PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW (PDR) Guidance notes for departments introducing PDR for support staff and academic-related staff

Transcription

1 PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW (PDR) Guidance notes for departments introducing PDR for support staff and academic-related staff Introduction 1. This note provides guidance for academic departments on the introduction or updating of Personal Development Review (PDR) schemes for academic-related and support staff. (Separate arrangements continue to apply for academic staff: see paragraph 7 below; and departments and divisions will be consulted during 2009/10 on review arrangements for research staff: see paragraph 8 below). 2. The University does not have a single scheme for the annual review of academic-related and support staff. Instead, the Personnel Committee agreed in 2007 a set of principles to underpin the introduction of departmental review schemes. These are now usually known as Personal Development Review (PDR), in preference to the term appraisal. 3. The introduction of PDR within departments is supported by the Oxford Learning Institute. If you would like support in setting up or reviving a departmental scheme, or have any questions about the content of these guidance notes, please contact in the first instance: pdadministrator@learning.ox.ac.uk. The Learning Institute can arrange departmental briefings for staff on the introduction of new schemes and provide training for reviewers and staff in the skills underpinning PDR (e.g. giving and receiving feedback). In addition, an optional on-line training course for reviewers will be available from TT The key principles underpinning the operation of PDR for academic-related and support staff are summarised here and reproduced in full at Annexe A. Departments are encouraged to introduce their own PDR schemes for these staff in line with the principles. PDR integrates the achievement of departmental and divisional objectives with support for individuals personal and professional development. It is integrated with existing staff management processes: the expectation is that individuals will be reviewed annually by their line manager or supervisor as part of a continuing dialogue throughout the year. PDR is based on an initial self-assessment by the individual in advance of the annual discussion: reviewees reflect on their own performance over the previous year and propose appropriate work objectives for the coming year and areas for future development. The principle of no surprises should guide the review discussion: both parties share their reflections in advance of the discussion; and reviewers should not raise for the first time during a PDR substantive issues in relation to an individual s performance in the role. PDR should not be used as the primary means of managing poor performance; and there is no direct link between PDR and salary, promotion, or discipline, for which separate procedures exist. (See sections 10 and 11 of the guidance notes, on how the outcomes of PDR might inform decisions on merit pay and regrading). I:\PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT\Policy work\personal development review\liisa\guidance notes.doc

2 5. Standard templates are available to support departments in introducing or updating PDR schemes: these can be adapted as necessary to suit the local context and culture, in consultation with staff. Sample templates are given at Annexe B. These reflect the experience and practices of those departments across the University who have introduced PDR schemes since Staff in the University Administration and Services are covered by a single scheme, though there are some local variants on this. For details, see: 7. Staff in Library Services, Computing Services and some other ASUC departments are also reviewed under separate schemes which reflect the University s general principles. For details contact your local HR manager or personnel administrator. 8. Academic staff continue to be appraised under the University s existing scheme which provides for a discussion once every five years. For further guidance, see: 9. During 2009/10, departments and divisions will be consulted on review arrangements for research staff, in line with the University s revised Code of Practice for the Employment and Career Development of Research Staff. The Code envisages that research staff will be included in departmental PDR arrangements and, pending the outcome of the consultation, existing departmental schemes should be open to those members of research staff who seek an annual review meeting. 2

3 Introducing departmental PDR schemes for academic-related and support staff Checklist of questions Departments are invited to consider the following questions before introducing or updating PDR schemes. What local arrangements will there be for consultation with the staff concerned? 1. The principles agreed by the Personnel Committee require departments to make appropriate arrangements for local consultation on the development of PDR. That consultation is expected to cover: how PDR will be integrated with existing staff management processes in the department how the record of the discussion will be agreed between reviewer and reviewee how agreed training and development needs arising from PDR will be collated and acted on how other individual or collective actions identified through PDR will be reviewed. 2. Experience across the University has shown that PDR is likely to be most effective, and to be more readily accepted by staff, where staff are consulted in the early stages of designing and developing a new scheme: Some departments have set up a working group of representatives of each of the categories of staff who will be covered by a scheme, to consider what departmental purposes and objectives the scheme can support and what arrangements need to be made locally for the processes outlined above. Other departments have adopted a two-stage approach to the introduction of PDR. In the first stage, a basic outline of the scheme and its associated paperwork has been presented to those who will be reviewers under the scheme (sometimes following input from an advisory group). The scheme has then been adapted in the light of comments from reviewers, before a final version is circulated to all staff. How will the department own the scheme? 3. PDR is also likely to be more effective if it is seen by staff to be owned by the department and to have the support of the Head of Department: Could the Head of Department write a preface to the scheme, showing how it supports departmental aims or objectives? Could the Head introduce or attend any briefings arranged to launch the scheme? Does the scheme paperwork incorporate the department s name and logo and reflect its usual house style? 3

