Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
The CSC continues the journey with yet another tool specifically for human
resource management officers in the public sector. In your hands is the
Guidebook on the Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS),
a step-by-step guide in establishing the agency SPMS. The Guidebook
provides basic information and competencies needed to set-up the SPMS,
including discussions on the system’s cycle: performance planning and
commitment building; monitoring and coaching; performance review and
evaluation; and rewarding and development planning. It aims to guide
HRMOs in using the system to better identify, assess, and streamline
performance measurement processes.
i
Acknowledgement
The production of this Guidebook would not have been possible without
the invaluable support of the Australian Agency for International
Development (AusAid) through the Philippine Australia Human Resource
and Organisational Development Facility (PAHRODF).
• The CSC Public Assistance and Information Office (PAIO) for its technical
inputs in the layout of the Guidebook.
ii iii
Table of Contents
Foreword i
Acknowledgement iii
Glossary vii
Measuring Performance through the Years 1
The Strategic Performance Management System:
Building on Past Initiatives 3
HOW TO ESTABLISH THE SPMS IN YOUR ORGANIZATION 7
Step 1. Form the Performance Management Team 7
Step 2. Review the Existing Performance Management System 11
PERFORMANCE PLANNING AND COMMITMENT 15
Step 3. Know and Understand Your Agency’s Major Final Outputs 17
Step 4. Identify the Success Indicators of Each Major Final Output 21
Step 5. Identify the Performance Goals of Your Office 29
Step 6. Identify the Performance Goals of the Divisions under Your Office 35
Step 7. Identify the Performance Goals of Individuals Under Each Division 39
Step 8. Develop the Rating Scale 45
PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND COACHING 59
Step 9. Develop the Performance Monitoring & Coaching Tools 61
Step 10. Develop the Performance Evaluation Tools 67
PERFORMANCE REVIEW AND EVALUATION 73
Step 11. Use the Performance Evaluation Tools 75
PERFORMANCE REWARDING & DEVELOPMENT PLANNING 83
Step 12. Use the Results of the Performance Evaluation 85
CRAFTING YOUR AGENCY SPMS GUIDELINES 89
iv v
Table 7. Regional Office Level (CSCRO) Success Indicators 34
Glossary
Table 8. Office Level (HRPSO) and Division Level (APCCD)
Success Indicators 35 Abbreviations Meaning
APCCD Audit and Position Classification and Compensation Division
Table 9. Regional Office Level (CSCRO) and Division Level (PSED)
ARTA Anti-Red Tape Act
Success Indicators 37 ARTA-RCS Anti-Red Tape Act-Report Card Survey
Table 10. Office Level (HRPSO), Division Level (APCCD), and Individual CARE-HRM Continuing Assistance and Review for Excellent
Human Resource Management
Level (Staff) Success Indicators 40
CB Certifying Board
Table 11. Regional Office Level (CSCRO), Division Level (PSED), and CHARM Comprehensive Human Resource Management Assistance,
Individual Level (Staff) Success Indicators 43 Review, and Monitoring
CNA Collective Negotiation Agreement
Table 12. Examples of How to Determine the Dimensions to
CS Civil Service
Rate Performance 47 CSC Civil Service Commission
Table 13. Operationalization of the Rating Scale 48 CSCAAP Civil Service Commission Agency Accreditation Program
Table 14. HRPSO Rating Matrix 49 CSCFO Civil Service Commission Field Office
CSCRO Civil Service Commission Regional Office
Table 15. CSCRO Rating Matrix 51
CSE-PPT Career Service Examination - Paper and Pencil Test
Table 16. APCCD Rating Matrix 52 CSI Civil Service Institute
Table 17. PSED Rating Matrix 54 CSLO Commission Secretariat and Liaison Office
Table 18. Employee A Rating Matrix 55 DBM Department of Budget and Management
DOLE Department of Labor and Employment
Table 19. Employee B Rating Matrix 56
DPCR Division Performance Commitment and Review
Table 20. Employee C Rating Matrix 57 E Efficiency
Table 21. Employee D Rating Matrix 58 EO Executive Order
Table 22. Sample Ratings of Accomplishments 78 ERPO Examination Recruitment and Placement Office
ESD Examination Services Division
Table 23. Ratings of Individual Staff under HRPSO 79
GAS General Administration and Support
Table 24. HRPSO’S Summary of Ratings (OPCR) 80 GOCC Government-Owned and Controlled Corporations
HR Human Resource
Chart 1. An Overview of the Performance Management System Cycle 11 HRD Human Resource Division
vi vii
MFO Major Final Output
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
MORE Management by Objectives and Results Evaluation
MSD Management Services Division
N/A Not Applicable
NGA National Government Agencies
NPAS New Performance Appraisal System
OFAM Office for Financial and Assets Management
OHRMD Office for Human Resource Management and Development
OLA Office for Legal Affairs
OPCR Office Performance Commitment and Review
OPES Office Performance Evaluation System
OPIF Organizational Performance Indicator Framework
OSM Office for Strategy Management
PAIO Public Assistance and Information Office
PALD Public Assistance and Liaison Division
PAP Programs, Projects, and Activities
PERC Performance Evaluation Review Committee
PES Performance Evaluation System
PMS Performance Management System
PMS-OPES Performance Management System-Office Performance
Evaluation System
PMT Performance Management Team
PMU Project Management Unit
PRAISE Program on Awards and Incentives for Service Excellence
PRO Personnel Relations Office
PSED Policies and Systems Evaluation Division
PSSD Personnel Systems and Standards Division
PRIME-HRM Program to Institutionalize Meritocracy and Excellence
in Human Resource Management
Q Quality
QS Qualification Standards
QSSD Qualification and Selection Standards Division
RA Republic Act
RBPMS Results-Based Performance Management System
RO Regional Office
SMART Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, and Time-bound
SPEAR Special Program for Evaluation and Assessment as
Required/Requested
SPMS Strategic Performance Management System
STO Support to Operations
SUC State Universities and Colleges
T Timeliness
TARD Talent Acquisition and Retention Division
WIG Wildly Important Goal
1999: Revised PES and
Measuring Performance through the Years 360-Degree Evaluation
Memorandum Circular No. 13, s. 1999 revised the PES
As the central human resource manage- and introduced the 360 degree evaluation, a cross rating
system in which assessment of performance and behavior
ment agency of the Philippine bureau-
comes from the employees’ self-evaluation as well as
cracy, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) 1993: Performance feedback from their subordinates, peers, supervisors,
is constitutionally mandated to adopt Evaluation System and clients. The Revised PES required each government
measures to promote morale, efficiency, Through Memorandum Circular agency to create a Performance Evaluation Review
1989: Autonomy
integrity, responsiveness, courtesy and No. 12, s. 1993, the Performance Committee (PERC) tasked to establish performance
of Agencies in Developing
Evaluation System (PES) standards. An evaluation of the cross-rating system
public accountability among government their Performance
sought to establish an objective revealed that employees perceived the system to be
employees. Evaluation System
performance system. The CSC too complex.
The CSC provided simple guidelines
Through the years, the CSC has imple- provided specific guidelines In 2001, through CSC MC No. 13, s. 2001, Agency Heads
to empower government agencies
mented several performance evaluation on setting the mechanics of were given the discretion to utilize the approved PES
to develop their own Performance
the rating system. Similar to or devise a Performance Evaluation System based on a
and appraisal systems. Evaluation System (PES). This guide-
the NPAS and MORE, the PES combination of the old PES and the revised performance
line was made through Memorandum
Below is a brief review of past initiatives: also measured the employee’s evaluation system.
