Water resources (a) case study presentation version 2.1

Integrating merit pay raises

with performance appraisal

MERIT RAISES & PERFORMANCE

Santa Clara RoseWater Planning

Sam Kim

April 2nd, 2014

1Santa Clara RoseWater Planning

California in Water Crisis

• Drought emergency declared February 2014

• Mandatory water rationing – 25% reduction

• Half million acres of agricultural land fallowed

• 10 rural towns with fewer than 100 days of water supply

• California to tap its Lake Mead ‘account’


Water Planning Division’s Mission

Better the use, the quality, and encourage preservation of precious water resources in this fast-growing county

Roberta Dickson’s personal mission:

Raise the level of productivity and activity in the group


Hydrologist

hydrology: study of movement, distribution, and quality of water

hydrologist: practitioner of hydrology working within the fields of earth or environmental science, physical geography, geology, civil engineering, or environmental engineering to form policies and plans

Career Statistics

• 2012 Median Pay: $75,530 annual salary

• Entry Level Education: Master’s degree

• Number of Jobs: 7,400 in 2012

• Job growth rate: 10% annually


Hydrologist in action


Water Planning Division Team

• Close knit group

• Personality loyalty to each other

• No loyalty to division’s work

• Previous management: passive & inconsistent

B. Mullen and C. Cooper, “The Relation Between

Group Cohesiveness and Performance: An

Integration,” Psychological Bulletin (March 1994),

pp. 210–227



High Cohesiveness + Low Performance Norms

LOW PRODUCTIVITY




pp. 210–227



Roberta Dickson’s Task:

Increase Group Performance Norms




pp. 210–227


• Honest and timely constructive feedback about employee’s job performance

• Conducted mid-year feedback sessions, outside of normal appraisal/merit pay cycle

Employees mostly responded well: “No one’s ever taken that sort of

interest in my work”

Roberta Dickson’s Employee Engagement


Current Assignment

Determine Annual Merit Raises

Process

1. Rate people according to the performance appraisal form

2. Up to 4 people nominated for merit increase from each of the divisions

3. About 3 people per division* will get merit increase

4. Others received cost-of-living adjustment

* 5 Divisions in Department of Environment & Natural Resources

21 people in Water Planning Division

~15% to receive merit increases


1. Once a year, rate people using county’s performance appraisal form based on:• 17 Criteria

• Weight of the criteria

• Anchor (rating score)

2. Division secretary has employees sign their appraisal forms

3. Merit pay raise announcements

4. Post-merit pay depression

Current Performance Appraisal Process


Current PA Form


• Once a year “feedback” on an employee’s work

• No goals, just criteria which are generally not “SMART”: specific, measureable, achievable, relevant, time-bound

• Employees rushed to sign the appraisal form with no discussion on the “feedback”

• Most employees clueless on how the merit pay was determined

• Demoralizing

• Lowers productivity

• Arbitrary and Capricious

Problems with County PA Process

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=no+leadership&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=ZPckNxeMOyltZM&tbnid=rxpQhXqz-F98cM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://nocompromiseleadership.wordpress.com/2011/10/17/every-leaders-internal-battle/&ei=GtdhUYaxNPSk2gWEtoCYBw&psig=AFQjCNFQA_Cer8z_pWa_efjYzPBlOrgkmw&ust=1365452927184910

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=no+leadership&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=ZPckNxeMOyltZM&tbnid=rxpQhXqz-F98cM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://nocompromiseleadership.wordpress.com/2011/10/17/every-leaders-internal-battle/&ei=GtdhUYaxNPSk2gWEtoCYBw&psig=AFQjCNFQA_Cer8z_pWa_efjYzPBlOrgkmw&ust=1365452927184910


How to continue to build employee engagement when

awarding merit increases and

providing performance feedback• Rate her people

• Determine which 4 people to bring forward

• Continue the Dickson’s Way

• Avoid the post-merit-award “depression”

