Performance & Development Review Policy

Purpose

The University of Otago recognises the value of investing in individual development, assessment, planning, goal setting and achievement. The Professional Staff Performance and Development Review ( PDR ) is the primary means for aligning the performance, skills, knowledge, and career development of professional staff with the goals and requirements of the University.

Organisational scope

This Policy applies to all Professional staff as defined in section 3 of this Policy.

Definitions

Accelerated Increase

Any increase of more than one standard increase.

Appointment Range

Lower half of salary range for the level on a salary scale.

Appointment Increase

A standard increase within the Appointment Range.

Descriptor

Examples that describe how staff may demonstrate their level of performance within a Competency.

Divisional Heads (for the purpose of this process only)

Vice-Chancellor, Deputy Vice-Chancellors, Pro-Vice Chancellors, Deans in Health Sciences, Chief Operating Officer, and Directors of the Professional Divisions.

Head

The Manager with the delegated authority for PDR salary increases.

Level

The different levels within a Salary Scale. Each level will have a salary range.

Merit Range

Top half of the salary range for the Level.

Performance Level

The 5 levels of performance assessed during the Review; “Outstanding”, “Exceeds Expectations”, “Fully Competent”, “Working Satisfactorily towards Full Competence” or “Requires Improvement”

Progress Review

An update review between Reviewer and Reviewee that occurs at set intervals during the review period.

Review

The formal PDR between the staff member and their Reviewer.

Review period

The period from the last Review or appointment to the next Review

Reviewee

the staff member who is being reviewed

Reviewer

The manager or supervisor who is responsible for the Review.

Salary Scale

The scale that the staff member is currently on as determined by their employment agreement. The scale may have defined salary steps or may only show a salary range.

Salary Range

The range from the bottom to the top of a level within a Salary Scale.

Standard Increase

In the Appointment Range this is one step. In the Merit Range this is 3 steps in Levels 1-3 and 4 steps in Levels 4-8.

Content

1. Principles

1. The aims of the PDR process are to:
1. Focus staff on appropriate professional development opportunities.
2. Produce agreed goals for staff and appropriate support to achieve them.
3. Encourage an effective working relationship between a staff member and their manager based on an honest and open exchange of views.
4. Provide the staff member with an opportunity for a Salary Review with someone who has first-hand knowledge of their work.
5. Align staff knowledge, skills and development with the strategic direction of the department and the University.
6. Ensure there are no surprises during the formal PDR .
7. Ensure a regular Review of job performance over the previous 12 months.

2. Timeframe

1. The PDR year starts at the completion of the formal PDR Review and ends at the time of the next annual review.
2. The formal PDR Review meeting happens once a year between 1 August and 31 October.
3. All PDR forms are completed and signed by the Reviewer, Reviewee and Head by the dates set by the University but no later than the end of the Calendar year.
4. Salary Review outcomes are decided by the dates set by the University but no later than the end of the calendar year.
5. Regular Progress Reviews are required to be scheduled throughout the year.

3. PDR eligibility

1. The PDR Policy applies to those staff who:
1. Are permanently employed on either the General Staff Collective Employment Agreement, Professional Staff Individual Employment Agreement or the Management Band Individual Employment Agreement and have been employed since 31 July in the Review year.
2. Are employed on fixed term agreements and have worked for 3 months or more. If the fixed term agreement ends before 1 February and it is unclear whether the position will be funded on 1 February, a review should still be completed. This shall not however bind the University to provide employment beyond the terms of the current agreement.
3. Staff are not eligible for salary increases if they have worked less than 3 months or, they have left the organisation or, they will not be continuing employment within the University beyond 31 January of the following year.
4. The PDR process can be used for staff not included in the above, e.g. short-term fixed-term, casual employees. However, these staff will not be eligible for salary increases through this process.
5. Completing a PDR Review is compulsory for eligible staff.

4. Changes to role

1. If a staff member's position changes and/or is re-evaluated at a new level during the Review period, the following applies;
1. i.if the effective date of the re-evaluation of the staff member's position occurred before 1 August, the staff member's performance is reviewed against the requirements for the new or changed role.
2. ii.If the effective date of the re-evaluation of the staff member's position occurred after 1 August, the staff member's performance is reviewed against the old position description.

