Senior Staff and Senior Postholder Reward and Recognition Policy and Process

Transcription

1 Senior Staff and Senior Postholder Reward and Recognition Policy and Process Policy Statement The strategic aims of the University, as outlined in the Strategic Plan and other similar documents such as the University of Opportunity have set serious challenging strategic objectives around: Increasing student numbers and improving the student experience Becoming recognised as a key contributor to the skills and knowledge development of the local regional and global economy Being a leading agent of economic and social regeneration locally, nationally and internationally All of the above can only be delivered by having highly skilled, highly motivated, ambitious and innovative staff who are prepared to commit themselves to be able to meet and adapt to the rapidly changing social, political and economic environment that we are all facing. This policy supports our senior staff in maximising their full potential and rewards excellence. It is a robust performance review/appraisal process around both individual and institutional performance. It also encompasses the opportunities for on-going personal and professional development as part of enabling our staff to achieve their full potential that rewards excellent, exceptional and sustained performance. Performance Review Process This process requires both the member of staff and their line manager to jointly agree and identify the key priorities, actions, leadership skills and development needs that are required to enable the member of staff to achieve excellence. This is intended to be a positive experience and to allow for any concerns/issues around performance to be identified at an early stage. This is so that they can be dealt with in a positive and supportive manner, before the concerns become a potential performance blocker in the delivery of personal and organisational objectives. Any ongoing performance issues should be managed through the relevant university policy. It is essential that this process is undertaken in an open and transparent manner that is consistently applied to all staff and we must ensure there is mutual trust in both how the process is undertaken and how the outcomes are arrived at. Key Purpose of the Process To enable senior management to: Review the contribution that the individual can make and has made towards the delivery of the University s objectives 1

2 To ensure the full potential of the member of staff is met by building, maintaining and rewarding excellent/exceptional achievement (particularly around leadership, innovation and income generation) To review individual achievements and performance against objectives by including the use of sector/professional benchmarks, comparative data, etc. Putting in place a clear, resourced and timely personal development plan. It is essential that all managers operating within this process have undergone formal appraisal training and attend briefing sessions on the implementation of the Rewarding Excellent Performance Scheme along with an update session every 3 years. Further guidance and information around the process are included within the University of Wolverhampton Senior Staff and Post Appraisal Guidance documentation. This policy procedure and scheme guidance will be reviewed annually. March

3 University of Wolverhampton Rewarding excellent performance scheme General Principles This document recognises the fact that the delivery of the University s objectives can only be achieved via the performance of its staff; this is managed and facilitated through the Senior Staff Appraisal and Objective setting process which must emphasise the alignment between reward and excellent performance. The annual review timeframe runs from 1 st August until 31 st July. The awarding of financial entitlement is split between the overall performance of the University and the member of staff s personal performance. The University s performance is linked to the delivery of its KPIs and strategic objectives. The member of staff s performance is based on how their role links to the delivery of strategic aims and objectives of the university. There will be a discussion between the line manager and the member of staff (as part of the Appraisal Process) around a set of objectives that are aligned with the University s objectives. It is the line manager s responsibility to ensure these objectives are co-ordinated and consistent with other members of the senior team that they have line management responsibility for. The scheme will be reviewed on an annual basis. Who does the Scheme apply to? i) Senior Staff; all staff not paid on national pay spines (above UW11 ie, professors, Associate Deans, Deputies and some Assistant Directors, head of Department) as defined by the University of Wolverhampton Governing Body. ii) Senior Posts: Normally members of CMT (as identified within the University of Wolverhampton committee membership, ie, Deputy Vice Chancellors, Deans, Directors, excluding the Vice Chancellor). It is recognised that the scheme will need to be administered consistently and that resources need to made available to the support the process Pay Uplift Entitlements 1. Each year the Finance Director, following discussion with the Remuneration Committee, will make a recommendation to the Finance and General Purposes Committee to set aside a sum of money for funding any Pay/Remuneration awards for the designated staff for the coming year. This sum will be no more than the same percentage of the 3

4 wage bill for senior staff as that given to incremental points for those on UW 11 and below that The range on offer will be dependent upon the University s current financial position and may vary from year to year and the amount/percentages of uplift available each year will be calculated based on the numbers of staff in post and the numbers of staff achieving a high/good performance rating A sum of money will be set aside in the budget each year to fund any cost of living and/or performance awards. Based on the actual financial performance of the University at the end of the financial year, the finance director may need to make a formal request to the Finance and General Purposes Committee to decrease and/or reconsider the amount of money set aside. It was agreed that any award would be a fixed amount. The entitlement will be made up of 3 elements: i). nationally agreed Cost of living award ii). individual achievement and/or team performance, where appropriate. iii). overall university achievement against objectives and KPIs. Normally financial awards will be made as a one off payment and will not be consolidated into the member of staff s salary apart from any uplift for cost of living. Any cost of living awards will be paid at the end of the financial year and will be backdated to the start of that year. The Senior Staff Appraisal process identifies the objective setting and performance management processes. Following the outcome of the annual appraisal process, the line manager/appraiser will give a recommended rating (based on the criteria identified on page 5): Achievement of overall objectives Consideration of any comparators within the team The relevant Dean or Director will forward their recommended rating along with the relevant documentation to the HR Director who will make the necessary arrangements for the next stage in the process. A formal panel will be convened at the end of each annual appraisal review period, chaired by the VC with other nominated senior post members, this panel will review all proposed awards on an individual, faculty/directorate and university wide basis. A consistency checking process which includes consideration around equality and equal pay elements will then be undertaken. The panel will then agree the final awards/uplift for each individual based on the achievement of local and overall University-wide objectives. Annual Objectives and Performance Measures Individual objectives and targets must be in line with either the Faculty or Directorate aims and objectives and be set for the year ahead. These should be aligned to emphasise the importance of the Senior Staff/Posts role in developing a high performance culture within the 4

