Performance Appraisal

O r a n g e C o u n t y S h e r i f f ’ s O f f i c e 2 5 0 0 W C o l o n i a l D r .

O r l a n d o , F L 3 2 8 0 2 4 0 7 . 2 5 4 . 7 0 0 0

4 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 4

Joe Galligan & Justin Stevens

CONSULTING

EXCELLENCE

PILLAR OF

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The current appraisal system in use by the Orange County Sheriff’s Office is excellent by

existing standards. The main purpose of the appraisal system is for personal development rather

than for any type of administrative decision-making. Much thought and care is put into the

involvement of employees throughout the process, as well as the feedback given to them.

Employees participate in setting a series of goals and dates for these goals to be achieved, which

allows them to be cognizant of what is expected of them and provides a useful tool for bettering

themselves and their performance.

There are some major highlights of the appraisal system that demonstrate its utility and

effectiveness. In particular, the feedback process, evaluation of those who are raters to improve

their rating abilities, and the Performance Improvement Plan serve to enhance the overall

potential for development and success of the program. However, there are some areas that can be

improved upon. Establishing an organizational climate that views the appraisal system as

worthwhile, honing in on behaviors in each specific job that must be measured for performance,

and increasing the rating scale from a three-item scale to a five-item scale would collectively

assist in establishing the appraisal system as an even better resource than it already is. Despite

these areas for improvement, the overall system is at a good place and much better than many

existing systems of performance appraisal that are being used today.

3

OVERVIEW OF CURRENT PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

SYSTEM USED BY OCSO

USE OF APPRAISAL

The system currently in use for performance appraisals at the Orange County Sheriff’s

Office (OCSO) is an appraisal used across the entire agency; that is, it is used to evaluate every

single position within the department aside from that of sheriff. Employees holding the rank of

sergeant or sergeant equivalent will perform the evaluation for any employees below their rank.

In the event there is no one designated as sergeant or sergeant equivalent, performance appraisals

shall be conducted by any employee designated as corporal or corporal equivalent. The

immediate supervisor of the sergeant or sergeant equivalent -usually the sheriff - shall complete

their respective performance evaluations.

PURPOSE OF APPRAISAL

As per a document entitled “Orange County Sheriff’s Office General Order”, the purpose

of the performance appraisal is “to serve both management and the individual employee to

document the employee's job performance in order to: support standardized, fair and impartial

personnel decisions; maintain and improve job performance; provide a medium for personnel

counseling and development; facilitate proper decisions regarding probationary employees;

provide an objective and fair means for measurement and recognition of individual job

performance within assignments in accordance with established standards; and identify training

needs.” Essentially, the main purpose of the performance appraisal is to provide an opportunity

for feedback, coaching, and personal development. It is important to note that the stated purpose

makes it clear that this procedure is not to be used for any administrative decisions such as hiring

4

and/or firing with the exception of probationary employees and potentially disqualifying an

employee from the promotion process. The focus of the performance appraisal is identifying

strengths and weaknesses in an employee’s performance and setting goals to improve such

performance for the next evaluation.

FREQUENCY OF APPRAISAL

The current performance appraisal system at OCSO is completed annually to the

anniversary date on which each employee was hired. It is noted that supervisors may complete

period evaluations as they see necessary, but this is rarely ever done, if at all. The only

performance that is to be rated for each employee’s evaluation is performance following said

employee’s previous evaluation; in other words, that performance from the past year.

Performance prior to or after the rating period should not be considered. It is noted that

employees shall be evaluated on the relevant job task analysis and job description for their

respective position within OCSO and that the evaluation criteria shall be both descriptive and

measurable.

TRAINING

Those supervisors in charge of rating must attend an annual managerial/leadership

training that covers all managerial duties, including the basics of performance appraisal; when

educating raters on performance appraisal, the importance of the process is stressed.