5.Assessment

1. Outcomes and Competencies are the key tools for assessment of performance and defining areas for development.
2. Outcomes
   1. An outcome is what has been achieved as assessed against a predetermined set of tasks, functions or responsibilities. They may be sourced from a range of areas including job descriptions, PDR meetings, policies, or practices.
   2. Expected outcomes are what staff are expected to achieve during a Review period.
3. Competencies
   1. The competencies focus on the way or manner in which the outcomes can be achieved.
   2. The University has 8 generic competencies:
   • Knowledge and Skills
   • Teamwork and Co-operation
   • Organisation, Planning and Self-Management
   • Problem Solving / Decision Making
   • Service to Customers
   • Initiative and Innovation
   • Leadership and People Management
   • Ngā Taonga Tuku Iho / Language and Culture
   3. Each competency is made up of a series of descriptors of performance or behaviour. These are described in detail in Appendix 1 – Competencies.
   4. For the purposes of the PDR it is expected that:
      • The majority of the competencies will apply when describing the level of staff performance. Some may be of more significance depending on the role.
      • Not all the competency descriptors would apply to each position or to a particular outcome.

6. Performance levels within competencies

1. Within each competency there are five performance levels:
1. Outstanding
2. Exceeds Expectations
3. Fully Competent
4. Working Satisfactorily towards Full Competence
5. Requires Improvement
2. Definitions of performance levels
   
   

   Outstanding

   Consistently achieves all their outcomes as described in the “outstanding” performance descriptors. The Key outcomes are recognised as exceeding the normal expectations for the role.

   Exceeds Expectations

   Achieves some outcomes that are recognised to be beyond the requirements of the role as described in the “outstanding” performance descriptors for key competencies, and balanced with outcomes achieved at the “fully competent” level for other competencies.

   Fully Competent

   Achieves all expected outcomes to a high standard as described in the “fully competent” performance descriptors. Performance assessed at this level is considered as meeting normal expectations for the role.

   Working Satisfactorily toward Full Competence

   Achieves some expected outcomes and demonstrates full competence in some areas as described in the “working satisfactorily towards full competence” performance descriptors. Development is required in some areas of the role but progress towards “fully competent” is evident.

   Requires Improvement

   Does not achieve some expected outcomes; performance is as described in the “requires improvement” performance descriptors. Development is required in some key areas of the role but improvement is not evident

3. Exceeds Expectations Descriptors
1. Unlike the other levels, Exceeds Expectations does not have a set of descriptors of the performance level (refer Appendix 1). This level is met by demonstrating all the relevant descriptors in the Fully Competent performance level and some of the relevant descriptors in the Outstanding performance level. The proportion of outstanding outcomes will increase as the staff member progresses up the scale.
4. The level of Fully Competent
1. The expectation is that all staff will attain the level of Fully Competent. They will do this by progressing through the Appointment steps within the Appointment range. The number of Appointment steps will vary depending on the level of Appointment and initial placement within that range.
2. Once the level of Fully Competent is achieved it is expected that this will become the minimum standard of performance.
5. Changes in Assessment across Reviews
1. It may not always be possible to sustain an assessment at the higher levels of Exceeds Expectations and Outstanding over time. Therefore, there may be movement within the levels of Fully Competent, Exceeds Expectations and Outstanding over time, e.g. someone assessed as Outstanding one year may be assessed as Exceeds Expectations or Fully Competent the following year.
6. Service to the University Community and/or Service to the Wider Community
1. Service to the University and wider community is not a requirement for professional staff, but a number of staff are involved in activities that benefit the University, and this kind of contribution needs to be acknowledged and valued. It is an additional positive factor which should be taken into consideration when assessing the level of performance.
2. Service can cover a very wide range of areas and includes all activities which are voluntary and not part of the job description. To be considered, the activities must benefit the University and should not detract from the staff member's ability to do their job. Listed below are examples of the types of activities that could be considered as community service:
   • Fostering positive links and better understanding between the University and groups such as local papatipu rūnanga, Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu and ngā Iwi Māori;
   • Membership of University committees such as the Operational Health and Safety Committee, or divisional and departmental committees;
   • Supporting a professional association or staff grouping e.g. the Technicians' Forum, Staff Women's Caucus etc;
   • Acting as a contact person under the Ethical Behaviour Policy.
   • Territorial or St Johns Ambulance service
3. A lack of relevant community service is not a negative factor as it is essentially a voluntary activity and not everyone has the opportunity to contribute in this way.