Circular No. 12, s. 1989. Internally,
performance and behavior in the
the CSC adopted a system called
work environment.
1978: MORE (Management by Objectives 2005: Performance Management
New Performance and Results Evaluation) in which System-Office
Performance
1
Drawing from the rationale
that “what gets measured gets TO ILLUSTRATE HOW TO
done,” every hour of work COMPUTE OPES POINTS:
The Strategic Performance Manage
is given 1 OPES point in the 243 working days in a year x 8 hours in a Building on Past Initiativ
rating system. day = 1,944 working hours in a year.
major final output or the To address the gaps and weaknesses found in previo
To
get
the
target
points
of
the
office,
collective performance of need to be acted upon. The backlog in the However, the SPMS makes a major paradigm shift
a unit. The smallest unit is work
of
the
Field
Office
is
not
considered
2
The government issuances related to the SPMS are the following: 3. Team approach to performance management. Accountabilities and
individual roles in the achievement of organizational goals are clearly
• Senate and House of Representatives Joint Resolution No. 4 authorized
definedtofacilitatecollectivegoalsettingandperformancerating.The
the President of the Philippines to modify the compensation and position
individual’s work plan or commitment and rating form is linked to the
classificationsystemofcivilianpersonnelandthebasepayscheduleof
division, unit, andoffice work plan orcommitmentandrating formto
military and uniformed personnel in the government.
clearly establish the connection between organizational and employee
• Administrative Order No. 25, s. 2011 created an inter-agency task performance.
force on the harmonization of national government performance
4. User-friendly. The suggested forms for organizational and individual
monitoring, information, and reporting systems. This inter-agency task
commitments and performance are similar and easy to complete. The
force developed the Results-Based Performance Management System
office,division,andindividualmajorfinaloutputsandsuccessindicators
(RBPMS) that established a common set of performance scorecard and
are aligned to cascade organizational goals to individual employees and
harmonized national government performance monitoring, information,
harmonizeorganizationalandstaffperformanceratings.
and reporting systems.
5. Information system that supports monitoring and evaluation. The
• CSC Memorandum Circular No. 6, s. 2012 provided guidelines in the
SPMS promotes the establishment of monitoring and evaluation
establishment and implementation of agency Strategic Performance
(M&E) and information systems that facilitate the linkage between
Management System.
organizational and employee performance and generate timely,
• Joint CSC-Department of Budget and Management (DBM) Joint Circular
accurate, and reliable information that can be used to track performance,
No. 1, s. 2012 provided the rules and regulations on the grant of step
report accomplishments, improve programs, and be the basis for policy
increments due to meritorious performance and length of service. decision-making.
• Executive Order No. 80, s. 2012 directed the adoption of a performance- 6. Communication Plan. Establishing the SPMS in the organization
based incentive system for government employees.
mustbeaccompaniedbyanorientationprogramforagencyofficialsand
employees to promote awareness and interest on the system and generate
appreciationfortheSPMSasamanagementtooltoengageofficialsand
Basic Elements of the SPMS:
employees as partners in the achievement of organizational goals.
1. Goal aligned to agency mandate and organizational priorities.
Performance goals and measurements are aligned to national
development plans, agency mandate, vision, mission, and strategic
priorities, and/or organizational performance indicator framework.
Predetermined standards are integrated into the success indicators as
organizational objectives are cascaded down to the operational level.
4 5
Step 1. Form the Performance Management Team
10
11
12
6 7
Step 1. Form the Performance Management Team Step 1. Form the Performance Management Team
SPMS Champion •Together with the PMT, the SPMS Champion is responsible and accountable for Head of Office •Assumes primary responsibility for performance management in his/her office.
the establishment and implementation of the SPMS.
•Conducts strategic planning session with supervisors and staff.
•Sets agency performance goals/objectives and performance measures.
•Reviews and approves individual performance commitment and rating form.
1 •Determines agency target setting period.
11
•Submits quarterly accomplishment report.
•Approves office performance commitment and rating.
•Does initial assessment of office’s performance.
•Assesses performance of offices.
2 •Determines final assessment of individual employees’ performance level. 2
PMT •Sets consultation meetings with all Heads of Offices to discuss the office
•Informs employees of the final rating and identifies necessary interventions to
performance commitment and rating system and tools.
employees.
3 •Ensures that office performance management targets, measures, and budget are 3
•Provides written notice to subordinates who obtain Unsatisfactory or Poor rating.
aligned with those of goals of the agency.
Division Chief •Assumes joint responsibility with the Head of Office in attaining performance targets.
•Recommends approval of the office performance and rating system and tools.
4 •Rationalizes distribution of targets and tasks.
4
•Acts as appeals body and final arbiter.
•Monitors closely the status of performance of subordinates.
•Identifies potential top performers for awards.
5 •Assesses individual employees’ performance. 5
•Adopts its own internal rules, procedures, and strategies to carry out its responsibilities.
6 •Monitors submission of Office Performance Commitment and Rating Form Individual •Act as partners of management and co-employees in meeting organizational 6
(OPCR) and schedule the review and evaluation by the PMT. Employees performance goals.
12 12
8 9
Step 2. Review the Existing Performance Management System
Onceformed,thefirstthingthatthePMTdoesistoreviewthe 1
agency’s existing performance management system (PMS) and make
necessarymodificationssothatitisalignedwiththeSPMSguidelines
issued through Memorandum Circular No. 6, s. 2012. 2
4
Stage 4.
Performance 5
Rewarding &
Development
Planning 6
Stage 1.
Performance 7
Planning &
Commitment
Stage 3.
PMS 8
Performance
Review &
CYCLE
Evaluation
9
Stage 2.
Performance
10
Monitoring
& Coaching
11
12
10 11
ng Performance Management System Step 2. Review the Existing Performa
same four-stage PMS cycle that underscores the Performance Review and Evaluation
ance management: is done at regular intervals to
Performance Monitoring and assess both the performance of
Coaching is done regularly during the individual and his/her office.
ance Planning and Commitment is done prior
the performance period by the Heads The suggested time periods for
start of the performance period where heads of
ofAgency,PlanningOffice,Division Performance Review and Evaluation Performance Rewarding and Development Planni
meetwiththesupervisorsandstaffandagreeon
andOfficeHeads,andtheindividual. arethefirstweekofJulyandthefirst is based on the results of the performance review a
tputs that should be accomplished based on the
The focus is creating an enabling week of January the following year. evaluation when appropriate developmental interve
nd objectives of the organization. The suggested
environment to improve team tionsshallbemadeavailabletospecific employees.T
r Performance Planning and Commitment is the Stage 3
performance and develop individual suggested time periods for Performance Rewarding a
arter of the preceding year.
potentials. The suggested time DevelopmentPlanningarethefirstweekofJulyandt
periods for Performance Monitoring firstweekofJanuarythefollowingyear.
wing Stage 1, ask yourself the and Coaching are January to June and
uestions: Stage4
July to December. When reviewing Stage 3,
SPMS calendar show that officials and
ask yourself the following When reviewing Stage 4, ask yourse
are required to submit their commitments Stage 2
questions: following questions:
start of the rating period?