Occasionally, a half-day training class is required where raters attend classes where they practice

activities such as goal-setting, frame of reference exercises, discuss common problems that occur

during the appraisal process, and also what would happen if a performance appraisal is not

5

completed. This training is also conducted in conjunction with human resources development,

which is supposed to train supervisors on the rating procedure, common ratings errors, the

evaluation meeting, feedback, and goal setting. Additionally, each supervisor is rated annually in

regards to his/her quality of ratings given to their subordinates and the counseling given to

subordinates during the feedback process. This feedback to each rater allows them to take note of

their own strengths and weaknesses in ratings and to improve these abilities.

PERFORMING THE EVALUATION

At the conclusion of the most recent appraisal or at hire, an employee’s immediate

supervisor must meet with all subordinate employees at the beginning of their new rating

periods. During this meeting, the supervisor must address the task of the employee’s current

assignment, the level of performance expected of the employee, the evaluation rating criteria,

and any career development goals of them. Supervisors are also expected to periodically review

these performance expectations with their subordinates throughout the new evaluation period.

Performance appraisal forms can be accessed by raters via the online OCSO portal. For

the first section of the performance appraisal form, the rater is to fill out basic information about

him/her and the employee they are evaluating (name, employee number, date of hire, etc.) In the

next section, raters must indicate which policies and procedures have been reviewed with the

employee and also if they have received any formal discipline during the period for which they

are being evaluated. The third section of the appraisal is to be completed only for those

employees who operate agency-issued vehicles, and is to be skipped if the employee does not

drive a vehicle.

6

The fourth section of the form is the evaluation section, which must be completed for all

employees. They are rated in eleven different areas, which are as follows: Job Knowledge,

Quality of Work, Productivity, Interpersonal Skills, Communication, Teamwork, Accountability,

Judgment/Decision Making, Personal Effectiveness, Leadership, and Employee Development.

Behaviors associated with each rating area can be located on the “rating info” section of the

OCSO portal. Each category is to be rated based on a three-item scale: Exceeds Standards (E),

Meets Standards (M), or Below Standards (B). Those who are rated “E” exceed the established

standards and perform correctly 96 to 100% of the time; those who are rated “M” meet the

established standards and perform correctly 70 to 95% of the time; finally, those who are rated

“B” fall below the established standards and perform correctly 0 to 69% of the time. Only one of

these values can be selected for each rating area.

The fifth section is only completed when the employee being rated supervises other

employees (e.g. when a sheriff is conducting the appraisal for a sergeant or corporal). This

section identifies three supervisory behaviors (Administrative, Supervision, and Supervisor

Interpersonal Skills) that are to be rated based on the same three-item rating scale used in section

four. The next section allows the supervisor to provide feedback in regards to the strengths of the

employee and areas that they can improve in. Raters are required to provide additional comments

in the “comments” section next to these fields. Strengths, areas for improvement, and comments

fields must be filled out for all employees that are evaluated. Once the rater fills out all of these

fields, they are to fill out the “overall rating” of the employee using the three-item rating scale

referenced prior. It is important that this overall rating is not completed before filling out the rest

of the performance appraisal form in its entirety.

7

For each rating area designated a value of “B” in the evaluation form, there is a section to

fill out on a separate form called the Performance Improvement Plan. This form is also found on

the OCSO portal and is used to set goals and make clear to employees what they are to work on

for their evaluation that will take place next year. Within each rating area issued a “B” rating, the

rater is to outline the specific area for improvement, as well as actions they recommend for how

the employee can improve. For example, in the event that the employee is not meeting standards

in the “Quality of Work” rating area, the rater would say that the specific area they need to work

on is preparing documents and reports that are accurate and free of errors. They would also

recommend actions to do so, such as the employee double-checking their work before sending

out documents and attending classes to improve their writing skills. Additionally, a completion

date for each specific area that is to be improved is set. Once these actions have been completed,

the rater will later fill out the date of completion; if they have not been completed or have not

been completed to a satisfactory level, the rater will note areas still in need of further

improvement. The rater does not have to complete the performance improvement plan for rating

areas that received a rating of “E” or “M”.

