Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPerformance Evaluation for Appointed Officials C I TY O F PALM DESERT REQUEST FOR CITY COIJNCIL ACTION TO: City Manager, Members of the City Council FROM: Dave Millheim, Director of Human Resources DATE: April 15, 1994 SUBJECT: PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS FOR APPOINTED OFFICIALS RECOMMENDATION By minute motion, authorize beginning the performance evaluation process for the City Attorney, City Clerk and City Manager. Select the date of for a closed session meeting of the City Council to discuss and prepare the formal group evaluation. Modify the existing performance evaluation system to include Mayor Wilson' s suggestions outlined below. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION In late 1992, the City Council approved a performance evaluation policy for council appointed officials (copy attached) . In early 1993, this policy was used for the first time. What follows is an outline of the steps the City Council are to take at this time based upon the adopted policy: (Please note Mayor Wilson' s suggestions would modify these steps) 1 . Appropriate forms are attached for each individual Councilmember to complete. This is to be done confidentially and privately. After each councilmember has completed their individual rating, each will meet individually with the respective person being evaluated. These meetings will be scheduled and completed within two weeks from receipt of the forms and prior to the executive session. Upon completion of these individual meetings, a copy of the individual evaluation completed by the Councilmember must be given to both the respective employee and the Mayor. This will insure that both the respective employee and the Mayor are fully prepared for discussions which may or may not take place at the group session. 2 . The City Council will set a date for an executive session at which the performance evaluation can be discussed with the full City Council in closed session. The Mayor is responsible for creating the summary performance evaluation to be given to the employee and placed in their respective personnel file. • Two other observations can be made from the City' s first attempt at using this approach. The first issue is the questions on the attached forms were chosen to help solicit responses which would aid the evaluation process . If there is a desire to change any of the questions or explore other areas, this should be done with the full Council ' s concurrence prior to the individual evaluations being conducted. Now would be the time for making any changes if so desired. The second observation relates to the use of an outside consultant to help coordinate this process . In the first attempt at using this policy, the Council choose to use Susan Quinn from The Quinn Company to facilitate the group meeting and to assist the Mayor in preparation of the final document. There were mixed reviews on whether the Council would like to continue to use an outside facilitator to assist the Mayor or whether they would not. Mayor Wilson has contacted me with some suggested changes to the evaluation system which he believes would eliminate the need for an outside facilitator. These changes are: 1 . In addition to providing the evaluation forms to the individual councilmembers, the Council asks each of the three individuals being evaluated to prepare for the Council, in advance of the first meeting, a two part-report that (A) summarizes their major accomplishments during the past year and ( 2 ) establishes a set of goals and objectives to be accomplished during the following year. This would provide a common framework for everyone to use and discuss as they prepared the respective evaluations . 2 . That in place of the Mayor attempting to summarize the individual conferences, each council member prepare a summary statement and have it signed by the evaluatee, sealed and placed in the personnel file of the individual being evaluated. For the purposes of selecting a date for the group meeting, staff is recommending the Council set a date approximately three weeks from now. Respectfully submitted, Review and Concur, �DDave Millheim Bruce Altman CITY COUNG e Ate ION: Human Resources City Manager APPROVED DENIED RECEIVED OTHER1)Authorized beginning the performance evaluation process for the CitI Attorney, Cj� Arglanager and the Executive Director of RDA and selected 5/24/94 at 3:30 MEETING p.m. for a closed session meeting of the City AYES: , 1` L , y- Council to discuss and prepare the formal NOES: ,(\L > group evaluation; 2)modify the existing A'3SFMT: -i-k performance evaluation system to include Mayor t?e,:.. .. . r�Q Wilson's suggestions �_.. outlined in the staff report. Origiriul. :,:i 1,11e wit t' City Clerk' s Office CITY O F PALM DESERT REQUEST FOR C I TY C OUNC I L ACTION TO: City Manager, Members of the City Council FROM: Dave Millheim, Director of Human Resources DATE: October 8, 1992 SUBJECT: PERFORMANCE EVALUATION POLICY FOR APPOINTED OFFICIALS RECOMMENDATION By minute motion adopt the attached City Council Policy regarding a performance evaluation system for appointed officials . BACKGROUND Some time ago, the City Council through the City Manager asked the human resources staff to develop some guidelines which the City Council could use to evaluate the performance of specific appointed officials . These included the positions of City Attorney, City Clerk and City Manager. This has been a difficult process for staff since these positions do not fall within the "normal" realm of other city positions . All of these individuals report directly to the City Council and thus do not fall under the City' s personnel ordinance as closely as other city positions . In these cases, the performance evaluation relationship is clearly between the City Council and the respective individuals involved. Additionally, human resource staff reports via the chain of command to the City Manager. These facts have put staff in the middle of an area where there could be potential difficulties . Nevertheless, staff has completed the assignment given by providing general guidelines, instructions and. a flexible policy to use as a performance evaluation system. The remainder of this report discusses in greater detail the process as well as general instructions to use for a positive outcome . Respectfully submitted, Review and Concur, Lave Millheim Bruce Altman Director of Human Resources City Manager c:\projects\perfeval.ar -- PERFORMANCE EVALUATION POLICY DISCUSSION Staff recommends based upon research and professional opinion that the City Council do the following as a process for considering this information: 1 . Set a date for an executive session to consider the information contained in this staff report and the attached policy. In attendance at this session should only be the City Council , City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk and Director of Human Resources . 