4 When will PDR discussions be held? 4. The expectation is that PDR discussions are held annually. Departments are free to decide at which point in the year to schedule discussions: Some departments conduct PDRs at the same time each year, often during Trinity Term/the Long Vacation (this means the outcome of the discussions can be used, with the consent of the individual, as one piece of evidence to inform merit review: see paragraph 10, below). Other departments hold PDRs immediately after the merit round, during Michaelmas Term. Holding all discussions at the same time simplifies the administration and monitoring of PDR and makes it easier to integrate the process with departmental planning and act on any outcomes of PDR at departmental level. Other departments hold PDRs on the anniversary of an individual s appointment to a post, so that discussions are scheduled throughout the year. This spreads the load for reviewers and reinforces the focus on the individual, but makes it harder to link PDR with other departmental processes, and more difficult to collate and act on training and development or other needs at the level of the department. It also makes the administration and monitoring of the scheme more complex. How will the scheme be integrated with departmental planning processes? 5. PDR is intended to integrate planning to meet departmental and University objectives with review of individuals performance and consideration of the support needed to achieve future objectives. It integrates a review of objectives set the previous year and the setting of new objectives for the coming year with an opportunity to discuss individuals development in and beyond the role. 6. Whenever PDR discussions are held within your own department, it is helpful for the departmental objectives for the next year to be agreed and circulated in advance of PDRs, so that individuals can take account of higher-level objectives in proposing their own goals for the coming year; and the department objectives can in turn inform the PDR discussion. How will PDR be integrated with existing staff management processes? 7. The expectation is that individuals will be reviewed by their line manager or supervisor as part of a continuing dialogue throughout the year. Before PDR is introduced, departments will need to consider the following questions: Does each individual in the Department know who their manager/supervisor is for the purposes of PDR, and for continuing support throughout the year? Are all managers and supervisors clear about their responsibilities for managing staff, and the role of PDR in relation to those responsibilities? (The PDR handbook for reviewers of academic-related and support staff provides further guidance). Does each individual have an up-to-date job description? In the first year of operation of a scheme, reviewees may not have detailed objectives covering each area of their work, and they may not have had the opportunity for some time to review their job description: the current job description provides a useful starting point for the discussion. 4

5 8. There are some exceptions to the principle of individuals being reviewed by their line manager: Where an individual has more than one manager, or has day-to-day tasks mostly allocated by a project manager separate from his/her line manager, you will need to reach agreement on who should conduct the review. The discussion itself should not usually be conducted by more than one reviewer but the reviewer may seek feedback from the other manager in advance of the discussion, with the agreement of the reviewee. In the rare cases where there is a breakdown in the line manager relationship, how will the scheme provide for individuals to have an alternative reviewer? 9. PDR should not be used as the primary means of managing poor performance; and there is no direct link between PDR and salary, promotion, or discipline, for which separate procedures exist. For further details on the role of PDR in managing performance, see the PDR handbook. 10. As outlined above, PDR is conducted separately from, and at a different time to, consideration of merit pay. However, if the review of the past year indicates that performance has been exceptional, information from the PDR can be used, with the consent of the individual, to inform further consideration under any arrangements for merit review. 11. Similarly, a PDR discussion should not be used primarily to discuss re-grading of a post. However, if it is clear from the discussion that the role has changed significantly during the year, or is likely to change significantly, submitting a post for re-grading might be one of the agreed outcomes of the discussion. How will individuals prepare for the discussion? 12. The individual begins the PDR process by reflecting on their own performance over the previous year and proposing appropriate work objectives for the coming year and areas for future development. These reflections are then shared with the reviewer in advance of the discussion and reviewers flag up at this stage any additional topics they want to cover during the discussion. How will you structure this advance preparation through a standard template or a list of reflective questions ed in advance to the reviewee. Should the scheme incorporate feedback? 13. Seeking feedback is an optional part of PDR; and you will need to consider whether and how you want to incorporate feedback in your scheme. The aim of eliciting feedback from others is to secure a more rounded view of the individual s work over the previous year, and to hear a broader spread of ideas on how certain aspects of the job might be done differently. The feedback can come from colleagues within the department or others, within the University or externally, with whom the individual works closely or for whom they provide a service. You can use a short form to elicit feedback, or an . Reviewers will need to agree with the individuals they manage who it would be appropriate to contact; and what form the feedback should take: e.g. should comments be sent directly to the individual and the reviewer, or should they be sent only to the reviewer? 5