In addition to the forms noted above, the employee may complete an optional form called

the Performance Evaluation Preparation Form prior to meeting with their supervisor. The

purpose of this form is to give the employee an opportunity to elaborate on how they achieved

their goals from the previous year. Sections on this form include: strengths, areas for

improvement, what steps can be taken to improve, and any accomplishments and/or activities

that they have participated in that have advanced the agency or helped develop their own

knowledge, skills, and abilities. The employee is to bring this form to their annual performance

meeting to be considered alongside their evaluation forms.

8

DISCUSSION & FEEDBACK OF APPRAISAL

At the conclusion of each employee’s rating period and once all forms have been

completed, the rater is to meet with the subordinate to discuss their evaluation. During this

discussion, the supervisor will review the evaluation itself with the subordinate. The supervisor

will also discuss the level of performance expected, rating criteria, and goals for the new

reporting period that starts at the conclusion of the meeting. The supervisor will also discuss the

Performance Improvement Plan if necessary, in addition to providing career counseling advice

on topics such as advancement and training for the employee’s position. The employee is also

allowed to prepare with the supervisor an optional Career Development Plan if requested. As can

be seen through the various methods of goal-setting and feedback, constructive criticism is of

vital importance to this process. At the conclusion of the meeting, each employee will be asked

to restate his/her understanding of the evaluation and each deficiency in the Performance

Improvement Plan and how to improve it. Employees will also be given the opportunity to attach

comments to the evaluation.

DOCUMENTATION

Following the meeting, employees must sign all documents discussed during the one-on-

one. The supervisor must then make a copy to retain for his/her records, make a copy to give to

the employee, and make a copy that is to be forwarded to the Human Resources Division

(Personnel Services Unit) of OCSO. Employee evaluations must be kept on file and

documentation procedures must be followed carefully. In the event that a legal issue arises

regarding any of the preceding documents, it is important that they can be retrieved.

9

Additionally, in the event that an employee is being considered for a promotion or transfer, their

previous two years of evaluations are reviewed for selection purposes; if these are misplaced, it

could affect an employee’s chances at progression within the department.

APPRAISAL APPEALS PROCESS

There is an appeals process in place for the performance evaluation as well. Supervisors

are to attempt to resolve employee disputes or disagreements on site at the review and meeting of

their evaluation. An employee who still disagrees with his/her evaluation can request in writing

through chain-of-command to his/her Division Commander to appeal. The employee must

elaborate on specific points of disagreements that he/she had with the supervisor who rated

him/her. The decision of the Division Commander is final.

EMPLOYEE PERCEPTIONS OF APPRAISAL

Based on our interview with an SME in the HR department at OCSO, it seems that

managers do not think the current performance appraisal is very effective. It is oftentimes seen as

more of a “rubber stamp”; not a lot of thought or care is put into the evaluation since it is not

used for pay or ranking employees for the sake of promotion, but it must simply be done. Due to

this rubber stamp mentality, the evaluations sometimes do not get completed. Despite the

automated system put into place for reminding supervisors and even their supervisors to

complete the evaluations, they still do not get completed. The HR department has stated that it

almost feels like “pulling teeth” to get supervisors to perform these evaluations.

10

STRENGTHS

The major strengths of the performance appraisal process in use by OCSO are listed

below, from highest to lowest.

EMPHASIS ON FEEDBACK IS GOOD

The feedback mechanisms used and emphasis on feedback itself is something of vital

importance to this process. Due to the fact that the purpose is mainly on development of the

employees, without a good feedback system, the whole appraisal process would be useless.

OCSO puts feedback at the top of the priority list for their employees, ensuring that all

employees go over each portion of their evaluation forms, and if necessary, the Performance

Improvement Plan. The supervisor explains all ratings given to the employee, stating why they

received that score in that area, suggestions to improve, and answering any questions the

employee may have about. The employee and their supervisor attend to all areas in which they

were below standards and review what they must do to improve; following this, they produce

career development goals and are asked to restate what they talked about in order to leave the

meeting knowing that both parties understand what is expected.