• Are office accomplishments • Is there a mechanism for the Head o
SPMS calendar allot time for the PMT
assessed against the success supervisors to discuss assessment res
nd make recommendations on the individual employee at the end of the
indicators and the allotted
e commitments? • Is there a provision to draw up a Pro
When reviewing Stage 2, budget against the actual
SPMS calendar indicate the period for
ask yourself the following expenses as indicated in the Development Plan to improve or corre
ency and Offices to approve the office
questions: Performance Commitment and of employees with Unsatisfactory or P
ual performance commitments? performance rating?
• Are feedback sessions to discuss Rating Forms and provided in
performance of offices, officials, your Agency Guidelines? • Are recommendations for developm
and employees provided in your • Does your SPMS calendar interventions indicated in the Perfor
Agency Guidelines and scheduled schedule and conduct the Commitment and Rating Form?
in your SPMS calendar? Annual Agency Performance • Is there a provision on your Agency
• Are interventions given to those Review Conference? link the SPMS with your Agency Hum
4 who are behind work targets? Is • Is individual employee Development Plan?
1 space provided in the Employee performance assessed based on • Is there a provision in your Agency
Feedback Form for recommended the commitments made at the tie up the performance management
PMS interventions? start of the rating period? agency rewards and incentives for top
• Is there a form or logbook to • Does your agency rating scale individuals, units, and offices?
CYCLE record critical incidents, schedule fall within the range prescribed • Are the results of the performance e
3 of coaching, and the action plan? in Memorandum Circular No. 13, used as inputs to the Agency HR Plan
2 s. 1999 - Revised Policies on and incentives?
the PES?
ng Performance Management System
un
Perf
3
Major Final Outputs refer to the goods and services
that your agency is mandated to deliver to external
clients through the implementation of programs,
projects, and activities (PAPs).
4
17
Step 3. Know and Understand Your Agency’s Major Final Outputs Step 3. Know and Understand Your Agency’s Major Final Outputs
SOCIETAL GOAL Human Resource Table 3. Major Final Outputs of the CSC
Development Toward
1 MAJOR FINAL OUTPUTS 1
Poverty Alleviation
MFO 1: Legal Services
18 19
Step 4. Identify the Success Indicators of Each Major Final Output
After identifying the MFOs of your agency, list down the success 1
indicators or performance measures and targets of each MFO.
• Citizen’s Charter
5
• RA 6713 (Code of Ethics and Ethical Standards)
• OPES Reference Table 6
• Accomplishment Reports (for historical data)
• Benchmarking Reports
• Stakeholders’ Feedback Reports
7
There may be other documents aside from those listed above that an
agency can derive its success indicators. 8
9
√SPECIFIC
Success indicators
mustbeSMART: √MEASURABLE 10
√ATTAINABLE
√REALISTIC
11
√TIME-BOUND
12
20 21
22
The Civil Service Commission derives its success indicators from its Logical Framework/
Examples
EXAMPLESofOFSuccess INDICATORS
SUCCESSIndicators OPIF Book of Outputs as well as its Scorecard. Other agencies may determine their success
FOUND THE AGENCY SCORECARD indicators from other documents listed above (e.g., Citizen’s Charter, OPES Reference
found in the
IN Agency Scorecard
Table, Benchmarking Reports).
Table 4. CSC Scorecard
The Civil Service Commission derives its success indicators from its Logical Framework/
Examples of Success Indicators OPIF Book of Outputs as well as its Scorecard. Other agencies may determine their success
OBJECTIVE MEASURE BASE 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
indicators from other documents listed above (e.g., Citizen’s Charter, OPES Reference
PERSPECTIVE
S TA K E HO LD E RSTA
under the validated out of Level II accredit- Level II accred- Level II ac-
revalidated)
PRIME-HRM 1,590 accredited ed out of 1,590 ited out of 1,590 credited out of
agencies)
Level II accredited – an agency which meets the basic requirements after having been subjected accredited
to CHARM and/or determined 1,590 accredited
accreditedto have complied with the
recommendations of the CSCRO/FO concerned after CARE-HRM and has been granted by the Commission agencies)
agencies)authority to agencies)
take final action on appointments.
OBJECTIVE MEASURE BASE A: N/A 2011 165% 2012 2013 2014 2015
(262 agencies
B High 3 WIG: Percentage 78% T: 20% 40%
revalidated) 85% 95% 98%
performing, of high density (39 (469 service of- (560 service of- (830 pass out (345 pass out of (1,022 pass
competent, II accredited
Levelagencies an agency which meets
and –their the basic requirements
passed after having
fices surveyed) been subjected to
fices surveyed) of CHARM and/or determined
975 service 363 service have complied
to of- with the
out of 1,042
and credible recommendations of the CSCRO/FO concerned
service offices pass- out after CARE-HRM and has been granted by the Commission
offices or
authority tofices surveyed) appointments.
take final action onservice offices
civil servants ing the ARTA-RCS of 50 higher) surveyed)
OBJECTIVE MEASURE BASE 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
service
A: 73% 75%
B High 3 WIG: Percentage offices
78% T: 20% 40% 85% 95% 98%
(361 passed (449 passed
performing, of high density sur-
(39 (469 service of- (560 service of- (830 pass out (345 pass out of (1,022 pass
out of 497 out of 599
competent, agencies and their veyed)
passed fices surveyed) fices surveyed) of 975 service 363 service of- out of 1,042
service offices service offices
and credible service offices pass- out offices or fices surveyed) service offices
surveyed) surveyed)
civil servants ing the ARTA-RCS of 50 higher) surveyed)
4 WIG: service
14 – CSC T: N/A 20% 30% 70% 80%
A: 73% 75%
Number of agencies offices
and (498 out of (747 out of (1,743 out of (1,992 out of
(361 passed (449 passed
with approved SPMS sur-
DOLE 2,490 agencies) 2,490 agencies) 2,490 agencies) 2,490 agencies)
out of 497 out of 599
veyed)
and its
A: service offices
N/A service offices
73%
12 at-
surveyed) surveyed)
(364 agencies
tached
with approved
4 WIG: agen-
14 – CSC T: N/A 20% 30% 70% 80%
SPMS)
Number of agencies cies
and (498 out of (747 out of (1,743 out of (1,992 out of
with approved SPMS DOLE 2,490 agencies) 2,490 agencies) 2,490 agencies) 2,490 agencies)
WIG: 0 T: N/A 80% 20%
and its
Number of NGAs, A: N/A 73% (315 agencies (79 agencies out
12 at-
23
OBJECTIVE MEASURE BASE 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Processing) Process)
C Provide 5 Number of ISO- T: N/A 3 4 5 5
PR OC E SS
A: N/A 3
excellent HR certified core and (Cases (Maintain the (Maintain the (Maintained)
(Cases
processes support processes Adjudication, 3 Processes 4 Processes
Adjudication,
Examination, + Training +Project
Examination,
Appointments Process) Management
Appointments
Processing) Process)
Processing)
PRO C ES S
ess Indicators of Each Major Final Output Step 4. Identify the Success Indicators of
98%
80%
100%
card—where the strategic objectives and measures are indicated: MFO 1: A. Recognized 1 Clien