2 . At this session the City Council can raise any issues they wish related to the policy. The policy is merely a description of the system and can be amended as agreed upon by the City Council . It is extremely important for both the City Council and the individuals being evaluated to have an absolute and clear understanding of how the system works . 3 . Once the system and policy has been agreed upon, understood, explained to all involved, then the City Council should complete their respective components of the evaluation process . This is to be done confidentially and privately. 5 . After each councilmember has completed their individual rating, . each should meet individually with the respective person being evaluated. This should take place within two weeks of the first executive session. 6 . A second executive session would then be held with the full City Council and the specific appointed official being evaluated. No other staff should be in attendance. The Mayor would be responsible for having each member of the City Council orally report on their specific evaluation and meeting with the employee. Feedback and candid discussion should be encouraged. Appropriate direction and vision should be addressed. Based upon all of the comments and discussion given, the Mayor will be responsible for creating the summary performance evaluation to be given to the employee. The original, signed by the Mayor and employee, will be placed in the employee ' s personnel file. In the case of the City Attorney, a personnel file has not been established. A "personnel file" would be established with the sole purpose of having a confidential location for the evaluations . Much of the above language is contained in the policy staff recommends the City Council adopt. This report will now explore other significant issues and instructions related to this process . There is nothing earth shattering about the ideas and suggestions contained in this report . Most of what follows is common sense and has been substantiated by research and practice. 2 Goal of Performance Evaluation: The most important thing the City Council should consider in developing a performance evaluation system is the goal they wish to accomplish. The textbook answer for why we do performance evaluations is to create a process which provides the employee with better feedback on their job performance and progress . Lack of such feedback can cause frustration and problems . Providing this feedback to the respective person should be the City Council ' s primary goal during the evaluation process . It is important to emphasize that a properly conducted evaluation can aid the City Council and the respective person in providing a better vision for the City of Palm Desert . A team approach should be fostered. A poorly conducted evaluation can have a very divisive effect on all involved. Uniqueness of these three positions : Most of the information contained in this report could be used in any evaluation system since it is based on common sense management approaches . Nevertheless , the uniqueness of the Council/Manager, Council/Attorney and Council/Clerk relationships can not be understated and presents some challenges to this process . These relationships do not fall under the classical model of supervisor/subordinate and thus the evaluation process is slightly altered. The Council hires a City Manager to run the City and staff while the Council provides overall policy direction. The City Attorney provides legal counsel and the City Clerk provides a variety of services . Each serves a very unique role different from the remaining staff positions . The City Council is not associated with the day-to-day details of any of these positions because they have other important roles to serve . Each uses and needs the other to achieve sound city operations . When evaluating these positions , importance should be placed on the working relationship between the City Council and these respective positions . It would be a mistake to get hung up on the technical details of these positions . Therefore, staff ' s approach in addressing this process is to provide the City Council and these individuals with a great deal of flexibility. A structured, quantitative approach ( and evaluation instrument) is not recommended due to the uniqueness of these positions . Flexible communication and open discussion are recommended. Timing of Reviews : Staff recommends that all three of these reviews should occur in January of each year. This is a quiet time after Christmas and is the mid-point of the fiscal year. It will allow changes in vision or direction, desired by the City Council , to be carried out as the new budget is developed. Doing an 7 evaluation concurrent with the fiscal year and adoption of the budget is not advisable due to the workload and time constraints placed on everyone . Common Rating Errors : Even the most experienced raters sometimes fall prey to common mistakes . In order to derive the greatest benefit from the performance evaluation process, the evaluation needs to be balanced, based on total performance and not influenced by personal bias . The following are common rating errors and advice you can use to keep from making them: 1 . The Halo Effect: Letting one predominant factor color your opinion of other factors (e.g. She ' s neat; therefore, work must be accurate) . Advice: Look for strong and weak points; focus on job-related factors only. 2 . Recency: Rating only on recent performance. Data should be representative of the entire period from the last review. Advice: Maintain an on-going note file to remember significant events . These may be positive or negative events . Plan ahead for the performance evaluation. 3 . Central Tendency: Checking all the middle or average boxes as an easy way out for the rater. Raters who fall into the "central tendency" syndrome have nothing to talk about during the performance interview meeting because nothing stands out. Advice : Look for strong and weak points; build on strong points , coach weak points and add challenges to the job where appropriate . 4 . Grouping: Attributing poor performance to group characteristics such as, "everyone ' s late" or "nobody does complete write-ups on customer complaints . " Advice : Focus on the individual; rate at different times; review your note file before rating. 