§ 99.11. Establishment of system.
(a) The Director, in cooperation with the appointing authorities, will establish a job-related system of performance evaluations for each class in the classified service.
(b) Performance evaluations will be based upon job-related factors appropriate for determining the manner in which the employee performs the duties and carries out the responsibilities of the position occupied. To provide a uniform and equitable basis for rating employees, the Director, in cooperation with appointing authorities, may establish work performance guides.
(c) Performance evaluation forms and procedures will be reviewed and approved by the Director prior to utilization.
§ 99.13. Reporting of performance evaluations. Performance evaluations for probationary status employees shall be completed and provided to the employees prior to the scheduled expiration of the probationary period by the appointing authority. Other performance evaluation reports shall be completed at least once each year, unless a different schedule is approved by the Director, and copies retained in the employee’s official personnel file. Upon request by the Director, performance evaluation reports shall promptly be made available for audit.
§ 99.14. Review of performance evaluations. Every employee for whom a performance evaluation is submitted will be shown the component parts of the evaluation by the supervisor as soon as practicable after the evaluation is made. The employee will be given an opportunity to review the component parts with the rater and the reviewing officer. Evidence of the review shall be indicated by the employee’s signature on the completed evaluation form. Refusal to sign the form will be reported in writing to the reviewing officer by the rater. Every employee shall have the right to be informed of this part and standards used in determining the evaluation.
§ 99.15. Application of performance evaluations. Performance evaluations shall be utilized for purposes of determining eligibility for promotion, to assist in establishing priority for promotion, or for determining order of furlough as provided for in the rules covering these subjects.
As one of the "appointing authorities" (i.e., the Library Director), I would construct an appraisal system that evaluates the librarian on the four areas outlined in the job description: Information services and reference desk duties; Collection development; Supervisory duties, and Other duties as assigned by the library director. The process will involve both a formal annual review as well as ongoing informal feedback from the librarian's supervisor. As indicated in § 99.15, the evaluation will be used to determine eligibility and/or priority for promotion or for "determining order of furlough." Action plans to address any potential disciplinary or performance problems, as well as a course of action to improve performance, will be developed as problems occur. In addition, employees will have the opportunity to appeal any part of an evaluation that he or she disagrees with, if the disagreement cannot be resolved with the employee's supervisor.
The lecture stresses the importance of providing ongoing feedback in addition to an annual review. Thus, the librarian will receive regular input from the supervisor in the form of monthly meetings that provide training and counseling with regard to the librarian's performance at the reference desk, as well as his or her collection development recommendations and supervisory duties. The meetings will allow the supervisor to gather information about the librarian throughout the year, and the supervisor will document this information - which will go into the employee's personnel file - to evaluate the librarian's performance during the formal review. (As the book emphasizes, everything should be documented to provide a professional written record, should there ever be a question about employee performance.)
The formal review will be based upon the assessment of both individual and unit performance goals set by the reference librarian and his or her supervisor, a self-review, and a team evaluation by both the supervisor and the librarian's peers, supervisees and the library's patrons. In addition, the librarian will have a chance to review his or her supervisor. (In other words, the formal review will provide 360-degree feedback.) It is important to establish individual goals that support the unit's goals in ordeer to foster the librarian's professional and personal development, and it is also important to have unit goals in order to promote team effort in the unit. The goals may be modified as needed, and the changes will also be documented to for legal purposes.
The lecture mentions that each employee should be allowed to provide a self-assessment of his or her performance during the review period. This self-evaluation can be used as a source of information that the supervisor can gather prior to the review, which can then be compared with the supervisor's review. A self-review will allow the employee to call attention to any accomplishments or concerns that the supervisor may not be aware of, and it will also let the supervisor see how an employee views his or her performance, and may even give an indication of the employee's work ethic (for instance, a completely laudatory self-review should raise some concerns of honesty). However, such reviews should be viewed in conjunction with other information, for as someone pointed out in the discussion board, some employees may be too self-effacing to draw attention to their achievements while others may not rate their performance in an entirely self-aware manner. Thus, a self-review that does not include any self-criticism or identification of weak spots may not necessarily mean an employee is being dishonest - it may be an indication that the employee is not aware of areas that need improvement, which the supervisor can help identify.
The lecture also mentions that if "the agency evaluates an employee based upon the employee’s performance as a team member, each individual team member’s supervisor is responsible for conducting the evaluation of that employee’s performance throughout the cycle," and that feedback from others such as the employees' peers and/or customers may be included in the review. Since the reference librarian will be working as part of a team at the library, a team evaluation conducted by the supervisor should be a part of the review. Feedback from other librarians and also from library patrons would be useful in the assessment to get a more complete picture of the reference librarian's overall performance. Feedback from other librarians can be gathered by means of a peer review system, while the librarian can be reviewed by his or her supervisees through a supervisor evaluation, which the librarian will also need to do for his or her own supervisor. Although the lecture mentions that peer reviews work best when they aren't tied to pay raises and/or promotions, it may work if the employees are allowed to see their peers' comments and are given the opportunity to respond to any negative assessments. (As the Rules of the Civil Service Commission indicate that employees are allowed to see the individual components of their review, they will be able to review their peer evaluations.)
It may be more difficult to gather information from library patrons, but it may be possible to gain a sense of how well the reference librarian assists the public from a review of chat logs, if the library provides reference chat (and if the chat software enables transcripts), and from patron comments, whether through e-mail or suggestion cards or face-to-face interactions. Still, unless there are numerous complaints against or praise for a particular librarian, it may be difficult to receive feedback from library patrons for the employee in question, which makes the peer evaluation all the more valuable as a means of assessing how well the librarian is performing on the job.
By itself, a supervisor review for this position will not provide an adequate appraisal of the librarian's performance. Because the librarian interacts with so many people other than his or her direct supervisor, it is best to incorporate 360-degree feedback (including the librarian's own self-evaluation) into the formal annual review, in order to get a complete picture of the librarian's overall performance, including his or her job knowledge, initiative and creativity, and teamwork, interpersonal and supervisory skills. Self-evaluations and upward review should also be included, as they can help make employees feel like a part of the review process, rather than the person being "judged," and can hopefully facilitate communication between the employee and the employer.
It is also important to gather information year-round, instead of right before the performance evaluation period, so that the review will not be unduly influenced by the employee's most recent performance and behavior (thus avoiding the "halo" effect). Thus, it is necessary to also have ongoing informal feedback from the employee's supervisor, in addition to the formal review.
No comments:
Post a Comment