay bill control) • Integrates the service (s) annual management cycle

SIADAPGeneral principles • Performance appraisal is results/objectives oriented • SIADAP is an universal system , applicable to the civil service as a whole • Enhances managers and subordinates responsibilities; • Staff contributions to the service and motivation are better perceived • Differentiates levels of performance • Aims at transparency • Integrates HRM system

SIADAPRequires: • Annual planning for the next year • (taking into account strategic objectives, government programme, service competences and assignments) • Annual setting of service objectives • Annual setting of individual objectives ( civil servant or team) • Annual reporting • Performance appraisal( against individual objectives)

SIADAPMain features • Applicable to the Civil Service as a whole • Main components: • Objectives • Competences • Personal Attitudes

SIADAP Objectives • Each service sets its own objectives • Objectives( no more than five , no less than three) must be agreed upon each subordinate and immediate superior, depending one of them on shared responsibility (team or group) • Each objective has its own weight for the final mark (no less than 15%, no more than 20%) • Grading system: • Level five- Exceeds largely the objective • Level three-Meets the objective • Level one- Does not meet the objective

SIADAPCompetences • Set up against job requirements ( for each professional group) • No less than four, no more than six • The weight of each competence shall not be less than 10%

Personal Attitude Evaluates how the job was performed, including aspects as effort, interest and motivation

Rating system • Rating of each component: from one to five • The final appraisal of each component corresponds to the following rating: • Excellent :from 4,5 to 5 • Very good: From 4 to 4,4 • Good: From 3 to 3,9 • Needs development: from 2 to 2,9 • Unsatisfactory :from 1 to 1,9

Final appraisalresults from the weighted average of each component according to the following weight

SIADAPQuotas ( forced distribution) • Very good: No more than 20% of the staff • Excellent : No more than 5 % of the staff

Forms Forms are legally pre-defined for the all civil service

Who interferes in the appraisal system • Superiors( appraisers) • Performance appraisal coordination committee (P.A.C.C.) • Director General ( top manager) of each service

Appraisers( immediate superiors) assignments Set up objectives and conduct appraisals

Performance appraisal coordination committee(P.A.C.C.) • Chaired by the D.G. • Composed by other managers • Assignments: • Sets up orientations • Guarantees a selective system ( has to validate excellent and very good ) • Advices the D.G. on claims • Proposes the Minister specific system (s) , according to the law

Appraisal processPhases • Self appraisal • Previous appraisal( by the superior) • Harmonization of ratings by the P. A C. C.( the highest ratings have to be signed by all members) • Appraisal interview( between superior and subordinate) • Final appraisal approval by the D.G. • The subordinate has to acknowledge the final appraisal. In case of disagreement ,he can present a claim to the D.G. The P.A.C.C. gives advice on claim (s) • The subordinate can still appeal to the minister

Managers( intermediatelevel) appraisals • Objectives are weighted :75% • Competences are weighted:25% • No forced distribution is established

SIADAPTransparency • A list of names , organized according final grades( Excellent , Very Good, Good, Needs development , Unsatisfactory) is publicized • A SIADAP data base is set up in the Directorate General for the Civil Service • Services can also be assessed

Strengths Result/objective oriented Set up within the context of TQM and MBO Breaks with a discredited previous system( inflation of high ratings) Responds to the need of controlling a high pay bill Weaknesses Time consuming process for setting up objectives ( from Government Program to individuals) specially within instability scenarios In 2004 only 18% of services conducted PA . In 2005 no data are available; a new system is being prepared Heavy work load and paper work( too demanding, ,considering a cost/benefit relationship) Forced distribution creates inequity and conflicts ( quotas are always fulfilled not on a merit basis .They result from internal negotiations ) Managers and staff had a modest contribution to the system System misses flexibility ( too universal) SIADAP- Strengths and weaknesses

Appraisal systems are complex • In many organization performance measurement and management systems are little more than human resources bureaucracies , with forms, rules and review layers. These paper-driven systems are burdens to managers and hence are completely marginally, if at all. They are typically seen by raters as extra work and by ratees as at best irrelevant, at worst demotivating ( Schneier, Shaw and Beatty) • Inflation of high ratings in civil service is common as civil service has no profit/market regulation • Heavy paper work load and bureaucracies are often associated • The emerging management of conflict takes time and energy

