Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Performance Management at Stanford: Pat Keating, L&OE
Performance Management at Stanford: Pat Keating, L&OE
Brian Nosek
1
Agenda
2
Change Drivers
79% 79% 80% 80%
80% 76% 78%
69%
68%
66%
70%
57%
54%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
g t t s y t k
in en on tio
n
en on on lit en on r
ach em icati n i
p m d iti ecti tibi itm r ati wo
o ag g lo ir pa e am
C
an un co ve Co
n
lD m
m sid Te
n d m Re e g a om o n
a M
Co
m lD in on C C Co
ack n ge na rk z ati Job ry
b a io o i o
ed Ch ss W ga
n v is
Fe ofe O r p er
Pr Su
The Business Case
4
Engagement, Performance and Retention
Business Value of Engaged Employees
The Manager, Employee Development
and Performance
Employees of managers who are very effective at development can outperform their peers by up to
25 percent
Impact of Manager-Led Development on Employee Performance
125
25%
100
} Performance Improvement
directly attributable to
Manager B’s effectiveness at
employee development
Activity & Impact Activity & Impact Activity & Impact Activity & Impact Activity & Impact
Explain Performance Help Employees Apply Ensure Projects Are Help Employees Find Assess Development
Evaluation Standards New Skills/Knowledge Learning Experiences Training Progress
19.8% 11.6% 19.8% 13.6% 13.8%
Create Individual Teach New Skill Provide Experiences That Pass Along Job Openings Give Feedback on
Development Plans (IDPs) or Procedure Develop Employees 10.3% Personality Strengths
12.0% 7.7% 19.1% Pass Along Development 13.3%
Ensure Necessary Give Advice from Own Opportunities Give Feedback on
Skills/Knowledge Experience 8.7% Performance Weaknesses
6.7% 6.7% 11.9%
Give Feedback on
Performance Strengths
8.0%
People Process
Technology
9
Expected Outcomes
• An easier, less cumbersome process
– An “easy-to-use” performance management process
– A common rating scale and set of competencies
10
Two-pronged Approach
11
Performance Management Maturity Model
Performance Management
Drives Development
Performance Management as
Required Mandate
Performance Management as
Fragmented HR Process
12
Benchmarking Ivy Leagues
School Uniform Online Goals and Mid-year One Rating Universal set
Process Year-end check-ins Scale of
Appraisals Competencies
Stanford Pilot phase Some units
13
= Not a current practice = Consistently practiced
Common Themes at Stanford
Ineffective Process No line level sponsorship
• “Managers don’t want to deliver tough messages
around performance.” • “Faculty don’t want to be bothered with
• “Managers and employees are only evaluated on performance management.”
goals and not people skills, therefore, how you • “Performance management is seen as an HR
achieve your goals is not important. People can practice.”
display bad behaviors and are not accountable.” • “This is not a true ‘pay-for-performance’ culture.”
• “People here have been in their jobs for a long time,
there really aren’t any ‘goals’ to set.”
14
Current State Summary
• Over 40 performance management forms across Stanford
• Rating scales vary from a 3 point scale to a 7 point scale and include numbers, letters and
descriptors, makes managing talent across the organization a challenge
• At least 3 different technologies are being used for performance management across Stanford
• Performance cycles vary greatly
• We measure hundreds of competencies and up to 17 competencies in one review
• Certain key elements of performance management that impact high performance including
multi-rater feedback, development planning etc. are not done consistently
• Lack the ability to track performance year-over-year
• Senior leaders cannot get a snapshot of their organization (unless using an online system)
• People management skills are not evaluated resulting in an over-emphasis on goals
Greater recognition of top talent and ready Getting rid of old behaviors and rewarding
now successors new behaviors
16
Retention & Succession Behavior Change
Best in Class Performance Management Programs
On-going Performance
Compensation feedback and Check-in/
coaching Feedback/ Mid-
Decisions
throughout the
year
year review
• Solicit • Solicit
feedback feedback
• Formal • Formal or
review, informal
employee performance check-in
writes self-review, via a mid-year review
gives self-ratings, or feedback session
manager adds and Year-end
rates • Communicate clear messages
Review around performance based
• Manager and employee meet
on goals and competencies
to discuss performance
17
Components of the PMP - Outline
Process Competencies
• Goal Setting
• Development Planning • Competency Model
• Mid-Year Reviews • Application
• Coaching and Feedback • Measurement of
• Multi-rater feedback competencies
• Year-End Reviews • Behavioral Descriptors
• Rating scales & Calibration
• Link to Compensation
PMP
People Tools/Technology
• University and • Form for goal setting, dev
School/Business unit planning, appraisals etc.