• Provide effective feedback to staff about their work

• Send a useful signal to her staff

Dickson’s Challenge


Dickson’s First Cut (10 of 21 people)

Name Job Tenure

(years)

Last Merit

Increase

Salary Notes Performance

Robert

Dorr

Hydrologist III 9 5 years ago $45,522 Liaison with large city water districts,

a thankless job

“High paid people have been

passed over for years”

Jim

Wallace

Hydrologist III 6 $39,620 Passed over for director slot Well regarded, glum lately

Dave

Davis

Water

Engineering

Specialist

9 Last 3 years;

Top of salary

range

$27,555 No formal training in water

engineering, blocked from Hydrologist

job

Extremely conscientious,

institutional memory, good

relationships

Linda

Weinberg

Half time;

Hydrologist II

$31,614 Worn down by fight for promotion;

fairness important

Creative and insightful; anger and

low morale affecting others

Barney

Vance

Hydrologist I 0.5; RIF

transfer

$28,418

(lowest)

Assigned lead to risky & political

project; 3 children

Refuses to coordinate with co-

workers or county engineering

Eric

Hansen

Hydrologist II 5 $30,919

(11th)

Funded by expiring grant Can do attitude; natural good

work; role model

Bill

Jordan

Hydrologist III Old

timer

$45,817 Disinterest; blames Krabel and his

“pets”

Inattention to detail; lazy

Jeff Rider Hydrologist I 1.5

transfer

Ineligible for 2

years

$29,430 Lacks fresh ideas & political sensitivity Quiet; accurate; learner; results

Leslie

Malina

Hydrologist II $31,614 Respected; unaware of her value to

division

Low self-esteem; works hardest

with results

George

O’conner

Hydrologist III 5 4 years ago $42,019 Job hunting for challenging

assignment

Top-notch; independent, reliable


• Confidential Report

• Graphic Rating Scale

• Ranking Method

• Forced Choice Method

• MBO

• Checklist

• Critical Incidence Method

• Performance Tests and Observations

• Field Review

• Rating Scales

• Forced Distribution Method

• Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales

Methods of Performance Appraisal


• Rank employees within a department from best to worst performers

• Based on 360-degree feedback

• Establish which of the top performers should be retained when downsizing

• Bottom flush non-producers

Alternative 1: Rank and Yank (GE, Boeing)


• Future potential vs. Past performance matrix

• Combines rating, ranking, and potential

• Rate within the pay grade level

• 360 degree feedback

Alternative 2: Potential and Performance

(Whirlpool)


Potential vs. Performance Matrix

Potential: The ability or capacity

for growth and development

into a leadership role

Performance: technical skills,

abilities, and subject matter

knowledge in job related field;

ability to develop and maintain

working relationships which

incorporate department’s values

Useful for staffing management,

development, and succession

planning


• “What” and “How” Performance Grid

• Combines rating, ranking, results, and competencies

• Rate within the pay grade level

• 360 degree feedback

• Self-evaluation

• Conducted twice a year

Alternative 3: Performance Grid (HP)

Wha

t

How


Performance Grid

12

Measuring “What” and “How” Together

What (MOs)

How (Competencies)

+

=

-

+=-

-+Inconsistent How

Awesome Results

--Inconsistent How

Inconsistent Results

= -Solid How


+ =Awesome How

Solid Results

+ -Awesome How


+ +Awesome How

Awesome Results

= +Solid How

Awesome Results

-=Inconsistent How

Solid Results

= =Solid How

Solid Results

How = CompetenciesHorizontal - = + (X axis. left to right))

What = Measurable ObjectivesVertical - = + (Y axis, bottom to top)

+ Awesome

= Solid

- Inconsistent

7

1

654

98

2 3


3 Rating System

Performance

Band What it Means What it does not mean

PB3(20%)

• Best in class

• Inspires others to excel; consistently

elevates their teams

• Continually builds and develops

leaders/employees in the organization.

