Today’s Objectives

•Share information about 2012 performanceevaluations

•Discuss how performance scores change as rolesand responsibilities change

•Review the performance award process for FY12

•Answer your questions

What Determines Performance

•SWAT Goal performance (50%)

•Individual behaviors consistent with ourcore values (25%)

•Your ability to complete your day to day jobcompetencies (25%)

2011 vs. 2012 Evaluations2011 2012

2011 Section

Name

2011

Weight

2011 Rating Scale 2012 Section

Name

2012

Weight

2012 Rating Scale

Expectations 40% 5: Exceptional

4: Exceeds Expectations

3: Meets Expectations

2: Improvement Needed

1: Unsatisfactory

Job

Competencies

25% 5: Expert

4: Advanced

3: Proficient

2: Basic

1: Limited

Goals 40% 5: Exceptional

4: Exceeds Expectations

3: Meets Expectations

2: Improvement Needed

1: Unsatisfactory

SWAT Goals 50% 5: Top Performer

4: Strong Performer

3: Solid Performer

2: Inconsistent Performer

1: Unsatisfactory Performer

Organizational

Competencies

(Mission, Values,

Performance

Improvement)

20% 5: Exceptional

4: Exceeds Expectations

3: Meets Expectations

2: Improvement Needed

1: Unsatisfactory

Core ValuesTeamwork

Patient-Centered

Accountability

Excellence

Pride

Innovation

25% 5: Top Performer

4: Strong Performer

3: Solid Performer

2: Inconsistent Performer

1: Unsatisfactory Performer

Performance

Evaluation

Score Matrix

100% High Performer: 4.00 – 5.00

Middle Performer: 3.00- 3.99

Low Performer: 1.00 – 2.99

Overall

Performance

Score Matrix

100% Top Performer: 4.50 – 5.00

Strong Performer: 3.50 – 4.49

Solid Performer: 2.50 – 3.49

Inconsistent Performer: 1.50 – 2.49

Unsatisfactory Performer: 1.00 – 1.49

Guide/Tool

New Performance Rating System

The following guidelines apply for standard scoring across all sections of the evaluation:

RatingLevel

Job Competencies Goals & Values In other words…

5 Expert Top Performer “BUILDS IT”

4 Advanced Strong Performer “ENCOURAGES IT”

3 Proficient Solid Performer “DOES IT”

2 Basic Inconsistent Performer “CAN DO IT”

1 Limited UnsatisfactoryPerformer

PerformanceImprovement Plan

Job CompetenciesExpert Possesses Specialist/Authority level knowledge of the

competencies required to be successful in the position andapplies/demonstrates the competencies in daily work (totalmastery).

Advanced Possesses highly developed knowledge and understandingof competencies required to be successful in the position, aswell as the ability to apply them.

Proficient Possesses detailed knowledge and understanding ofcompetencies required to be successful in the position,and can apply the competencies in daily work.

Basic Possesses basic understanding or knowledge needed for thejob.

Limited Competency has been minimally demonstrated.

SWAT GoalsTop Performer No higher level of performance can be obtained.

Strong Performer Achievement clearly and consistently exceeds thegoals/targets/criteria.

Solid Performer Consistently achieves goals/targets/criteria.

Inconsistent Performer Fails to consistently meet goals/targets/criteria.

UnsatisfactoryPerformer

Fails to meet goals/targets/criteria.

Core Values: TeamworkTop Performer Seeks opportunities to build collaborative partnerships with

internal and external team members to impart systemknowledge and to advance the system.

StrongPerformer

Frequently uses opportunities to work with others, shareknowledge, and help others succeed.

Solid Performer Consistently works with others to accomplish teamgoals and tasks.

InconsistentPerformer

Occasionally isolates oneself from others while workingtoward team goals and objectives.

UnsatisfactoryPerformer

Isolates oneself from others instead of working toward teamgoals and objectives.

Overall PerformanceTop Performer Performance was superior in terms of completeness,

timeliness, and independence; mastery of skills and tasksinvolved was demonstrated.

StrongPerformer

Performance was what can be expected of a fully qualifiedand experienced person in this position.