The first positive aspect of the feedback process is that it is used primarily for

development and not for administrative decisions like pay raises. Some research shows that when

an organization uses an appraisal system for both feedback and administrative decisions like pay

raises, both functions suffer as a result.1 The feedback in this case focuses on both explaining

1 Meyer, H.H., Kay, E., & French, J. (1965) Split roles in performance appraisal. Harvard Business Review, 43, 123-129

11

areas of development and ways to improve. During the process, specific behaviors to improve

must be identified. Generally, feedback that is specific and behaviorally oriented is more useful

than feedback that is general and vague, and feedback is also better for development when it

includes both problem-oriented and solution-oriented information.2

EVALUATION OF RATERS

Another highlight of the appraisal process at OCSO is that the highest supervisors also

rate the supervisors below them. Included in their ratings of these lower-level supervisors is the

ability and skill of the supervisor in ratings subordinates. This feedback on rating ability is

beneficial; if the supervisors are not rating their own employees correctly, it would be difficult to

trust their judgment. Feedback is given to the supervisors on their rating ability and also on how

to improve that ability. Assessment center research has shown that it is beneficial to evaluate

assessors on their ability to rate incumbents, and to provide feedback to them on how to improve

their assessment abilities when they are not up to par.3 It is likely that this observation can also

apply to supervisors rating their employees for performance appraisals.

PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT PLAN

The Performance Improvement Plan is a good extension of the feedback system itself.

The Performance Improvement Plan puts a larger focus on areas that need improvement because

they fell below standards. In addition to highlighting areas of an employee’s behavior that need

2 Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Sage. 3 Thornton III, G. C., & Mueller-Hanson, R. A. (2003). Developing organizational simulations: A guide for practitioners and students. Psychology Press.

12

improvement, the Performance Improvement Plan also sets specific behaviors that should be

done by certain dates in order to improve their own skills in those areas. Essentially, the

Performance Improvement Plan is a process used to set goals for each employee to work on in

order to improve his/her abilities and the organization as a whole. This is important as goal-

setting has been shown to increase motivation to perform well; specific goals that are difficult

but still achievable and have also been agreed upon by employees increase motivation to perform

better even more.4 The current system establishes very specific goals to be accomplished by

certain dates, and thus falls in line with the goal-setting literature. When these goals are set and

an action plan is put in place, the process is more likely to be perceived as accurate and fair. 5

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PREPARATION (EMPLOYEE) FORM

The Performance Evaluation Preparation Form that can be completed by employees is

another benefit of the current appraisal system. As an optional document, it is not a hassle for

employees as they are not required to complete it. However, it does give employees the chance to

do a sort of self-evaluation, explain themselves and the goals they have accomplished since their

last evaluation, and provide some input on the appraisal process. In doing so and involving

employees more in the process, this is likely to increase the employees’ perceptions of fairness of

the process, and thus establish more face validity for the evaluation procedure.

BEHAVIORS LINKED TO EACH RATING FOR REFERENCE

4 Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2008). Essentials of organizational behavior (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. 5 Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Sage.

13

As stated in the section above explaining the appraisal process, supervisors have the

option of clicking a link in the portal when filling out the evaluation form that explains job-

relevant behaviors for each rating area. This is likely to help in determining whether an employee

exceeds, meets, or falls below certain standards in each rating area. More specifically, if there is

some area that a rater is not familiar with (although there should not be because training should

account for this), these behaviors may help in determining what value to assign the employee.

These suggested behaviors for each rating area are in a way parallel to something like a

behavioral checklist. Behavioral checklists have been shown to reduce cognitive load of raters

and increase discriminant validity between the rating areas and dimensions, thus reducing

cognitive errors like halo effect.6 This is especially useful when there are so many rating areas to

develop a score for.