5 University which will ultimately cascade through the University as a whole. There will be a requirement for the individual to deliver against the broad range of generic accountabilities but specific targets and performance measures may also be set for individual accountabilities. Objectives and targets that are set should be clearly defined and stated e.g., income generation should be quantified by an actual amount and timescale for delivery. Performance measures should also be quantifiable since they are being provided to assist in the ultimate assessment rating (and salary implications where applicable). Assessing Performance Performance will be formally assessed via this appraisal review process; however the monitoring of all objectives should continue throughout the year to ensure that performance remains on target. Senior Staff/post holders are expected to maintain the standards of excellence and distinction associated with their role and responsibilities. Continued performance and improvement against the criteria will be monitored as part of the appraisal process. At the formal annual appraisal each objective or indicator should be reviewed separately and assessed against the following five point scale: Performance Rating Definitions In carrying out this evaluation, the performance against a particular objective in one year may be carried over to the next where a longer time period is required for the relevant outputs to be delivered. However, while progress towards the delivery of outputs can be recognised in the current year, outputs can only be rewarded by an award in the year of delivery, to avoid double-counting. A. Very good performance: Majority of objectives exceeded. B. Good performance: All objectives met and some exceeded or equivalent objectives delivered in place of agreed objectives. C. Threshold performance: Majority of agreed objectives achieved (or equivalent agreed objectives) or mitigation agreed in exceptional circumstances. D. Improvement in performance required: Less than half of agreed objectives met. An improvement plan must be developed and agreed. Improvement to be delivered within 12 months to avoid a subsequent review of continuing membership of the Professoriate and/or current role and responsibilities. (This would ultimately be subject to a separate procedure). Poor Performance procedure to be invoked as below. E. Unsatisfactory performance: Little or no achievement of objectives. Immediate remedial action to be agreed. Poor Performance procedure invoked below. Rewarding Excellent Performance Where an individual achieves performance level A for 3 consecutive years, they will be specifically brought to the attention of the Remunerations Committee. 5

6 Poor Performance In categories D and E no cost of living award will be received Continuing failure to meet objectives against targets will trigger the following review procedure: Performance rating D In the first year there will be no action however, the individual will written to by the Vice-Chancellor outlining where improvements are expected to be made. If in the following year, there is another overall rating of D with no identified mitigating circumstances, the individual will be required to attend a formal meeting with the Vice- Chancellor at which a comprehensive action plan will be agreed with the individual and their line manager in order to address the performance issues. If the individual fails to deliver on the actions, the Vice Chancellor will convene a formal panel of members of OVC to consider the continuing status of the individual. Performance rating E If there is an overall E rating and with no mitigating circumstances, the Vice-Chancellor will convene a formal panel of members of OVC and the Director of HR to consider the continuing status of the individual. Additional Guidance It is recognised that the University s appraisal procedure must be carried out by both parties with the appropriate degree of rigour that will withstand close scrutiny and audit. This is especially important as the process may lead to changes in the level of an individual s remuneration. In order to ensure that the process is managed consistently, all relevant sections of the appraisal documentation (forms and guidance notes to be produced once process has been agreed by the Remuneration Committee) are completed coherently, and signed by all parties before submission to the Director of HR. Appraisees wishing to include any additional supporting evidence must ensure that work has not been put forward for any previous appraisal process and that it is no more than 18 months old. Additional paperwork/material must be clearly documented and well presented. Incomplete paperwork or paperwork not returned on time will not be included in the process and will therefore not be considered by the panel. Formal panel process Following completion of the annual appraisal process the line manager/appraiser will recommend a formal performance rating assessment (A E) based on: The achievement of overall objectives Consideration of any comparators within the team These recommendations along with copies of the completed and agreed appraisal documentation will be forwarded to the Director of HR who will convene a formal panel. For Senior Staff membership of review panel: VC (Chair), DVC rep, Finance Director, Dean of Research/Dean of Faculty/Corporate Services Director (depending on role of individual). 6

7 For Senior Post holders not within OVC VC (Chair), DVC, External rep with knowledge of the sector For Senior Post holders within OVC VC, the Chair of the Remuneration Committee and an External rep with knowledge of the sector Vice Chancellor - Chancellor. The Remuneration Committee will agree any uplift of the Vice These panels will then agree the final performance assessment and associated salary uplifts for senior staff and post holders, following a final consistency checking process to ensure fairness and equity. The V.C. will then present a report to the Remuneration Committee, outlining the proposed uplifts and pending an analysis of where excellence has been achieved, equality analysis and comparability of UOW salary ranges etc. across other institutions to ensure salaries are broadly consistent/comparable, the uplift will be approved. Following the final ratification of the Remuneration Committee individuals will be written to notifying them of the outcome of the Rewarding Excellence process and any salary uplifts awarded. NB: There is no right of appeal by the appraisee following the decision of the formal panel. Schedule to the Policy On 5 th March 2015 Remuneration Committee agreed the formula for funding the scheme shall be: cost of living + equivalent % incremental rise +/- F&GP recommendation = amount available in the pot 7