Laserfiche WebLink
Performance Evaluation System 8 <br />4. Performance Evaluation System <br />Springsted <br />As a part of this Audit Springsted has reviewed and analyzed the City's current <br />performance evaluation system. The current system currently has four rating <br />factors in which to evaluate employees on the essential job functions of their <br />position. These categories are: <br />E: Exceeds Expectations (Performance has been above reasonable <br />expectations) <br />F: Fully Competent (Performance has attained a level of full competency) <br />N: Needs Improvement (Performance has been below reasonable expectations) <br />U: Unsatisfactory (Performance is unsatisfactory) <br />Each of the essential job functions of a position are rated individually using <br />these criteria. Supervisors are then allowed to comment on Suggestions for <br />Improvements and Commendations. It is recommended that a general <br />comments section be added to each individual job function. <br />It is recommended that the ratings scale and definitions be expanded to more <br />clearly define the rating and also that a point system is developed so that an <br />employee gets a score for each essential function as well as an overall ranking <br />of their performance. The City could use either a four or five step scale as <br />follows: <br />Five Steps Four Steps <br />Exceptional Performance: <br />Exceeds Standards: <br />Meets Standards: <br />Needs Improvement: <br />Below Standards <br />4 points <br />3 points <br />2 points <br />1 point <br />0 points <br />Exceeds Expectations <br />Meets Expectations <br />Needs Improvement <br />Below Expectations <br />3 points <br />2 points <br />1 point <br />0 points <br />Whichever scale the City would choose, Springsted can assist in development <br />of an expanded definition of the rating factor. <br />In the City's current evaluation for there is a section for listing goals which the <br />employee "hopes" to accomplish in the coming year. To further enhance an <br />objective and thorough performance evaluation system, it is recommended that <br />this section be expanded. This section of the form would be labeled Mutually <br />Established Goals and would be rated using the same criteria and scale as the <br />essential functions. <br />The City would then determine a weighting factor for how much of the total <br />rating is based on essential functions and how much on mutually established <br />goals. The weighting may be different for supervisory and department head <br />positions that for other City positions. <br />Lino Lakes, Minnesota. Human Resource Audit <br />