Session 5

Performance Evaluation System

in Bangladesh Civil Service
PROFESSOR MOMTAZ JAHAN
 What is Performance Appraisal/ Evaluation?
 Performance appraisal is the process of assessing
systematically the performance of a person on the
present job and his/her potential for higher level jobs
in future.
 Thereare various techniques of performance appraisal
as well as various types of appraisal like—self
appraisal, superior appraisal, peer appraisal, group
appraisal.
CONTD>

 Performance appraisal provides an objective basis

for taking personnel decisions.
 Establishing performance standards,
communication standards, and corrective actions
are the steps in performance appraisal.
Performance Appraisal System in BCS

 Performance of Bangladesh civil servants are evaluated by the Annual

Confidential Report (ACR). ACR in BCS is meant for a particular calendar
year.
 Its purposes are;
1. Ensuring accountability in civil service.
2. Providing cumulative records of an officer’s performance.
3. Playing the role as a means for improving performance.
4. Supplying vital information for posting, transfer, training, career
advancement and other personnel decisions.
Contd.

 A single ACR form consisting of eight parts is being used for all first class
officers.
 There are three main actors in the evaluation system.
1. Assesse/ Officer Reported Upon (ORU)
2. Assessor/ Report Initiating Officer (RIO)
3. Counter Signing Officer (CSO).
The immediate senior officer of the ORU will be the RIO and will send it to the next
higher officer for counter sign.
Eight Parts of the Existing ACR

 Part 1: Personal Information which is to be filled up by the ORU.

 Part 2: Medical Examination Report to be filled up by an authorized medical
officer.
 Part 3: 13 Personal Attributes of the assesse is assessed by the RIO.
 Part 4: 12 Performance Traits of the assesse is assessed by the RIO.
 Part 5: Pen Picture about the assesse by the RIO.
 Part 6 : Recommendations to be filled up by the RIO.
 Part 7: Comments of CSO
 Part 8: To be filled up by the ministry/division concerned.
Personal Attributes

 1.Discipline
 2.Judgement and sense of proportion
 3.Intellect
 4.Endeavor and initiative
 5.Personality
 6.Cooperation
 Punctuality
CONTD.

 8. Dependability
 9. Responsibility
 10. Interest in work
 11. Promptness in carrying order and action
 12. Carefulness in security
 13. Behavior with people
Performance Attributes

 1. Professional knowledge
 2.Work standard
 3. Quantity of performed work
 4. Ability to supervise and direction
 5. Relations with coworkers
 6. Efficiency in decision making
CONTD.

 7. Ability to implement decision

 8. Interest and efficiency to train subordinates
 9. Capacity to express in writing
 10. Capacity to express in speaking
 11. Promptness in writing and countersigning ACR
 12. Dutifulness
CONTD>

 Total Marks Obtained

 Extra-ordinary 95-100
 Very Good 85-94
 Good 61-84
 Average 41-60
 Below Average 40 and below
Recommendations by RIO

 Brief Comment
 1. Special trend and quality
 Honesty and integrity
 Recommendations for in service training
 Competency for promotion
 Other Recommendations (if any)
Comments of CSO

 The evaluation of RIO is very good/reasonably

good/rigid/flexible/not neutral.
 Moreover, I put my comments below
 1. General Comments
 2. Total marks based on evaluation.
Drawbacks of Current ACR System

 Totally subjective in nature.

 It is commonly believed that ACRs are prepared on the
RIOs discretionary judgement about the performance of
ORU.
 BCS uses the superior rating. It increases the likelihood of
bossism and is highly susceptible to rater’s bias.
 Under rating and over rating of ORU by RIO.
CONTD.

 The system has no provision of feedback to the officer except

information on the adverse remark if any. The confidential
nature of the system deprive the officers getting directions for
improving performance.( If an employee gets below average
grade in cumulative rating he is considered got adverse
remark).
 The 5th part is the space kept for pen picture. In many cases it is
seen that the qualities of the ORU which have been marked in
part 3 and part 4 are again mentioned in the space but special
qualities of the ORU is not mentioned.
CONTD.

 Lack of seriousness of RIOs and CSOs in writing ACRs.

 Sometimes the remarks written contradict to the marks awarded to
each individual trait or the remarks contradict to the overall grading
of the ORU.
 CSOs can write their own judgements about the rating recorded by
the RIO. But it is believed that the CSOs do not play their due part
in rectifying rating errors done by the RIO.
Contd.

 The CSOs mostly does not write any comment on the 7th part.
It does not help in proper assessment. In some cases the CSO
do not posses any idea about the performance of the ORU.
 Assesses cannot know about inconsistencies in their rating
score as the appraisal process is confidential.
 ACR has no relevance to career planning and performance
improvement as the ACR does not allow performance related
feedback except the adverse remark.
CONTD.

 Less scope to assess according to professionalism. There is no

specific professional or job oriented criteria for performance
evaluation.
 Uniform ACR format is used. Not all factors are relevant for
all cadres.
 ACR is mostly personality oriented and not function related.
 No relationship with reward system.
 The system is used mainly as a control mechanism.