• Champions our mission, vision and

values

• Effectively achieves goals; however

doesn’t routinely exceed expectations

• Gets along with others

• Once a PB3, always a PB3

PB2(70%)

• Raises game to meet goals

• Consistently achieves what and how

• Supports a culture for our mission, vision

and values.

• Achieves What, but can be difficult to

work with at times

• Is nice, but consistently misses goals

PB1(10%)

• Doesn’t raise game as needed

• Inconsistent in what and/or how

• Is out the door pronto

• Inflexible to feedback or change

• Doesn’t support or champion our

mission, vision and values


Performance Grid + Rating

12


What (MOs)

How (Competencies)

+

=

-

+=-

-+Inconsistent How

Awesome Results

--Inconsistent How


= -Solid How


+ =Awesome How

Solid Results

+ -Awesome How


+ +Awesome How

Awesome Results

= +Solid How

Awesome Results

-=Inconsistent How

Solid Results

= =Solid How

Solid Results



+ Awesome

= Solid

- Inconsistent

7

1

654

98

2 3


Performance Grid – People

12

Where would you put the Division staff?

What (MOs)

How (Competencies)

+

=

-

+=-



+ Awesome

= Solid

- Inconsistent

7

1

654

98

2 3


Performance Grid – People

12


What (MOs)

How (Competencies)

+

=

-

+=-

Linda (II)

Bill(III)

George (III)

Eric (II)

Dave (spec)

Leslie (II)

Jeff (I)

Jim (III)

Barney(I)

Robert (III)



+ Awesome

= Solid

- Inconsistent

7

1

654

98

2 3


• Place every employee in the 9-box grid

• Nominate the top four PB3 performers

• Accept the top three PB3 in Box 9

• Provide specific and regular feedback to every employee on where they are in the matrix and how they could improve

• Provide development goals and development opportunities

• Employees understand, accept, and know exactly what they’resigning on the PA form

Immediate Next Steps


• Adopt the 9-box Performance Grid model

• Set “SMART” cascading objectives for every employee tied to job descriptions and county’s strategic goals

• Provide continuous performance feedback to every employee based on objectives and 360-degree feedback

• Conduct joint rating sessions throughout the county semi-annually

• Base merit pay increase on top performers throughout the county

Strategic Shift in County PA


• Ensure clear and up-to-date job descriptions exist for every level

• Create strategic goals within the county, department, and division

• Frequently communicate the strategicgoals and check for understanding of individuals’ objectives

• Motivate employees through performance staff development, appraisal, and merit pay increases

Support and build on Roberta Dickson’s work

More changes

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=no+mission+or+vision&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=IbozLNdWEKfUZM&tbnid=yNIa_73BtG7agM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://evansvillemovingforward.blogspot.com/2011/12/its-simple-no-vision-no-progress.html&ei=sddhUYyNMIar2QXZuYDwBQ&psig=AFQjCNFMlMVAsnHq7OLCmrAa4Uz2Xpr_NQ&ust=1365453062078343

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=no+mission+or+vision&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=IbozLNdWEKfUZM&tbnid=yNIa_73BtG7agM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://evansvillemovingforward.blogspot.com/2011/12/its-simple-no-vision-no-progress.html&ei=sddhUYyNMIar2QXZuYDwBQ&psig=AFQjCNFMlMVAsnHq7OLCmrAa4Uz2Xpr_NQ&ust=1365453062078343


• Better the use, the quality, and encourage preservation of precious water resources in this fast-growing county

• Raise the level of productivity and activity in the group

Result: Carry out the mission effectively


• What kind of performance appraisal/evaluation system do you have?

• How happy are you with your performance appraisal process?

• Should employees be ranked against each other?

• How would you prefer to be evaluated?

• Why wasn’t Rob Segal, a long time employee respected for his perspective, not included in the top 10? (as compared to Bill Jordan)

Questions

Water resources (a) case study presentation version 2.1

Documents

Transcript of Water resources (a) case study presentation version 2.1