ONLINE FORMAT OF APPRAISAL

We also thought that having the appraisal forms all stored online make them much more

convenient for the supervisors who must do the ratings. The forms are simple and easy to access,

and also easier to fill out online rather than having to do it by hand. The database also provides

an easy way to store the forms so that there is not much effort needed to look for them why they

are needed. It takes away from the hassle of paperwork and having to sort through files in order

to gather materials.

6 Donahue, L. M., Truxillo, D. M., Cornwell, J. M., & Gerrity, M. J. (1997). Assessment center construct validity and behavioral checklists: Some additional findings. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality.

14

OPPORTUNITIES & RECOMMENDATIONS FOR

IMPROVEMENT

The major opportunities to improve of the performance appraisal process in use by OCSO, as

well as recommendations to improve each, are listed below from highest to lowest.

GETTING “BUY-IN”

Based on the feedback we got from our subject matter expert, it seems that supervisors in

the organization are not fond of the appraisal process. It often does not get done because there is

a lack of concern and motivation to perform the appraisals. Organizational climate is the

perception of policies, procedures, and practices in an organization.7 The climate at OCSO seems

to be that performance appraisals are not important, thus establishing a reason for them not to get

done. It seems that the key to improving the procedure and effectiveness of the procedure overall

is to increase motivation to complete appraisals and make the organizational climate surrounding

the performance appraisal system to be pro-appraisal rather than against it.

Employees are often resistant to big and sudden changes in the organization.8 Therefore,

when implementing any changes to the current politics or policies, it is important to do so

gradually. Although supervisors do not like the fact that appraisals have no ties to salary

increases or promotion, we do not recommend changing this due to the literature that shows the

7 Ostroff, C., Kinicki, A. J., & Tamkins, M. M. (2003). Organizational culture and climate. In W. C. Borman, & D. R. Ilgen (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 12, p. 565-593). New York, NY: John Wiley. 8 Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2008). Essentials of organizational behavior (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

15

benefits of keeping such procedures separate from personal development. However, we must

first establish buy-in for these procedures with the people on the top. One way to do so is to

research other sheriff’s departments around the country that value appraisal systems; these could

then be compared to the views on appraisal at the OCSO and results of attributing more value to

the appraisal process can be demonstrated. In doing so, proving to those in charge of rating

employees that completing these appraisals is likely to lead to real changes in performance levels

for both their subordinates and themselves is likely to lead to better results for the organization.

This demonstration of value should not be in the format of an annual meeting, but should

permeate throughout the organization on a daily basis. Perhaps one strategy would be to adopt a

phrase that would highlight the benefits of constant improvement, and also maybe send out a

monthly newsletter that discusses improvement in the organization at both the individual and

organizational level. It is our hope that employees will associate these improvements with the

performance appraisal process and come to place more value upon it.

CONSIDER A SUPPLEMENTAL FORM TO JOB ANALYSES

In the current general order for performance appraisals, it is stated that evaluation criteria

should be descriptive and measurable. As it stands, although the rating areas are observable, they

are not entirely descriptive and measurable or specific to any one job position. It is our

knowledge that a job analysis is conducted for each position at OCSO. Without a form to refer to

evaluate each individual position, it seems that the highest potential in evaluating a position is

lost due to the general nature of the form as it spans across all jobs. One area of opportunity here

is to change this procedure so that there is another form to refer to when evaluating different

positions.

16

Our recommendation is that a supplemental form is constructed for each position in

conjunction with the job analysis for the purpose of providing specific and observable behaviors

during performance evaluation. The general form for performance appraisal would still be used

and would not need to be changed, but depending on the position being evaluated, the

supplemental list would provide the rater with interest to improve accuracy in ratings. Ideally,

the supplemental form would break down the job into the eleven ratings areas from the general

form using information already gathered in the job analysis. For example, the definition of the

rating area of “Job Knowledge” as per the Performance Evaluation Form is that the employee

“demonstrates knowledge [and] skills necessary to perform job effectively”. On the supplemental

form for evaluation for the position of Forensic Firearms Analyst within OCSO, a behavior from

the job analysis that would fall under this category is effectively choosing and using the correct

chemicals in order to restore serial numbers on various firearms. This behavior is both specific

and observable and pertains to a certain position within the department. Research on

categorization in memory has shown that categorization depends on the similarity of the target to

categories given to the rater.9 Therefore, the more categories that are available to the rater, the

more likely they are to rate each employee for each job correctly.