LEGAL SERVICES as a Center of (CSC
Chart 3. Link between CSC’s Logical Framework and Scorecard
Chart 2. CSC Logical Framework Excellence
2 Perce
80%
70%
100%
SOCIETAL GOAL Human Resource ited
Development Toward
Poverty Alleviation B. High 3 WIG:
MFO 2:
performing, agen
EXAMINATIONS AND
competent, and
70%*
60%
100%
APPOINTMENTS fices
SECTORAL GOAL
Improved Public Good credible civil
Service Delivery Governance 4 WIG:
servants
appr
Adjudication,
Examination,
Appointments
Processing)
60%
73%
(4,791 out of
6,582 cases
resolved)
80%
53%
(592 out of 1,115)
RBPMS rating:
Passed
OUTCOMES Merit & Rewards
Public Accountability PERSONNEL and S
System in the Civil Service
of Civil Servants Promoted
Strengthened and POLICIES AND
C. Provide excel- 6 Num
STANDARDS
lent HR processes and s
MAJOR FINAL OUTPUTS
SERVICES
30%
N/A
N/A
N/A
D. Ensure fairness 7 WIG:
PERSONNEL
PERSONNEL HUMAN
T:
A:
T:
A:
T:
DISCIPLINE & MFO 4: and efficiency in
LEGAL EXAMINATION POLICIES & RESOURCE solve
ACCOUNTABILITY
SERVICE & APPOINTMENTS STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT HUMAN RESOURCE
ENHANCEMENT performing Quasi- time
SERVICES SERVICES
SERVICES DEVELOPMENT Judicial functions
N/A
N/A
N/A
SERVICES
E. Enhance the 8 Perce
PROGRAMS, PROJECTS, AND ACTIVITIES (PAPS) competency of meet
• Adjudicate • Develop & for- • Formulate • Conduct MFO 5: our workforce stan
Develop policies,
administrative mulate guidelines, policies on training programs
standards, rules
disciplinary & standards & government PERSONNEL
• Formulate/ & regulations on
non-disciplinary procedures on the employment
evaluate/ personnel
cases various processes DISCIPLINE AND
• Review/ administer program evalua- F. Ensure efficient 9 Zero
involved in recruit-
• Formulate enhance/ HRD programs tion, including
ment, examination ACCOUNTABIL-
opinions & monitor agency & service-wide personnel
& placement management
rulings career systems scholarships inspection &
audit actions
ITY ENHANCEMENT
• Certify eligible &standards
WIG: Percentage
of cases resolved
within 40 days from
the time they are
ripe for resolution
Percentage of CSC
employees meeting
their job competency
standards
Employees collectively refer to the rank and file, supervisory, and executive/managerial groups
Zero un-liquidated
cash advance
• Render legal for placement
of financial
counseling • Develop SERVICES
6
7
8
• Conduct policies, resources
examination standards &
regulations on
• Issue certificate employee-
of eligibility management
• Process/ review relations in the
appointments for public sector You will note that MFO 2 (Examinations and Appointmen
Ensure
fairness and
efficiency in
performing
Quasi-Judicial
functions
Enhance the
competency
of our work-
force
Ensure
efficient
management
of financial
resources
non-accredited Scorecard but it is one of the core functions of the CSC.
agencies
D
E
F
In the Scorecard, you will find that general administrative
part of the strategic objectives: C. Provide excellent HR
efficient management of financial resources.
PR OC E SS P EO PLE FI N AN C E
*Target percentage may change depending on the results of the validation being conducted by O
Step 4. Identify the Success Indicators of Each Major Final Output Step 4. Identify the Success Indicators of
26
Step 4. Identify the Success Indicators of Each Major Final Output Step 5. Identify the Performance Goals of your Office
11 11
HRPSO; Office for Strategy Manage- MFO 5: Personnel Discipline and
ment (OSM); Public Assistance and Accountability
12 12
Information Office (PAIO); CSCROs Enhancement Services
28 29
rmance Goals of your Office Step 5. Identify the Perfor
ThechartbelowshowshoweachCSCoffice,division,andindividualstaffinthecentralandregionallevelswork
ational priorities of the Civil Service Commission performancetargets,strategicobjectives,andMFOsandcontributetorealizeCSC’svisionofbecomingAsia’sleadin
forStrategicHumanResourceandOrganizationDevelopmentby2030.
e determines its specific performance targets or
ts annual work plan. Thechart,however,doesnotshowalltheunitsintheCSCbutonlythosethataredirectlycontributingtotheMFOs.
VISION:
Central and Regional Levels Contributing to
) activities or General Administration and Asia’s Leading Center of Excellence
the MFOs
ties.Assuch,youshouldhaveyourownSMART for Strategic HR and OD by 2030
or success indicators from the office/unit level
alstafflevel.
OLA CSCRO CSCROs ERPO OSM HRPSO CSCRO OHRMD CSI CSCRO OSM CS
OLA
LSD CSCFOs ESD PMU APCCD PSED TARD IST HRD PMU P
Divisions
Individual Individual Individual Individual Individual Individual Individual Individual Individual Individual Individual Indivi
Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Sta
rmance Goals of your Office Step 5. Identify the Perform
Toillustratehowtheperformancegoalsofanofficecascadedowntothedivisionandindividualstafflevelsonthecentralandregional
levels,thisGuidebookwillzeroinonMFO3andonespecificofficeintheCivilServiceCommissionthatcontributestoit:theHuman
EXAMPLE OF THE PERFORMANCE G
ResourcePoliciesandStandardsOffice(HRPSO),andonedivisionunderit,theAuditPositionClassificationandCompensationDivision
OF AN OFFICE AT THE CENTRAL OFFIC
(APCCD) and its counterpart office and division on the regional level, the CSC Regional Office (CSCRO) and the Policies and Systems The HRPSO contributes to MFO 3. Below are the pe
EvaluationDivision(PSED).YouwillnotethattwoofficesinthecentralofficeactuallycontributetoMFO3:HRPSOandOSM.However,the success indicators of the HRPSO that cascade dow
focuswillonlybeontheHRPSO(centraloffice)andthePSED(regionaloffice).Theseunitsarehighlightedinyellowbelow: that the success indicators are SMART—Specific,
able, Realistic, and Time-bound. HRPSO’s other s
VISION: cascade down to the other two divisions2 under it
One
CSC
Office
and
Regional Levels
Asia’s Leading Center of Excellence
Table 6. Office
Level
(HRPSO)
Success
Indicators
for Strategic HR and OD by 2030
MAJOR FINAL STRATEGIC O
MEASURES
OUTPUTS OBJECTIVE S
Resoluti
High performing, agencies
Recognized as Enhance the competency
competent & credible sion wit
a Center for Excellence of our workforce
civil servants recomm
PRIME-H
Standar
Test form
% of high lence ap
developed with
% of CSC density No. of agencies by end o
appointments above average CSC client % of agencies
employees agencies & with approved
ted upon within reliability index satisfaction rating accredited under
meeting their job their service & functional Orientat
1.5 hours within 2 days (frontline services) PRIME-HRM
competency offices passing SPMS
before security ducted b
ARTA-RCS
printing
MOA bet
giving b
of CB s
CSCROs ERPO OSM HRPSO CSCRO OHRMD CSI CSCRO OSM CSCRO HRPSO CSCRO signed b
Replies
days up
CSCFOs ESD PMU APCCD PSED TARD IST HRD PMU PALD PSSD PSED
2
The other two divisions under the HRPSO are: Personnel Systems an
and Qualification and Selection Standards Division (QSSD).
3
The other offices of the Civil Service Commission contributing to M
Individual Individual Individual Individual Individual Individual Individual Individual Individual Individual Individual Individual tions Office and the Regional Offices.
Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff
Step 5. Identify the Performance Goals of your Office Step 6. Identify the Performance Goals of the Divisions Under Your Office
Highlighted on the table below are the success indicators of the Audit
6 andPositionClassificationandCompensationDivision:
6
Table 8. Office
Level
(HRPSO)
and
Division
Level
(APCCD)
Success
Indicators
7 If you follow Step 5, you should be able to MAJOR FINAL STRATEGIC OFFICE LEVEL (HRPSO) DIVISION LEVEL(APCCD)
7
MEASURES
OUTPUTS OBJECTIVE SUCCESS INDICATORS SUCCESS INDICATORS
identify the performance goals of your office
8
l that contribute to specific MFOs. MFO 3: Recog- Percent- 100% of recommenda- 100% of recommenda- 8
Personnel nized as age of tions for accreditation tions for accreditation
Policies a Center agencies from the CSC Regional from the CSC Regional
9 and for accredit- Offices acted upon Offices acted upon within 9
Standards Excellence ed under within 15 days from 10 days from receipt of
Services PRIME- receipt of the recom- the recommendation
10 HRM mendation 10
Resolutions for Resolutions for accredita-
accreditation of agen- tion of agencies prepared
11 cies approved by the within 10 days from 11
Commission within 15 receipt of the recommen-
days from receipt of dation from the CSCRO
12 recommendation from 12
the CSCRO
34 35
Step 6. Identify the Performance Goals of the Divisions Under Your Office Step 6. Identify the Performance Goals of the Divisions Under Your Office
1
end of the 1st Quarter by March 15
Division
Level
(PSED)
Success
Indicators
Orientation on PRIME- Proposal on the PRIME-
2 HRM conducted by EO HRM Orientation ap- POLICIES AND 2
REGIONAL OFFICE
March 2013 proved by the Director MAJOR FINAL STRATEGIC SYSTEMS EVALUATION
MEASURES (CSCRO) SUCCESS
by the end of February OUTPUTS OBJECTIVE DIVISION (PSED)
3 INDICATORS 3
SUCCESS INDICATORS
MOA between the CSC Draft MOA between the
and award giving bod- CSC and award giving MFO 3: Recog- Cumulative 25% Cumulative 25% of Cumulative 25% of
ies on the integration bodies on the integra- Personnel nized as of agencies agencies accredited agencies accredited
4 of CB standards to tion of CB standards to
4
Policies a Center accredited under CSC Agency under CSC Agency
their criteria signed their criteria approved and for under CSC Agency Accreditation Accreditation
by end of September by the Director by Standards Excellence Accreditation Program (CSCAAP) Program (CSCAAP)
5 2013 August 15 5
Services Program (CS- granted Level II granted Level II
Replies to queries Draft replies to queries CAAP) Accredited Status Accredited Status
sent within 15 days submitted to the Direc- granted Level II under PRIME-HRM under PRIME-HRM
6 upon receipt by the tor within 10 days upon Accredited Status
6
HRPSO receipt by the HRPSO under PRIME-HRM
7 Liketheofficelevelsuccessindicators,divisionlevelsuccessindicators 7
should also be SMART—Specific,Measurable,Attainable,Realistic,and
Time-bound.
8 8
If you follow Step 6, you should be able
9 to identify the performance goals of 9
l your division that are aligned with the
performance goals of your office.
10 10
11 11
12 12
36 37
Step 7. Identify the Performance Goals of Individuals Under Each Division
Like the office level and division level success indicators, individual 6
level success indicators should also be SMART—Specifi c,Measurable,
Attainable,Realistic,andTime-bound.
7
10
11
12
38 39
6
5
4
3
2
1
12
11
10
9
8
7
40
Table
10.
Office
Level
(HRPSO),
Division
Level
(APCCD),
and
Individual
Level
(Staff
1)
Success
Indicators
MAJOR FINAL STRATEGIC OFFICE LEVEL (HRPSO) SUCCESS DIVISION LEVEL (APCCD) INDIVIDUAL LEVEL (STAFF)
MEASURES
OUTPUTS OBJECTIVE INDICATORS SUCCESS INDICATORS SUCCESS INDICATORS
MFO 3: Recognized as Percentage of 100% of recommendations 100% of recommendations 100% of recommendations
Personnel a Center for agencies ac- for accreditation from the CSC for accreditation from the CSC for accreditation from the CSC
Policies and Excellence credited under Regional Offices acted upon Regional Offices acted upon Regional Offices Nos. 1, 2 and 3
Standards PRIME-HRM within 15 days from receipt of within 10 days from receipt of acted upon within 7 days from
Services the recommendation the recommendation receipt of the recommendation
Resolutions for accreditation Resolutions for accreditation Resolutions for accreditation of
of agencies approved by the of agencies prepared within 10 agencies prepared within 7 days
Commission within 15 days from days from receipt by the HRPSO from receipt by the HRPSO
receipt of recommendation from
the CSCRO
PRIME-HRM Certifying Board Proposed PRIME-HRM Certifying Proposed PRIME-HRM Certify-
(CB) Standards for Center/Seal Board (CB) Standards for Cen- ing Board (CB) Standards
of Excellence approved by the ter/Seal of Excellence approved for Center/Seal of Excellence
Commission by end of the 1st by the Director by March 1 submitted to the Division Chief
Quarter by February 15
Step 7. Identify the Performance Goals of Individuals Under Each Division
7
2
6
5
41
8
11
12
10
Step 7. Identify the Performance Goals of Individuals Under Each Division Step 7. Identify the Performance Goals of Individuals Under Each Division
10 10
If you follow Step 7, you should be able to
11 identify the activities and outputs of individual
11
12
l staff that contribute to the achievement of the
performance goals of your division and office. 12
42 43
Step 8. Develop the Rating Scale
DEVELOP
THE RATING SCALE
12
44 45
Step 8. Develop the Rating Scale Step 8. Develop the Rating Scale
7 Because performance is measured within a scheduled monitoring period, all Resolution on QS for newly-created unique This performance target is rated 7
accomplishments always involve the dimension of time. As such, performance is
positions approved by the Commission on quality and efficiency because
within 15 days upon receipt by the HRPSO it involves:•Acceptability. The
alwaysratedoneitherefficiencyand/ortimeliness.
of complete requirements resolutions need to be approved by the
8 Commission.•Standard response time of
8
15 days.
11 11
12 12
46 47
g Scale
below.
planned targets.
the planned targets.
t or success indicator.
100% of the planned targets.
zation of the Rating Scale
TABLISHING THE RATING SCALE
ased
Incentive
System
for
Government
Employees).
than expected but related aspects of the target.
DESCRIPTION OR MEANING OF RATING
below explains the meaning of each rating:
or Outstanding rating and the 50% and below range for Poor rating
e ranging from 1 to 5—with 1 as the lowest and 5 as
Thefollowingtablesshowexamplesofratingmatricesonthreelevels—office,division,andindividualstaffatthecentraland
regional levels.
EXAMPLES OF RATING MATRICES
OfficeLevelRatingMatrix
• The second column on the table below shows all the performance targets or success indicators of the CSC’s Human Resource
PoliciesandStandardsOffice.Columns3to5describethemeaningofeachnumericalratingalongthedimensionsofquality,
efficiency,andtimeliness.
Youwillnotethatsomeperformancetargetsareonlyratedonqualityandefficiency,someonqualityandtimeliness,and
othersonlyonefficiency.