Appraisal systems are useful • Recruitment and selection ( validates selection procedures) • Integration of staff in the organization( asses adaptation to the organization) • Training (identifies training needs) • Promotion: performance appraisal is a promotion requirement ( promotion without merit can not receive support and contributes to civil service discredit) • Mobility: Can recommend mobility • Career and payment : is the basis for different tracks in career( slower or faster) with payment impact

Key points for a successful appraisal schemeBritish Advisory and Conciliation Arbitration Service • Make sure senior managers are fully committed • Consult with managers employees an d trade unions • Give appraisers adequate training( setting objectives and interviews) • Keep the system simple and straight • Monitor and update system(s)

Specific experience with parliamentary staffParliaments special features • General system is not directly applicable to Parliament. Legislation provides for specific rules and regulations • Parliament has no political planning for the legislature ( contrary to what happens with government programme). Main activities come from political/parliamentary control of government performance • Therefore, there is no cascade strategic planning for the services, the departments or the individuals

Other parliaments experiences • Civil Service general system is not used • The general system is adapted in some cases (Netherlands) • Some parliaments have their own model ( France and U.K.) • No system is used in some cases ( Spain and Luxembourg) • Annual interviews are conducted to set up individual objectives , in order to developing h.r.( Denmark and Finland)

SIADAR*New inspiring principles to pursuit • Development of competences. The main reason for appraisal is the further improvement of performances • Decentralization in H.R.M. • Motivation and performance improvement • Appraisal :does not replace other demanding H.R.M. techniques and practices ( specially recruitment) • Compensation performance related system • Prevention of high ratings inflation and paper overload • Clear and straight system • Managers role *Sistema de Avaliação de Desempenho da Assembleia da República- Portuguese Parliament Performance Appraisal System)

SIADAR Features • Corresponds to P.A. principles and H.R.M. needs • P.A.C.C. sets up annual criteria for appraisals • Sets up annual individual objectives by mutual agreement( subordinate/immediate superior). An Individual Plan for Development of Competences (IPDC) is established . The IPDC is the basis for development of competences and appraisals • Annual interview • Annual appraisal report. The subordinate acknowledges the Report • General principal: good performance, with an average impact in career compensation schemes (ordinary appraisal) • Management takes the imitative for exceptional performances appraisal( positive or negative) • P.A.C.C. validates exceptional appraisals • Exceptional merit is awarded by the Speaker in a public ceremony

SIADAR grading(no marks) • Good performance- ordinary appraisal scheme. It is the rating required for standard career development • Insufficient- extraordinary appraisal when the performance is beyond required • Very Good –Excellent performance( reduces six months for promotion), awarded on the basis of facts and/or particular events. In some cases an exceptional merit ratingcan be awarded. In these cases P.A. reduces one year time required for promotion and abolishes competition

FormsSummary • Job description; missions ; objectives to meet • Difficulties encountered by the appraised • Results achieved against objectives • Strengths and weaknesses related to attributes (skills and knowledge; organization and implementation capacity; adaptation and continuous improvement; planning capacity ;team work and coordination; responsibility and commitment; personal attitude such as effort, interest and motivation) .Grading of each attribute : Exceeds objectives, Meets objectives, Needs development, Unsatisfactory • Individual Plan for Development of Competences (IPDC) , agreed upon appraiser and appraised. Encompasses the following items: objectives and results to be achieved next year; conditions for developing competences , including training; evolving projects • The forms are different for ordinary appraisal ( good performance) and exceptional appraisal ( Excellent or unsatisfactory) and they have attached a performance appraisal guide both to the appraised and the appraiser

SIADARFirst year • System design in consultation with Managers, Staff, Trade Union and also ( for approval) with Board of the A.R. and M.P.(s) • Training (appraisers /appraised) • Reduced paper work (simple forms, no marks, simple appraisal criteria; simple attributes) • Impact in career( no forced distribution) • General principle of good performance was adopted by the P.A.C.C. No exceptional appraisals were conducted • Second year is now being run. It will be the first appraisal year, taking into account objectives set up by mutual agreement

Performance ManagementThe ICL Way Performance management is the way forward- for every individual and for the company as a whole. It is therefore vitally important that every individual as a clear understanding of his/her work objectives and responsibilities, because performance will be measured against them

Civil Service Performance Appraisal in Portugal :