THE RATING SCALE

The current rating scale in use is a three-item scale: Exceeds Standards (E), Meets

Standards (M), or Below Standards (B). The current breakdown seems to cover way too much in

some areas, and too little in other areas. For example, a below standards worker is someone who

9 Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

17

falls below established standards and performs correctly only 0 to 69% of the time. On the other

hand, there is a very small percentage for those who exceed standards, being only those who

perform correctly 96 to 100% of the time. It is therefore very easy to fall into one category and

very difficult to achieve the other; additionally, this leaves no room to distinguish between two

employees in some areas. For example, it would be difficult to distinguish between an extremely

poor employee who performs well 0% of the time and one who performs well 65% of the time

due to the fact that they would both be assigned the rating of “below standards” regardless.

Score sensitivity states that a procedure for measuring must be sensitive enough to

distinguish between real differences that exist in attributes.10 The current system of measurement

may fail to distinguish accurately between varying levels of performance between employees,

especially for those who fall below standards. Our proposition is to change the three-item scale

to a five-item scale as follows:

Below Standards (“B”): Fall below the established standards and performs correctly 0 to

50% of the time

Somewhat Below Standards (“SB”): Fall below the established standards on some

behaviors in the rating area and performs correctly 51 to 69% of the time

Meets Standards (“M”): Meet the established standards and performs correctly 70 to 80%

of the time

Somewhat Exceeds Standards (“SE”): Exceeds the established standards on some

behaviors in the rating area and performs correctly 81 to 90% of the time

10 Furr, R. M., & Bacharach, V. R. (2013). Psychometrics: an introduction. Sage.

18

Exceeds Standards (“E”): Exceed the established standards and performs correctly 90 to

100% of the time

This new rating scale would allow raters to easily distinguish between poor and very poor

employees, and also to give other employees a rating of exceeding standards, but not quite

exceeding all standards within a rating area.

TRAINING OF RATERS

As it stands, raters are provided with training on what seems like a random basis.

Currently, raters are to attend training classes when they occur. These rating classes do focus on

teaching frame-of-reference skills to easily classify and rate behaviors, education on cognitive

biases and cognitive errors that may influence ratings, and other techniques for observing

behaviors and evaluating employees. Training in all of the techniques mentioned have been

shown to improve rater accuracy when performing evaluations.11

Our suggestion here is simple; rather than do the frame-of-referencing and cognitive

biases training randomly, set a date to do this training course annually. Doing so would allow

raters to practice these skills and remind them each year of what to watch for when performing

evaluations. As it stands, the class is currently only a half-day training course for one day when it

takes place anyway, so it is really not too much to ask for to require the course once each year.

Additionally, it seems it would only be helpful to do the course once a year as a refresher course.

BIANNUAL APPRAISALS

11 Thornton III, G. C., & Rupp, D. E. (2006). Assessment centers in human resource management: Strategies for prediction, diagnosis, and development. Psychology Press.

19

The current system of performance appraisal that is in place is set up so that appraisals

are done on an annual basis. Although supervisors are told to keep information in mind and note

behavior of employees over the course of that year (or rating period), it is likely that some

information is forgotten or lost along the way. It is noted that information committed to long-

term memory is not “lost”; however, it is possible that the passage of time and activities that fall

between storing knowledge and retrieving it may interfere with the ability to recall the

information when it comes time for evaluations to take place.12

Our suggestion to combat this potential issue is to increase the frequency of the

evaluations to twice a year rather than once a year. By making evaluations biannual rather than

annual, it would help raters recall behaviors and information relevant to evaluation more easily.