CentralOfficeLevel
Table 14. HRPSO
Rating
Matrix
MAJOR
HRPSO SUCCESS DESCRIPTION OF DESCRIPTION OF RATINGS FOR DESCRIPTION OF RATINGS
FINAL
IINDICATORS RATINGS FOR QUALITY EFFICIENCY FOR TIMELINESS
OUTPUTS
MFO3: 100% of recommenda- 5 – Acted upon within 10 days from
Personnel tions for accreditation receipt of the recommendation
Policies from the CSC Regional
and 4 – Acted upon within 11 to 12 days
Offices acted upon
Standards from receipt of the recommenda-
within 15 days from
Services tion
receipt of the recom-
mendation 3 – Acted upon within 13 to 16 days
from receipt of the recommenda-
tion
2 – Acted upon within 17 to 22 days
from receipt of recommendation
1 – Acted upon beyond 22 days
from receipt of recommendation
Resolutions for ac- 5 – Approved upon 1st presentation of resolu- 5– Approved within 10 working
creditation of agencies tion to the Commission days
approved by the
4 – Approved upon 2nd presentation of resolu- 4 – Approved within 11 to 14 days
Commission within 15
tion to the Commission with minimal changes
days from receipt of
recommendation from 3 – Approved upon 2nd presentation of resolu- 3 – Approved within 15 working
the CSCRO tion to the Commission with major changes days
2 – Approved upon 3rd presentation of resolu- 2 – Delayed by 1 to 7.5 days
tion to the Commission with minimal changes
1 – Approved upon 3rd presentation of resolu- 2 – Delayed by 8 or more days
tion to the Commission with major changes
PRIME-HRM Certifying 5 – Approved upon 1st presentation of resolu- 5 – Submitted within 75
Board (CB) Standards tion to the Commission days or less
for Center/Seal of
4 – Approved upon 2nd presentation of resolu- 4 – Submitted within 76 to
Excellence approved
tion to the Commission with minimal changes 80 days
by the Commission by
end of the 1st Quarter 3 – Approved upon 2nd presentation of resolu- 3 – Submitted by end of
Step 8.
NOTE: Time frame 2 – Average unsatisfactory rating of partici- 3 – Conducted by end of
for this activity is 3 pants 1st quarter or within 81 to
ng Scale
Policies
Services
FINAL
MAJOR
Personnel
Standards
OUTPUTS
each
onefficiency.
Program
(CSCAAP)
of agencies
CSC Agency
PRIME-HRM
II-Accredited
Status under
OFFICE
Accreditation
granted Level
SUCCESS
REGIONAL
INDICATORS
Cumulative 25%
accredited under
numerical
RegionalOfficeLevel
rating
Table
15.
CSCRO
Rating
Matrix
FOR QUALITY
DESCRIPTION OF RATINGS
along
the
PRIME-HRM
under PRIME-HRM
under PRIME-HRM
under PRIME-HRM
under PRIME-HRM
RATINGS
DESCRIPTION
dim
• The second column on Table 16 shows all the
Level 2-Accredited St
Level 2-Accredited St
Level 2-Accredited St
Level 2-Accredited St
cies under CSCAAP g
of accredited agencie
4 – Cumulative 29% t
1 – Cumulative 12% or
FOR EFFICIENC
2 – Cumulative 13%-2
more of accredited ag
2-Accredited Status u
accredited agencies u
52 53
Step 8. D
evel Individual Level Rating Matrices The APCCD is staffed by three MAJOR STAFF A DESCRIPTION
DESCRIPTION
employees. The three succeeding tables for Employees A, B, and C below FINAL SUCCESS OF RATINGS
vel:EmployeeB MAJOR STAFF B DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION CentralOfficeLevel:EmployeeC
DESCRIPTION OF RATINGS
FINAL SUCCESS OF RATINGS OF RATINGS
Rating
Matrix FOR QUALITY Table
20.
Employee
C
Rating
Matrix
OUTPUTS IINDICATORS FOR EFFICIENCY FOR TIMELINESS
DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION MFO3: Draft MOA 5 – Draft MOA approved by 5 – Approved by the Division MAJOR STAFF C DESCRIPTIO
ESCRIPTION OF RATINGS DESCRIPTION OF RATINGS
OF RATINGS OF RATINGS Personnel between the CSC the Division Chief upon first Chief before July 22 FINAL SUCCESS OF RATINGS
FOR QUALITY FOR QUALITY
FOR EFFICIENCY FOR TIMELINESS Policies and award giving submission OUTPUTS IINDICATORS FOR EFFICIENC
and bodies on the
5 – Draft resolution ap- Standards integration of CB 4 – Draft MOA approved by the 4 – Approved by the Division MFO3: Proposal on the 5 - Approved by the Division
proved by the Director from Services standards to their Division Chief upon second Chief from July 22 to 26 Personnel PRIME-HRM Ori- Chief upon 1st submission
1 to 4 days from receipt by criteria approved submission with minimal Policies entation approved
the HRPSO by the Division changes and by the Division
Chief by 31 July Standards Chief by the end 4 - Approved by the Division
4 – Draft resolution 2013 3 – Draft MOA approved 3 – Approved by the Division Services of January Chief upon 2nd submission
approved by the Director in by the Division Chief upon Chief from July 27 to NOTE: Timeframe with minimal changes
5 days from receipt by the second submission with major August 3 is Jan. 1 to Feb. 15
HRPSO changes 3 – Approved by the Division
Chief upon 2nd submission
3 – Draft resolution ap- 2 – Draft MOA approved by 2 – Approved by the Division with major changes
proved by the Director from the Division Chief upon third Chief from August 4 to 16
6 to 8 days from receipt by submission with minimal 2 – Approved by the Division
the HRPSO changes Chief upon 3rd submission
with minimal changes
2 – Draft resolution ap- 1 – Draft MOA approved by the 1 – Approved by the Division
proved by the Director from Division Chief upon third sub- Chief beyond April 16 1 – Approved by the Division
9 to 11 days from receipt by mission with major changes Chief upon 3rd submission
the HRPSO with major changes
Draft replies to 5 - Approved by the Division 5 – Replies sent within an
1 – Draft resolution ap- queries approved Chief upon 1st submission average of 1 day Meeting with 5 – Meets all the content
proved by the Director more by the Division award giving requirements with additional
than 11 days from receipt by Chief within 7 4 - Approved by the Division 4 – Replies sent within an bodies convened analyses and policy recom-
the HRPSO days upon receipt Chief upon 2nd submission average of 2 to 5 days by end of May mendations
by the HRPSO with minimal changes
- Approved by the Division 5 – Proposed standards ap- NOTE: The 4 – Meets all the content
ief upon 1st submission proved by the Division Chief 3 – Approved by the Division 3 – Replies sent within an required output requirements with suggestions
before January 31 Chief upon 2nd submission average of 6 to 8 days is a meeting
with major changes report and the 3 – Meets all the content
- Approved by the Division 4 – Proposed standards timeframe is 30 requirements of the report
ief upon 2nd presentation approved by the Division 2 – Approved by the Division 2 – Replies sent delayed by
days
th minimal changes Chief from January 31 to Chief upon 3rd submission an average of 2 to 3.5 days 2 – Incomplete report