Solid Performer Performance is at the level expected for this position:effective, consistent, and reliable. Valued contributor.

InconsistentPerformer

Performance needs improvement, or staff member is new tothis position and is still learning.

UnsatisfactoryPerformer

Immediate improvement is essential, and a performanceimprovement plan is required.

What is Performance Calibration?

•A process for leaders to discuss and comparestaff’s performance ratings with the goal ofmaking sure leaders apply similar standards forall staff and eliminate biases to the greatestextent possible.

– Inter-rater reliability

•This year at Scott & White:– Beginning to calibrate (At regional level)

– Provide tools to leaders to guide through process

Why Calibrate?

•Individual performance must align withsystem performance/results

•Creates more accurate performance scores

•Identifies growth opportunities for staff andorganization

•Establishes more fair results

Expected Distribution

Based on Staff count of 100

Time Spent

Pro

jects

Wo

rke

dO

n

Get Familiar

AchieveMastery

Performance Progression

GetExperienced

Summary• New Rating Scale for Performance Reviews

– Affects everyone

– SWAT Goals met equals Solid Performer

• Calibration of Performance Scores – Completed by Region

– September 1 – 21: Evaluations Completed and SAVED

– September 24 – 26

• Top Performers – 10%

• Strong Performers – 20%

• Solid Performers – 50%

• Inconsistent Performers – 15%

• Unsatisfactory Performers – 5%

• Performance Conversations

– October 1 – 12

– Individuals must accept/reject performance evaluation by October 12th

Q & A

•Question 1:– I’ve always been a 5, now I’m a 3.8. Why

doesn’t S&W appreciate me anymore?

•Question 2:– My manager set tougher SWAT goals than

many other managers. Shouldn’t that countfor something?

Q & A

•Question 3:– My manager told me that he thinks I’m a 5 but

HR told him to rate me a 3. Is that true?

•Question 4:– Why didn’t you tell us this at the beginning of

the year…why are you (HR) always changingthe rules at the end of the game?

2012 Performance Awards

2011 Actual

7.5% (829 Staff Members)

2012 Goal

30% (3300 Staff Members)

92.50%

7.50%

Staff MembersNot ReceivingAward

StaffReceivingAward

70.00%

20.00%

10%

Staff MembersNot ReceivingAward

StrongPerformerAward(11%-30%)

Top PerformerAward(up to 10%)

Increase the percentage of total staff receiving award from 7% to 30%

Based on meeting $50 million dollar challenge

Who is eligible?

• Eligible:– Full-time and part-time staff (Directors to front line)

• hired on or before 06/04/2012

– Directors will not receive additional bonus

– Must have completed (accept/reject) 2012 Performance Review

– Employed on date of payout

• Not Eligible:– PRN staff (based on status as of 8/31/2012)

– Residents

– Senior and Executive Staff (SWC payroll)

Payout Matrix 2012 Targets• Top performers will receive 2.5% of FY12 actual base

earnings

• Strong performers will receive 1.25% of FY12 actual baseearnings

• Examples:– $37,500 base pay

• Top Performer: $37,500 X 2.5% = $937.50*

• Strong Performer: $37,500 X 1.25% = $468.75*

– $55,000 base pay

• Top Performer: $55,000 X 2.5% = $1,375.00*

• Strong Performer: $55,000 X 1.25% = $687.50*

*Taxable Income – post calibration

Summation

PerformanceEvaluation tobe completedby manager

Dashboardscreated and

sent toleadership

Calibrationby leaders

Conversationswith StaffMembers

All reviewsaccepted/rejectedby Staff Members

AwardPayout Date

Sep22 - 23

Sep1 – 21

Nov23

Sep24 - 26

Oct1 - 12

Oct12

Sep27

Scores adjustedin PeopleSoft

Q & A

•Question 1:– When will I know how I was rated and if

I receive a Performance Award?

•Question 2:– My department has already taken care

of getting rid of our low performers andwe are now a department of highperformers. Why can I only have 30%when they are all high performers?

•Question 3:– What if I only have five employees?

•Question 4:– Who will be making the decision on my

performance award? Last year theperson who made the decision didn’teven know who I was.

Q & A

Questions