We propose that this mid-year evaluation (to be held at 6 months since the last evaluation) need

not be a formal evaluation, but simply a sit-down meeting where progress so far is discussed.

The supervisor may also wish to reevaluate the Performance Improvement Plan that was set for

the employee and see if he/she is on track to attain goals that were set. This meeting should still

be documented as taking place, and the employee should be required to sign off on it as well.

JUSTIFY MEETING OR EXCEEDING STANDARDS IN PIP

As of now, the Performance Improvement Plan is only to be completed for those ratings

areas that fall “below standards”. Due to the fact that performance appraisals are already viewed

as a hassle for supervisors to complete, adding this form only adds to it. It may be the possibility

that due to this fact, and that the form only needs to be completed for each rating area that falls

12 Tulving, E. (1983). Essentials of episodic memory. New York: Oxford University Press.

20

“below standards”, it is likely that supervisors are more likely to rate employees at a “meets” or

“exceeds” level simply to avoid filling out the form and adding on more to their workload.

We suggest that the Performance Improvement Plan be filled out regardless of the ratings

an employee received in each rating area. If an employee was ranked as “exceeds” or “meets”,

we think that an explanation (even if one to two sentences) should be made. In doing so, this

assures that each rating area is covered on the form, and also that supervisors are more likely to

be honest in their ratings since they have to justify the rating regardless of what the outcome was.

If this new system was to be used with our proposed new rating scale as well, we suggest that

areas for improvement are made both for those employees who are below standards (“B”) and

somewhat below standards (“SB”).

MAKE ALL FORMS CONSISTENT

Our last suggestion is simply to make sure that all forms are consistent with one another

and up-to-date. The process of changing an appraisal is an ongoing one, so it is not expected that

everything will be up-to-date right away. However, we observed some inconsistencies in our

review of the existing materials. For example, the instructions for the Performance Evaluation

Form state that there is a score of “Meets Standards/Needs Improvement”, or “N”, but this

response does not exist on the actual Performance Evaluation Form. Although this is a small

detail and not something that would destroy the appraisal process, it is important that all forms

and documents are consistent with one another for both the rater and employee being rated, as

well as legal reasons.

WHAT WE LEARNED

21

We learned that performance appraisal is often a game of what seems like trade-offs. The

ideal situation and ideal approach to appraisal is often unrealistic; compromises must be made in

order to honor the integrity of the evaluation but also to encourage participation in the process as

well. A lot of thought goes into the process, and to make changes and improvements to an

existing system of appraisal requires a lot of care, attention, consideration, and time. Employees

are not likely to jump on board to a new idea without giving reason to first.

Another thing we learned is that people often do not like the performance appraisal

process and simply do not like doing performance appraisals. Establishing rapport with

employees and gaining support for the performance appraisal system is very difficult. Despite the

fact that OCSO has an excellent appraisal in place, employees still do not like it. It seems

although lots of research and theory have been proposed in regards to performance appraisals,

there is no perfect system; the best appraisal system is highly dependent on both the organization

and the purpose for the appraisal itself.

22

Name: Date of Report: Employee #: OCSO Hire Date: Sworn Date: Period covered by this report:

Rater Name: Rater Signature ______________________________________________________Date ____________

Rater Supervisor Name: Rater Supervisor Signature ____________________________________________Date ____________

Captain Name: Captain Signature ____________________________________________________Date ____________

Employee Signature ___________________________________________________Date ____________ I agree with the ratings I do not agree with the ratings (I have attached explanation)

Overall Rating: (Below Standards rating requires Performance Improvement Plan) Scheduled Date: Review Type: Next Review Date: Next Review Type:

KEY

E = Exceeds Standards M = Meets Standards B = Below Standards

E M B Job Knowledge: Demonstrates knowledge & skills necessary to perform job effectively Quality of Work: Accurately & thoroughly completes work Productivity: Effectively completes the specified amount of work within established guidelines Interpersonal Skills: Exercises courtesy & tact in dealing with others Communication: Effectively shares information with co-workers & citizens Teamwork: Maintains effective working relationships with others Accountability: Accepts responsibility for performance & behavior Judgment/Decision Making: Makes sound & logical decisions Personal Effectiveness: Maintains appropriate physical conditioning, hygiene & appearance

Orange County Sheriff’s Office Performance Evaluation Form

23

Leadership: Contributes to & respects the contributions of others in achieving Agency goals Employee Development: Strives to grow personally & professionally

Must be filled out for all employees that supervise other employees

KEY

E = Exceeds Standards M = Meets Standards B = Below Standards

E M B Administrative: Successfully performs general supervisory duties Supervision: Successfully supervises employee job performance Supervisor Interpersonal Skills: Exercises courtesy & tact in dealing with subordinates

Has employee had formal discipline in the rating period: yes no

Emergency Notification Form on file Current Home Phone Number & Address on file

Reviewed with supervisor:

GO 4.6.1 Anti-Discrimination & Equal Employment Opportunity GO 8.1.6 Use of Force (Sworn Only)

GO 4.7.2 Exposure Control Program (Sworn/designated Civilians) GO 8.1.7 Vehicle Apprehension/Pursuit (Sworn Only)

Critical Incident Management Guide

Date of last:

Sworn Block Training/Civilian Four Hour Training:

Firearm Qualification:

Biennial Physical (Sworn/designated Civilians):

Must be filled out for all employees that operate agency vehicles

Driver’s License #: Expiration Date: Valid: yes no

LEVO Training Date Completed:

Must be filled out for all employees

Strengths Areas for improvement

24

Comments __________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Employee requests Career Development Plan yes no

Performance Improvement Plan Completed yes no (Below Standards rating requires Performance Improvement Plan)

Orange County Sheriff’s Office Performance Improvement Plan Name Date of Report Employee # Next Review Date Next Review Type Rater Signature/Date ______________________________________________________ Rater Supervisor Signature ______________________________________________________ Captain Signature/Date ______________________________________________________ Employee Signature/Date ______________________________________________________

Job knowledge: Demonstrates knowledge & skills necessary to perform job effectively Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments

Quality of Work: Accurately and thoroughly completes work Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments

Productivity: Effectively completes the specified amount of work within established guidelines Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date

25

Comments

Interpersonal skills: Exercises courtesy & tact in dealing with others Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments

Communication: Effectively shares information with co-workers & citizens Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments

Teamwork: Maintains effective working relationships with others Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments

Accountability: Accepts responsibility for performance & behavior Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments

Judgment/Decision Making: Makes sound & logical decisions Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments

Personal Effectiveness: Maintains appropriate physical conditioning, hygiene & appearance Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments

Leadership: Contributes to & respects the contributions of others in achieving Agency goals Specific area for Improvement

26

Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments

Employee Development: Strives to grow personally & professionally Specific area for Improvement Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments

Administrative: Successfully performs general supervisory administrative duties Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments

Supervision: Successfully supervises employee job performance Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments

Supervisor Interpersonal Skills: Exercises courtesy & tact in dealing with subordinates

Recommended actions by (date) Completed Date Comments

27

Orange County Sheriff’s Office Performance Evaluation Preparation Form

This form is optional. Employees may complete prior to evaluation meeting with supervisor. Employee Name Date Position Section/Division Supervisor Evaluation Period Covered

Strengths: What are your strengths?

Areas for Improvement: What areas are in need of improvement? What steps would be beneficial or have you already taken to improve these areas?

Accomplishments/Activities: Describe the activities in which you have participated that have enhanced the agency and/or developed your knowledge, skills, and abilities (e.g., prepared for and participated in the DFC Exam, prepared for and competed in the Transfer Review Board, cross-trained in specialty

units, attended training/seminars):