7. Parties involved in the PDR

1. The person who manages the staff member's work directly will normally be the main Reviewer.
2. A Reviewer should have responsibility for a manageable number of Reviewees. If the number of reviewees exceeds what is reasonably manageable then alternatives must be considered. Consideration may include delegating, shared or assisted reviews, or other alternative ways for completing the PDR .
3. It may be appropriate for the Reviewer to be supported by a more senior manager in completing the PDR .
4. In some situations, it may be appropriate to invite someone with additional knowledge about the performance to participate in or contribute to the Review. This should be discussed in advance of a Review meeting.

8. Support People in the PDR review

1. Either party has the opportunity to bring a support person to the Review meeting. This could be, for example, a colleague, whānau support or a union representative. There may be a variety of reasons why a staff member would like a support person.
2. If a support person is to be involved, the parties participating in the Review should discuss and clarify in advance what their role in the meeting will be. For example, a support person might provide support but not speak during the session, or they may provide prompts to help provide information.

9. The formal PDR meeting

1. The formal PDR must be completed before 31 October. The requirements for the Review meeting are:
1. The Reviewer will give the Reviewee at least one week's notice of the Review meeting, offer the opportunity to bring a support person, and ensure adequate opportunity to prepare.
2. The Reviewer should arrange a suitable place for the PDR meeting.
3. In the Review meeting, the parties will discuss the staff member's performance in terms of expected outcomes and competencies.
4. The parties will discuss the overall assessment of the staff member's performance. The Reviewer will consider all the information discussed at the meeting before finalising the decision about the overall assessment of performance.
5. If the Reviewer believes that more information is needed before a decision can be reached, a second meeting can be arranged and plans made to obtain the necessary information.
6. A work and development plan will be developed for the next year.
7. The parties will set regular dates for progress reviews over the next 12 months.
8. The Reviewer will write up the PDR form.
9. The Head, if not the Reviewer, and the staff member have an opportunity to make additional comments in the PDR Form.
10. The completed form will then be signed by all parties and copied to the Reviewer, the staff member and the departmental personnel file. This should be completed by the end of November.

10. Salary review

1. The standard salary increase will depend on the specific scale that applies to a position.  For example, for roles on Scale 1 the standard Appointment Range salary increase is one step and in the Merit Range three steps in Levels 1-3 and four steps in Levels 4-8.
1. NOTE: for staff on Scale 1: As of 1 February 2023, eligible staff on Scale 1 will automatically receive a Standard increase if they are eligible for a PDR, and not on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP), or part of a formal process, or at the top of the scale or off the scale.
2. For all other salary scales, please refer to the criteria for movement relevant to each scale.
3. If a staff member’s performance is assessed as Requires Improvement, appropriate support and a development plan will be put in place to assist with an improvement in performance.
4. Accelerated Salary Increases
1. An Accelerated Increase is two steps and may be considered in either range when a performance level of Exceeds Expectations or Outstanding is given. Accelerated Increases are reserved for exceptional performance.
2. Reviewers will need to submit a case for consideration and approval by the Divisional Head. Approved Accelerated Increases will need to be sent to the HR Promotions and Remuneration team for review and processing.
5. Management Band Increases
1. The Management Band scales are set out in ranges. The criteria and level of salary increases are outlined in the Management PDR Guidelines.

11. Support during the PDR process

1. For the Review to be successful, it is important that the parties maintain a respectful and constructive working relationship. A range of support is available to assist with the process including providing advice on staff development opportunities or skills-based training, development plans and objective setting.
2. Support is available at any time. Working on the principle that there should be “no surprises” during the formal PDR , it is better that the support options are called on when the need is first identified – this is more likely to be during one of the progress meetings prior to the formal PDR .
3. People available to provide advice and support at any stage include, but are not limited to, colleagues, senior staff in your Division, the Divisional HR Managers, the Head of Organisational Development, the Equity Manager, Union Representatives and the University Mediator. These staff may be able to help directly or suggest other people or options. These resources are available to all campuses.

12. What to do if a disagreement should arise

1. If a disagreement should arise between the parties during the Review, parties will be encouraged to resolve it themselves using the options outlined in section 11 as this allows them to keep control of how they manage their working relationship.
2. If, at the end of the process, there is a significant ongoing disagreement that is likely to take a medium to long term period to resolve, it is recommended that staff invite an appropriate third party to facilitate a constructive discussion to help both parties reach an agreement. This could be any person that both parties believe has the knowledge and personal skills to help resolve the disagreement and who is willing to assist in this way. Support and facilitation mechanisms available include your Manager, the Divisional HR Managers, the Head of Organisational Development, the Equity Manager, Union Representatives and the University Mediator.

