|
|
Performance Planning & Review (PPR)
PROGRESS UPDATE
Multnomah County recently piloted the Performance Planning & Review (PPR) process for managers. The six-month pilot, completed during January–June 2008, was just the beginning of a multi-phase plan to bring a standard performance evaluation process and competency-based performance practices to all county employees.
One of the major milestones in the plan was the August 2007 adoption of the Multnomah County Competency Model by the Chair’s Office and Department Directors.
PPR is more than a performance evaluation process. It is a comprehensive process focused on manager-employee communication, identifying performance driving behaviors (competencies), goal-setting, and employee development—occurring throughout the year, not just at year-end. PPR is founded on the most current industry standards for best practices in management and organizational effectiveness. The successes and learnings from our PPR pilot provide both a valuable baseline and a springboard for continuous process improvement.
The Goal
Maximize organizational performance throughout Multnomah County. Implement a system that enables managers and employees to engage in meaningful performance planning, feedback and review processes by using standard, consistent, and effective tools.
The Successes
There are 116 managers trained in competency-based performance planning, feedback and review processes. DCS, DCJ, and Central HR were the forerunners in the PPR pilot. We applaud their efforts, honor their feedback and recognize their support. An additional 240 managers will be trained by the end of FY08–FY09, and 5 departments will be using PPR at the exempt management level.
The Learnings
An evaluation of the pilot was completed and made available for review in October 2008. The next table presents some of the initial feedback themes and what we are doing to respond.
|
|
| Feedback Themes |
Process Improvement Actions |
FORM TOO COMPLEX: busy, lengthy, unclear who/when to fill in comments
|
simplified PPR form |
COMMUNICATION & PLANNING: liked goal-setting, expectation, clarification, feedback, recognition, knowing “on-track”
|
keep PPR process; continue to enhance elements of planning and communication |
CONFUSION ABOUT GOALS vs COMPETENCIES: hard to differentiate between them; action steps seemed redundant for each section...they overlap
|
clarify how Competencies and Goals relate |
CONSISTENCY, STRUCTURE, ACCOUNTABILITY: liked that it is not year-end only process; accountable to goals; sets up consistency for communication
|
keep PPR process; simplify form to better support process |
FORM RATINGS: language and levels not strengths-based
|
adjusted language and rating levels on PPR form |
Next Steps
DCJ, DCS, and Central HR continue using PPR for FY08-FY09
- Upgrades include: simplified PPR form, example completed PPR forms, FAQ document
- Currently recruiting for internal champions, or “PPR Liaisons,” as PPR moves forward
DCM, DCHS and MCSO transition to use of PPR beginning January 2009
- Pre-training focus groups—employee input, ownership, and change leadership
- Training delivered in November and December 2008
- Recruiting for internal champions
Library and HD implement PPR for FY09-FY10
- Above processes for prior departments will be mirrored
Represented employees transition to the PPR process—projected for FY10-FY11
Build-out Competency Model and PPR process to fit for represented employees.
|