6 How will you safeguard and act on records of the discussion? 14. Departments need to consult locally on what arrangements should be made to record PDR discussions and to store PDR records safely. You will also need to consider whether you wish anyone other than the reviewer and reviewee to see the agreed record of the meeting. Some departments have a procedure called grand-parenting, whereby the agreed record is also seen by the reviewer s line manager, or by the Head of Department. 15. Most departments use a template to record the discussion (see Annexe B) which can be completed by either reviewer or reviewee. The aim is to reach consensus on an agreed record of the meeting but, if this is not possible, it is preferable to record significant areas of disagreement in a way that both parties are happy with, rather than spend considerable time trying to reach agreement. The completed form needs to be signed by both reviewer and reviewee. How will you share and act on agreed training and development needs, or other needs that require action at the level of the department? 16. Introducing a PDR scheme can raise individual expectations about the support that staff will receive in the role. Before introducing a scheme, you will need to consider what support is available to individuals; and how you will record, collate and act on the needs identified through PDR: How will you record individual s agreed training and development needs? Most departments have a separate form, or part of the form, which records any agreed needs and which both parties agree to share on a selective basis with others (e.g. the departmental administrator or Management Group) What arrangements can be made locally (within the department or cognate departments, within a building or across the division) to provide development opportunities for staff (e.g. through local mentoring, work-shadowing or secondment arrangements)? Are all staff and reviewers aware of the University s central training and development provision? See: What percentage of the department s budget can be set aside to cover any training and development needs arising from PDR that are not covered by the University s central provision? How will the department collate and act on these needs? How will the department identify any collective needs arising from PDR? (e.g. the PDR process might indicate a shared need for support in a particular software package or set of skills, that is best met at the level of the department, rather than by individual participation in courses). How will the actions arising from PDR be followed up throughout the year? 17. Although PDR is an annual process, the expectation is that it will be integrated with dayto-day management processes. Some departments include explicit provision for review of the outcomes of PDR, at three-monthly, or six-monthly intervals. Others make less formal provision for the actions arising from PDR to be reviewed during regular one-toone meetings between reviewers and individuals. 6

7 Annexe A: Principles for the introduction of personal development review for university support and academic-related staff These principles were agreed by the University s Personnel Committee in Michaelmas All departments will have in place a scheme for personal and career development review that aims to integrate support for individuals with the achievement of departmental objectives. Departments will be expected to make appropriate arrangements for consultation at the local level on the development of such schemes. 2. All academic-related and support staff within a department will normally be expected to participate in the departmental scheme. There will be a further central consultation on the introduction of appropriate arrangements for academic staff, based on these principles. 3. The scheme will be based on an annual discussion that is integrated with existing staff management processes and is part of a continuing dialogue between individuals and their line manager or supervisor. 4. All schemes will adopt the minimum of paperwork that is consistent with safe recordkeeping and good staff management practice. The Learning Institute will provide central templates for the processes and paper-work associated with the scheme, that departments can adopt locally. 5. There will be no direct link between the review process and probation, salary, promotion, or discipline, for which separate procedures exist. If, however, the review indicates that performance has been exceptional, or that the job has grown significantly, information from the discussion can be used with the consent of the individual to inform the separate procedures for merit reviews or re-grading. The Learning Institute and Personnel Services will provide guidance to departments, and training for departmental administrators, on how to coordinate Personal Development Review with other local staff management processes. 6. The Learning Institute and Personnel Services will consider how local schemes can best be monitored with a light touch, to ensure consistency of treatment between individual members of staff. 7. Schemes will incorporate an element of self-evaluation. Individuals will be responsible for an initial assessment of their own performance against agreed objectives and for suggesting any areas for future development, including opportunities to pursue life-long learning. Appropriate feedback on performance will be provided by the individual s agreed reviewer. This will usually be their line manager or supervisor. 8. It is expected that all schemes will be based on the following framework, and that departments will make only minor adjustments to this framework where this is necessary to tailor it to the local context. a) Individuals will prepare for the annual review discussion by reflecting on their progress against agreed objectives/core areas of work for the previous year; considering whether their job description accurately reflects the requirements of the role; proposing draft objectives for the forthcoming year; and suggesting any associated training and development needs. It is recognized that not all members of support staff will have individual objectives specific to their role. b) Individuals, and their line managers/supervisors, will share their reflections on these issues in advance of the discussion (either in writing or orally), to enable both parties to reflect on the issues raised and to prepare adequately for the discussion. c) The annual discussion will cover: 7