February 7 with minimal changes
– Approved by the Division 3 – Proposed standards 1 – Approved by the Division 1 – Replies sent delayed 1 – No meeting conducted /
ief upon 2nd presentation approved by the Division Chief upon 3rd submission by an average of 4 or more Meeting conducted but no
th major changes Chief from February 8 to with major changes days report
February 18
Draft replies to 5 - Approved by the Division 5 – Replies sent withi
– Approved by the Division 2 – Proposed standards ap- queries approved Chief upon 1st submission average of 1 day
ief upon 3rd presentation proved by the Division Chief by the Division
th minimal changes from February 19 to March 9 Chief within 7 4 - Approved by the Division 4 – Replies sent withi
days upon receipt Chief upon 2nd submission average of 2 to 5 day
Approved by the Division 1 – Proposed standards ap- by the HRPSO with minimal changes
ief upon 3rd presentation proved by the Division Chief
th major changes beyond March 9 3 – Approved by the Division 3 – Replies sent withi
Chief upon 2nd submission average of 6 to 8 day
with major changes
Recommenda- 5 – Recommendations
6 tions for Level II- consolidated within 6 or
Accredited Status less days Steps 9 and 10 are
under PRIME-
HRM of agencies 4 – Recommendations subsumed under the
7 accredited consolidated within 7 to
under CSCAAP 8 days second stage of PMS
consolidated
within 10 days 3 - Recommendations cycle-Performance
from receipt of consolidated within 9
all recommenda- -11 days Monitoring and
tions
8
2 – Recommendations Coaching
consolidated within 12-15
days
9 1 – Recommendations
consolidated beyond
15 days Performance
10
11
Monitoring
12
& Coaching
58
Step 8. Develop the Performance Monitoring and Coaching Tools
61
Step 8. Develop the Performance Monitoring and Coaching Tools Step 8. Develop the Performance Monitoring and Coaching Tools
Document Subject Area Date the task Date the Output 1st Q
No. or of the Task was assigned to was approved u
2nd
a
1 Task No. or the Signa- the drafter by the r
1
3rd
if Taken tory of the supervisor t
from WFP Document 4th e
r
2 and Subject Name of Division/Field Office _____________________________
2
Area Division Chief / Director II ________________________________
Number of Personnel in the Division / FO ____________________
3 Mechanism/s 3
Activity Meeting Others Remarks
Memo
One-in-One Group (Pls. Specify)
Doc. No. Signatory Subject Action Date As- Date Status Remarks
Monitoring
4 Of- signed Signed 4
ficer
7 Supervisors and coaches play a critical role at this stage. They can provide
7
an enabling environment, introduce interventions to improve team
8 performance, and develop individual potentials. 8
To reiterate, it is important that you establish an information system as Please indicate the date in the appropriate box when the monitoring was conducted.
a vital management tool that will support data management to produce
9 Conducted by: Date: Noted by: Date: 9
timely, accurate, and reliable information for program tracking and
performance monitoring and reporting.
Immediate Superior Head of Office
10 10
11 11
12 12
62 63
Step 8. Develop the Performance Monitoring and Coaching Tools Step 8. Develop the Performance Monitoring and Coaching Tools
64 65
Step 10. Develop the Performance Evaluation Tools
66 67
ormance Evaluation Tools Step 10. Develop the Performance Evaluation Tools
OPCR, DPCR, and IPCR Below are the 7 columns in the OPCR and DPCR form:
VIEW DIVISION PERFORMANCE (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
COMMITMENT AND REVIEW
(DPCR)
FORM Major Final Success Allotted Divisions Actual Ac- Rating for Quality Remarks
INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE
Outputs Indicators Budget or Persons complish- (Q), Efficiency
COMMITMENT AND REVIEW
(IPCR)
FORM
(MFOs) (Targets + Account- ments (E), Timeliness 1
Measures) able (T), and Average
Score (Ave)
2
Q E T Ave
3
OPCR,DPCR,andIPCRidentifies:
making the performance commitment, his/her 4
zation, and signature
Foroffices/unitsthatperformSTOorGASactivities,indicateyour
coreorsupportfunctionsonthefirstcolumninlieuofMFOs. 5
rformance commitment was made at the beginning
Major Final Success Indica- Actual Accomplish- Rating for Quality Remarks
CR, DPCR and IPCR is a table with several columns:
7
Outputs tors (Targets + ments (Q), Efficiency (E),
(MFOs) Measures) Timeliness (T),
umns The IPCR has 5 columns
and Average
s • Column 1: Major Final Outputs
8
Score (Ave)
ivided into The lower portion of the form is signed by the Supervisor and/or Rater
lity (Q),
11
at the beginning and end of the rating period.
) and the
12
69
The OPCR Form The DPCR Form
Rating Period:
months and year
Date when
performance
commitment The supervisor
is made at the (Office
beginning of Director) who
rating period approves the
performance
commitment
signs at the
beginning of
rating period
Date when
performance
commitment
is made at the
beginning of
rating period
Pe
The rater writes
his/her comments on
the ratee and his/her
The Ratee signs recommendations
here after discussion Perfo
of evaluation with
Division Chief
10
11
12
75
6
5
4
3
2
1
8
7
12
11
10
9
76
FortheIPCRform,youshouldhavecompletedthefirsttwocolumnsatthebeginningoftheperformancemonitoringperiod:
• Column 1 – Major Final Outputs that your division is contributing to (Steps 5, 6, and 7).
•Column2–SuccessindicatorsorperformancetargetsofeachindividualstaffperMFOforthemonitoringperiod(Steps5,6,
and 7).
During the actual evaluation, the rater describes the actual accomplishments of the ratee vis-à-vis the performance targets on
the 5th column for the OPCR and DPCR forms or the 3rd column for the IPCR.
Step 11. Use the Performance Evaluation Tools
77
2
6
5
11
12
10
Step 11. Use the Performance Evaluation Tools Step 11. Use the Performance Evaluation Tools
In the table above, there are five rows of accomplishments. The first two
COMPUTING THE NUMERICAL RATINGS accomplishments are rated on quality and timeliness. The third accomplishment is
As explained in Step 8 (Develop the Rating Scale), you do not need to rate ratedonquality,efficiency,andtimeliness.Thefourthaccomplishmentisratedon
every performance accomplishment along all three dimensions of quality, qualityandefficiency.Thelastaccomplishmentisratedonefficiency.
totaling 14. Divide this by the 3 dimensions and you get an average rating of 4.67.
Table 22.Sample Ratings of Accomplishments
3 The fifth accomplishment got a single rating of 5 on efficiency. So the average 3
SUCCESS Average is rating is also a 5.