Leadership • Forced distribution curves
• Manager commitment, • Training curriculum and
capability, confidence format
• Employee commitment, • Job- aids to learn the new
capability, confidence process
18
Performance Management
Talent Compensation
Management
Performance
Management
Employee Survey
Experience
19
Pilot Issues
• Focus
• Scope
• Leadership
20
Pilot Group – Focus and Scope
Unit Focus Scope
GSB Changing behavior, driving innovation Whole organization
21
Executive Sponsors
• David Jones, VP HR
• Jeanne Berent, Executive Director of Finance and Administration, OOD
• Marcia Cohen, Sr. Associate Dean, Finance and Administration, SOM
• Shirley Everett, Sr. Associate Vice Provost, R&DE
• Adam Daniel, Sr. Associate Dean, H&S
• Clare Hansen-Shinnerl, Sr. Associate Dean, Finance and Administration, SOE
• Gary Edwards, Performance and Culture Strategist, GSB
22
Successful Change
23
Engaged Leadership
24
A Phased Approach (PILOT)
Phase
Phase 1 (Year 2011)
1 (FY2011)
Program
• A select pilot group Design
will participate &
in Phase
1 of the program.Implementation
• Define a high level university-wide program
which will include a performance Phase 2 (FY2012)
management philosophy and • Review various technology options, costs
recommended steps as part of the program etc. based on the needs defined in Phase
including development planning 1
• Review university wide and organization • Design and test online performance
specific competencies to create a model management tool
that can be broadly applied • Test new technology
• Create a common rating scale and • Create appropriate training and job-aids
definitions for employees and managers
• Recommend a format for writing appraisals • Launch new technology
• Gain line level sponsorship
• Assess ePerformance to see if it will meet
the organization’s needs
• Design appropriate training tools for
managers and employees
• Create a robust change management plan
for implementation
25
Multi-Year Timeline
26
Benefits of Participating in the Pilot
27
Detailed Timeline
28
Completed In Progress Not Started
High Level Strategy and Metrics
Adoption to Impact
• Staff is using the new • Managers develop the • Employee engagement, • Employee
program and ultimately skills to conduct professional productivity is higher
the technology effective performance development, employee as a result of the
reviews recognition and new program
• Managers give more employee commitment • It is easier to identify
• Staff finds the new frequent and more are higher
program and technology poor performers and
effective coaching and • Discretionary effort and
effective and easy to use create an action plan
feedback intent to stay are higher • It is easier to identify
• Stanford University is • High performing
and reward high
able to track and employees are identified performers
• Performance manage performance and rewarded • Turnover for high
management is and talent across the appropriately performing
established as a key organization employees is lower
accountability at every • Performance rating • Better business
level in the organization distributions are results
and from the top down normalized
• Employees understand
29
The Business Case
30
Questions
31
Backup Slides
32
Recommended Plan & Deliverables
• Define a high level university-wide program • Shift from performance management being an HR
• Performance Management Philosophy initiative to being a line level initiative
• Recommended steps • Sponsorship and launch at the highest level
• Reviewing university wide and organization • Identify line level performance champions who
specific competencies to create a flexible model will support a culture of performance
that can be broadly applied and easily customized management
• A common rating scale and definitions • Champions model new behaviors
• Recommended format for writing appraisals • Build channels of accountability at the line level to
ensure that managers are following the program
*For a complete definition of each activity, Source: Learning and Development Roundtable 2003 Employee Development Survey.
please see the previous slide.
34
Overall Employee Satisfaction Rate: 73%
† Percent favorable = Total positive responses (“Strongly Agree,” “Agree”) divided by total valid responses.
Slide 35
Overall Engagement Rate: 78%
† Percent favorable = Total positive responses (“Strongly Agree,” “Agree”) divided by total valid responses.
Slide 36
Strongest Dimension of Teamwork (tie)
Slide 37
Strongest Dimension of Supervisory Consideration (tie)
Slide 38
Weakest Dimension: Feedback and Coaching
Slide 40
Weakest Rated Individual Items: ~50%
or lower Favorable
Dimension Item % Favorable
(scale of 0 to
100)
Feedback My supervisor or someone at work 51%
and coaches me on how to improve the
Coaching way I do my job.
Change When organizational changes occur, I 51%
Managemen understand the rationale for those
t changes.
Change I am well informed in advance of 49%
Managemen organizational changes when they
t occur.
Professional In the last year, I have been 46%
Developme encouraged to advance my career.
nt
Slide 41