8 a review of progress towards the individual s objectives for the previous year [or, in the first year of operation of the scheme, or where individual objectives are not appropriate, a review of key activities undertaken] a review of the core areas of the individual s current role and responsibilities and how these are being interpreted discussion of successes in achieving objectives, or undertaking activities, over the past year the identification of any barriers to the achievement of objectives or activities and possible remedies agreement of appropriate objectives or activities for the following year, linked as relevant to departmental plans and the University s Corporate Plan consideration of the individual s immediate development needs, including training, and other support requirements; and the effectiveness of any training or development carried out over the previous review period with the agreement of the individual, discussion of longer-term career development, including any support required and any opportunities for lifelong learning. 9. Departments will make locally appropriate arrangements, based on guidance and templates provided by the Learning Institute, for: a) individuals and their reviewers to agree a record of the discussion, with a presumption that the record will be held on the individual s personal file b) collating and acting on agreed training and development needs arising from the annual review discussions, including mechanisms to ensure that common themes and training needs emerging from review discussions are picked up and acted on c) regular review of other individual or collective actions identified by the annual review process; and for integration of the review process with existing staff management procedures. 8

9 Annexe B Suggested templates to support the introduction of PDR for academic-related and support staff. 1. Most departmental PDR schemes are supported by two standard forms: A Form A or equivalent, which both reviewees and reviewers use to prepare in advance for the PDR discussion A Form B or equivalent, which is used to record the discussion. 2. Some departments then use a separate section of Form B to record agreed training and development needs, other departments use a separate form (Form C). 3. We reproduce in this annexe the paperwork in use within one academic department, that was developed in consultation with staff Personal Development and Review Scheme for Support Staff Introduction by Head of Department The [Department] is introducing a new Personal Development and Review Scheme (PDR). The scheme is being introduced for support and academic-related (admin) staff in the first instance and will apply to all such staff whether on fixed-term, permanent or open-ended contracts. The University s scheme for appraisal of academic staff will remain unchanged. I believe that the scheme will bring considerable benefits to individual staff. Participating in an annual PDR discussion will enable you to review the progress you have made over the last year, to discuss what additional support you might need to undertake your work over the coming year, and, where appropriate, what your further career plans are, and what support might be available from the department or the central university to help you fulfil those plans. The new scheme will also enable you, where appropriate, to discuss and agree with your line manager your forthcoming objectives and to understand how those objectives fit with the Department s strategies for retaining its position of excellence in research and teaching. Brief Description of the Scheme 1. The intention is that the new PDR scheme will build on existing staff management processes, such as one-to-one discussions and team meetings and will form part of a continuing dialogue between individuals and their line manger. 2. The scheme will integrate support for individuals with the achievement of the objectives of the Department and the Division. 3. The scheme will apply to support and academic-related (admin) staff in the Department once they have completed their probationary period. 4. The scheme will be based on a confidential annual review discussion normally conducted by an individual s line manager. Within the Department, many members of the support staff have an operational as well as a line manager and in some cases it may be more appropriate for the operational manager to conduct the review with input from the line manager. If the line manager does conduct the review they will ask for input from the operational manager. In exceptional circumstances, individuals will have the option of seeking another reviewer. 5. There is no direct link between the scheme and salary, promotion, or discipline, for which there are separate departmental procedures. If, however, an annual review indicates that performance has been exceptional, or that the job has grown significantly, 9