ACTUAL
INDICATORS Q E T Ave obtained by
ACCOMPLISHMENTS dividing the
(Targets + Measures) To get the final average rating, add all the average ratings vertically and divide
4 total by the 4
Draft PRIME-HRM Certi- Draft PRIME-HRM Certifying Board 4 4 4 thesumbythenumberofaccomplishments.Intheexampleabove,therearefive
number of
fying Board Standards Standards for Center/Seal of dimensions: accomplishments.Thus,youdividethetotalratingof20.67by5andgetthefinal
for Center/Seal of Excellence approved by the Director 4+4 = 8 ÷ 2 = 4
5 average rating of 4.13. 5
Excellence approved by upon second presentation and with
the Director by March 1 minimal changes on March 3 TheteamworkorientationoftheSPMSisreflectedintheoverallratingofan
Average is
6 Proposal on the Proposal on the PRIME-HRM Ori- 5 2 3.5 office.Thus,theaverageofallindividualperformanceassessmentsdoesnotgo 6
obtained by
PRIME-HRM Orientation entation approved by the Director dividing the higherthanthecollectiveperformanceassessmentoftheoffice.Toillustrate,the
approved by the upon first submission on March 10 total by the table below shows a sample summary list of individual performance ratings and
Director by the end of number of
7 February dimensions:
the overall rating of the HRPSO: 7
5 + 5 + 4 = 14 ÷ 3 Table 23. Ratings
of
Individual
Staff
under
HRPSO
Draft replies to queries Draft replies to 75 queries submit- 5 5 4 4.67
= 4.67
8 submitted to the Direc- ted to the Director within 9 working Individual
Staff
under
HRPSO 8
tor within 10 working days upon receipt by the HRPSO
HRPSO Secretary 3.99 Satisfactory
days upon receipt by Final Average
Rating is HRPSO Administrative Asst. 4.1 Very Satisfactory
the HRPSO
9 obtained by APCCD Chief 4 Very Satisfactory
9
Position paper/ com- Draft Position paper on HRMO 4 3 3.5 adding all the Average individual
APCCD Employee A 3.6 Satisfactory
ments on legislative Item in the LGUs submitted on the average ratings rating is obtained by
10 bills submitted within deadline set by the CSLO vertically and APCCD Employee B 5 Outstanding dividing the total of 10
the time frame pre- dividing the individual ratings
APCCD Employee C 4.03 Very Satisfactory
scribed by the CSLO sum (Total
(44.32) by the number
Rating) by the PSSD Chief 2.3 Unsatisfactory
of individuals in the
11 APCCD staff 3 APCCD staff recommended for 5 5 number of PSSD Employee A 4 Very Satisfactory 11
office(11):
recommended for train- training/HR programs accomplish-
PSSD Employee B 3.3 Satisfactory 3.99+ 4.1 + 4 + 3.6 + 5 +
ments:
ing/HR programs
4 + 3.5 + 4.67 + QSSD Chief 5 Outstanding + 4.03 + 2.3 + 4 + 3.3 + 5
78 79
Step 11. Use the Performance Evaluation Tools Step 11. Use the Performance Evaluation Tools
10 10
If you follow Step 11, you should
11 be able to use your OPCR, DPCR, 11
l and IPCR forms.
12 12
80 81
Attheendoftheratingperiod,theHeads
of Office and supervisors must discuss
the results of the assessment with the
individual employees concerned. Step 12
below falls under the fourth stage of the
PMS cycle—Performance Rewarding and
Development Planning.
Performance
Rewarding &
Development
Planning
Step 12. Use the Results of the Performance Evaluation
4
SAMPLE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Below is a suggested format of the professional development plan for 5
thecontinuingcareerdevelopmentofstaff.
You can use this plan to enhance the skills or develop potentials of
6
employees who perform well and to improve or correct performance of
employees who fail to meet targets.
7
10
11
12
85
Step 12. Use the Results of the Performance Evaluation
Awards nominees for various awards categories. Key Players and • Key players include the fo
Responsibilities ¤ SPMS Champion
3 4. PRAISE Committee in determining top performers of the agency who
¤ PMT
qualify* for awards and incentives. ¤ Planning Office
(Step 1)
¤ HRM Office
4 ¤ Head of Office
¤ Supervisor
¤ Individual Employees
5 • Functions are clearly spell
• There is an Office Order/E
If you follow Step 12, by the Agency Head
6
you should be able to link the SPMS Goal Aligned to • Table of MFOs enumera
l with other HR systems. Agency Mandate and services of the organization
•MFOs are aligned to addre
7 Organizational Priorities
and Outputs/Outcomes ¤ Agency strategic prioriti
Based ¤ Agency mandates, visio
8 ¤ OPIF Logframe
(Step 3) ¤ Philippine Development
¤ Organizational/ Sectora
9 • Success indicators are ide
• Success indicators are SM
88
User-friendly • One Form for Commitments (target setting) 1. Performance Planning and Commitment
Agency SPMS Forms and Rating (evaluation) for both organization • SPMS calendar shows that officials and
and individuals employees are required to submit their
(Step 10) • Commitment and Rating Forms for both the commitments prior to the start of the
organization and individual performance are rating period
similar and easy to accomplish • SPMS calendar allots time for PMT review
• SPMS Forms that operationalize the four-stage and recommendations of the performance
PMS commitments
¤ Performance Commitment and Rating Forms • SPMS calendar indicates period for Head
include columns for MFOs, success indicators of Agency/Heads of Offices’ approval of the
(targets + measures), actual accomplishments, office performance commitment and individual
and rating performance commitments
¤ Commitments are agreed upon by the
2. Performance Monitoring and Coaching
Management and officials/employees as
• Feedback sessions on the performance of the
indicated in the OPCR and IPCR Forms
offices as well as the officials/employees are
¤ Space is provided for comments and
provided in the guidelines and indicated in the
recommendations for individual employee
SPMS calendar
development
• Interventions are given to those behind work
¤ Performance Monitoring and Coaching Form/
targets. In the Employee Feedback From, a space
Journal
is provided for recommended interventions
¤ Professional Development Plan
• There is a form or logbook to record
Information System • M&E mechanisms and information system are critical incidents, schedule of coaching, and
that Supports M&E established action plan
• There is a database/summary of targets and
3. Performance Review and Evaluation
accomplishment which shall be the basis for
• Office accomplishments are assessed against
verification of accomplishments
the success indicators and the allotted budget
Communication Plan • There is a program that orients agency officials against the actual expenses as indicated in the
and employees on the new and revised policies Performance Commitment and Rating Forms
on the SPMS and provided in the guidelines
• The orientation schedules are indicated in the • Annual Agency Performance Review Conference
SPMS calendar is conducted as found in the SPMS calendar
Four-stage PMS cycle are described in the Agency • Individual employee performance is assessed
SPMS Cycle
Guidelines/Manual: based on the commitments made at the start of
• Performance Planning and Commitment the rating period
(Step 2)
• Performance Monitoring and Coaching • Agency SPMS rating scale should fall within
• Performance Review and Evaluation the range prescribed in MC 13, s. 1999 (Revised
• Performance Rewarding and Development Policies on the PES)
Planning
90 91
Although the SPMS is not totally new, it still requires a transition
4. Performance Rewarding and Development
Planning period and a significant shift in orientation regarding performance
measurement. The SPMS necessitates a change in the organizational
• There is a mechanism for discussion of
assessment results by the Head of Office and culture from the leadership down to the rank and file. As such, the
supervisors with the individual employee at the change process needs to be managed carefully and communicated clearly
end of the rating period to everyone in the organization.
• There is a provision for the drawing up of a
You will need a comprehensive change management and communication
Professional Development Plan to improve
or correct performance of employees with plan to orient employees on the essential features of the SPMS so
Unsatisfactory or Poor performance rating that in the process, you will be able to obtain their buy-in, support,
• Recommendations for developmental and engagement.
interventions are indicated in the Performance
Commitment and Rating Form
• Provision in the guidelines on the linkage of
SPMS with the Agency HR Development Plan
• Provision in the guidelines on the tie-up
of performance management system with If you follow all the items in the checklist
the agency rewards and incentives for top
above, you should be able to craft your
performing individuals, units, and offices
• The results of the performance evaluation
l Agency SPMS Guidelines.
are used as inputs to the Agency HR Plan and
rewards and incentives
92 93
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
Tel.
No.
931-8092
/
931-7939
http://www.csc.gov.ph/