13. Appeal

1. The outcome of the PDR Review can only be appealed on the grounds that the PDR process has not been followed and that the failure to do so affected the outcome of the Review.
2. An appeal to the Director Human Resources may be lodged by either the staff member or their Reviewer.
3. The deadline for appeals is the date set by the University but will be no later than the University's last working day of the calendar year.
4. Staff should be informed of the outcome of their appeal within a month of lodging the appeal. If there is any delay in informing staff of the outcome of their PDR salary Review, either party may apply for the appeal deadline to be extended.
5. The Director, Human Resources will decide on how the appeal will be considered and make the final decision on the outcome.
6. If the appeal is upheld, the parties will be advised of the outcome and instructed on the actions that need to be taken. This may require that the process is repeated with appropriate mentoring and supervision.

Appendix 1: Competency criteria

The University of Otago is committed to and will recognise bicultural competencies. This may mean staff demonstrate across some/all of the competencies:

• An appreciation/understanding of Te Ao Māori and its expression in the University's Māori Strategic Framework
• A commitment to and knowledge of Te Tiriti o Waitangi/The Treaty of Waitangi (and how it applies to your job/position)
• An understanding of Māori values (and iwi aspirations) and how they can be applied in the workplace
• A demonstrable commitment to the principles of the Māori Strategic Framework

1. Competency: Knowledge and skills

Nāu te rourou, nāku te rourou, ka ora ai te iwi
(With your basket (of knowledge) and my basket, the people will prosper)

Skills  and knowledge relevant to the job including those defined in the job  description. This may include technical skills, professional skills,  trade skills, equipment knowledge, computer skills etc.

Departments  have the scope to adapt these descriptions to fit their particular  situation by defining specific technical or professional skills and  knowledge for their area, or by reference to relevant professional  standards.

2. Competency: Team work and co‐operation

Ehara taku toa i te toa takatahi; engari, he toa takatini
(Success is not the work of one, but the work of many)

3. Competency: Organisation, planning and self-management

Naia te toa a Tarewai, kei a ia tāna patu
(Here is Tarewai in his true strength, he has his patu back)

4. Competency: Problem solving / decision making

E wai e taea te kupenga whīwhiwhi?
(How does one tend a tangled net?)

5. Competency: Service to customers

Ka tika a muri, ka tika a mua
(If everything is running smoothly at the back (kitchen & dining area) all will be well out the front (for visitors))

Customers are anyone receiving or benefiting from your work. This may include students, clients, other staff or managers.

6. Competency: Initiative and innovation

He pū auaha, he toa kōkiri
(Where innovation prompts initiative)

7. Competency: Leadership and people management

He aha te mea nui o te ao? He tangata, he tangata, he tangata
(What is the most important thing in the world?  It is people, it is people, it is people)

8. Competency: Ngā Taonga Tuku Iho / Language and Culture

Hutia te rito o te harakeke, kei hea te korimako e kō? Ka rere ki uta, ka rere ki tai. Kī mai koe ki au, he aha te mea nui o te ao? Māku e kī atu, He tangata! He tangata! He tangata!
(If you pluck out the flax shoot, where will the bellbird sing? It will fly inland, it will fly seawards. If you ask me, what is the most important thing in the world? I will reply, People! People! People!)

E aro nui ana ki ngā Mātāpono o Te Tiriti o Waitangi me te Anga Mahere Māori o Otago
(Has a commitment to the Articles and Principles of Te Tiriti O Waitangi / The Treaty of Waitangi and to the University of Otago Māori Strategic Framework)

The Ngā Taonga Tuku Iho / Language and Culture competency may require on-going development before the majority of staff meet full competence. In some cases this development will be gradual, often undertaken as a group over time. When making an overall assessment, please refer to the FAQ “will my overall assessment be affected by the Ngā Taonga Tuku Iho/Language and Culture competency?”

Related policies, procedures and forms

• Remuneration Policy
• Job Evaluation guidance
• PDR for professional staff

Contact for further information

If you have any queries regarding the content of this Policy or need further clarification, contact:

Performance and Development Adviser
Email HR.PDR@otago.ac.nz
Tel +64 3 479 9051