10 information from the discussion can be used, with the consent of the individual, to inform the separate departmental procedures for merit reviews or re-grading. 6. The review discussion will include a review of the individual s performance over the past year, agreement on appropriate objectives/tasks for the forthcoming year; discussion of any support needed to achieve those objectives (including training and development); and discussion of future career plans where appropriate. 7. The process, apart from passing on information about training needs and other points requiring action by the department, will be confidential between the reviewer and reviewee. 8. All participants in the scheme, including reviewers, will be expected to take part in a short training session organised by the Oxford Learning Institute. 9. All participants will be expected to maintain the confidentiality of the process. The Process in Outline Once established the PDRs will be conducted on an annual cycle which will be completed by the end of June each year so the discussions can inform the Merit Review process (see 5 above). a) Your line manager (or other agreed reviewer) will contact you to say that the review cycle is underway and to arrange with you a suitable date for the meeting which should be at least six weeks away. b) You should prepare for the annual review discussion by completing Section A of the prompt sheet (Annex A). This prompt sheet will be available on-line at [xxx] c) In completing the prompt sheet, you are invited to reflect on: the main duties or activities you have undertaken over the previous year and on any changes to those duties; your main achievements in fulfilling those duties, including, after the first year, the extent to which you have met any agreed objectives, and any difficulties or obstacles you may have encountered; how your duties, activities and achievements reflect what was anticipated at the start of the period; your proposed aims and objectives for the next year and any suggestions for improvements or changes to the way you work; any additional support you may need, including training or development. Where appropriate, you may also want to outline your future career plans and any ideas for support that the Department or University might provide to you in achieving those plans. d) Send your completed prompt sheet to your line manager (or other agreed reviewer) at least two weeks before the date of the review meeting. e) You and your reviewer should agree a venue for the review meeting where you feel comfortable and where the discussion can take place in confidence. The meeting will generally last around an hour. f) Your reviewer will then lead the discussion based on the prompt sheet. He or she should invite you first to give your own reflections; and then give you his or her feedback. g) Following your meeting your reviewer will draft a short note of the discussion for Section B of the form and seek your comments on this draft. The note should make clear any action points and who is responsible for following them up. h) Any training or development needs or other points requiring action by the department should be entered in Section C of the form. It should be noted that this part of the form will be seen by the [Departmental Administrator] and completion of it is voluntary. i) Once the record has been agreed and all the sections have been signed the reviewer should: 10

11 Send a copy of Section C of the form to [the Departmental Administrator] Give a copy of the form to the reviewee File the original in a secure cabinet If a line manager leaves the Department, the material relating to the reviews for their team will normally be passed on to their successor with the consent of the individual concerned. In subsequent years the record of the previous year s meeting will inform completion of the prompt sheet by the reviewee. 11

12 CONFIDENTIAL Personal Development and Review Scheme for Support and Academic-Related (Admin) Staff Prompts for Review SECTION A: To be completed by the reviewee before the review discussion NAME. REVIEWER Please complete this prompt sheet and send it to your line manager or agreed reviewer at least two weeks before the date that has been arranged for your review 1. Main duties/activities in preceding twelve-month period 2. Major changes in duties/activities 3. Achievements including the extent to which you have met any objectives set in the previous year. 4. Exploration of whether the duties, activities and achievements reflected what was anticipated at the start of the period 5. Difficulties/obstacles encountered 6. Objectives/aims for the future 12

13 7. Suggestions for improvements/changes 8. Support needed to help you achieve your future aims/objectives, including any training and development needs 9. Career development plans and support needed to achieve these plans 13

14 CONFIDENTIAL Personal Development and Review Scheme for Support Staff SECTION B To be completed by the reviewer after the review discussion NAME. REVIEWER LINE MANAGER DATE OF REVIEW MEETING.. Please provide an overview of the review discussion. You may consider highlighting positive achievements, including the extent to which any objectives have been met, suggestions for personal and career development, training and development requirements and any further action you believe to be necessary. 14

15 Signature of employee Signature of reviewer A COPY OF SECTION A AND SECTION B SHOULD BE RETAINED BY THE REVIEWER AND REVIEWEE ONLY. THE REVIEWER SHOULD ENSURE THAT THE FORMS ARE TREATED AS CONFIDENTIAL AND KEPT IN A SECURE PLACE. 15

16 CONFIDENTIAL Personal Development and Review Scheme for Support Staff SECTION C: To be completed by the reviewer after the review discussion NAME. REVIEWER LINE MANAGER DATE OF REVIEW MEETING.. Please provide a list of any training or development requirements that have been identified in the course of the review and any further action that is required by the department. Signature of employee Signature of reviewer THIS SHEET WILL BE PASSED TO THE ADMINISTRATOR SO THAT ANY TRAINING AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS CAN BE FOLLOWED UP. THIS FORM WILL SUBSEQUENTLY BE STORED ON YOUR DEPARTMENTAL PERSONNEL FILE. 16