5 . Holding a grudge: Some raters never let go and never forget a previous negative behavior. Imagine yourself in the situation -- paying for something you did years ago. Advice: Look for positives in employee; highlight strong performance areas ; face up to grudge and discuss it, then get rid of it. 6 . Prejudice: Be careful of illegal prejudices such as race, religion, national origin, sex, or handicaps creeping into the 4 evaluation. This is a serious mistake. Some also harbor prejudices against hair color, weight, height, etc . Keep bias out. You are rating the performance and not the person. Advice: Look for strong performance areas; stick to vision and job-related areas . 7 . Favoritism: Overlooking the poor performance of "nice" employees . They could perform better but everyone likes them and they are easy to get along with. Advice: Consider growth areas ; look for strengths in others . 8 . Sunflower Effect: Rating all categories or employees high to make yourself look good. Advice : Concentrate on employee development, not ratings, to look better. 9 . Subjective versus objective appraisal : Allowing feelings versus observable facts to bias the evaluation. Advice : A behavior is that which can be observed. An attitude is a conclusion which identifies a feeling or emotion about a situation. Base the evaluation on what you know and observe and not what you "feel . " Observed behaviors are objective, attitudes can be subjective. Employee Feedback session: The "one-on-one" meeting and the group discussion are very important events . Allow sufficient time. This once-a-year session is not a one-minute feedback session. Do not schedule it after a particularly long Council meeting when everyone may be tired or in a hurry to get home. If this situation were to occur, reschedule the sessions to a more appropriate time. Recognize that some people (both raters and those being rated) sometimes approach the evaluation apprehensive, defensive and even fearful . Reassure and calm them. The most important thing the Council can do is listen to suggestions which the employee wishes to share . Some people look forward to evaluations as an appropriate time to convey issues which they have been holding back. Use open ended questions like, "How do you feel about this?" Avoid closed questions . Emphasize that appraisal of the past performance is used as a basis for forward looking performance improvements . So do not dwell on the past . Get agreement for the future . Identify employee strengths . Examine the employee ' s record with a 5 positive attitude. Search for and focus on strengths , not weaknesses . Look for successes , not failures . It is important to not "dump" a whole year' s worth of job deficiencies on the employee. This will create a defensive and negative relationship. An important principle of performance evaluation is that problems and deficiencies should have been dealt with earlier when they occurred, through feedback and open discussion. This should be an on-going process . Self-help appraiser questions : The following is a list of questions which each Councilmember should ask themselves as an appraiser. These questions should help the Council approach the appraisal from an objective perspective. 1 . Do I fully understand the purpose and mechanics of our appraisal scheme, or should I find out more about it? 2 . Am I assessing the individual or the past performance? 3 . Am I assessing performance over the whole period under review, or am I giving undue weight to recent events , memorable events and so on? 4 . Am I being influenced by personal likes and dislikes? Guidelines for Criticism: Some people do not respond well to criticism. This could be caused by both the personality of the individual receiving the criticism and how the message was conveyed. What follows are general guidelines for giving criticism in a productive fashion. You may want to remember that these principles work all during the year and not just at evaluation time . 1 . Give the criticism in private . Do not run the risk of embarrassing or humiliating the receiver. The one-on-one sessions are provided so that a free exchange can take place without the involvement of others . 2 . Make certain the receiver is paying attention and is emotionally ready to listen . Feedback not heeded is feedback not heard. 3 . Wait for the receiver to get over anger, hurt or confusion. You want the receiver to be receptive to your message. 4 . Do not communicate anger. This is a critical time to be objective . 5 . Reject the behavior, not the person. Focus on what was done rather than the person' s role in it. 5 6 . Be clear and specific . Use actual examples . Offer them before you are asked for them. 7 . Probe for understanding with questions . Make certain the receiver understands what you are saying. Find out how he or she is taking your criticism. Make certain the data and assumptions that triggered your criticism were accurate . 8 . Give criticism while the behavior is fresh in both your minds . It will have the maximum impact. 9 . Be honest with yourself about your objective. If your intent is to punish, the receiver will realize this (even if you do not) and will become defensive. 10 . Show understanding of and empathy for the receiver' s situation. This will help win the receiver' s trust. 11 . Be provisional if possible; qualify your observations . Do not communicate hopelessness and finality. Avoid saying "always" or "never" type statements which may not be totally accurate . 12 . Do not ascribe intent to the person' s behavior. "You do not want to do a good job" will create defensiveness . Report on the behavior only. 13 . Do not overload the receiver with criticism to the point that it becomes threatening or creates excessive stress . Do unto others . . . Administrator Evaluation Manual : Attached to this report is a blue covered training manual called "Administrator Evaluation Manual : A Complete Guide for Board Members . " This is a very good outline and provides an excellent overview to the entire evaluation process . Staff solicited other appointed official evaluation systems from throughout the state. Examples were received from Sunnyvale, Walnut Creek, San Carlos , Duarte, Albany, Morgan Hill, Hercules and the League of California Cities . Samples ranged from very quantitative styles to very flexible styles . The samples received from other cities , while providing useful ideas, were specific to the respective cities . Even though staff has developed it ' s own forms in this policy, the ones contained in Chapter 4 of the blue Administrator Evaluation Manual are excellent. They are simple to use, objective and flexible enough to facilitate a good discussion. These forms would best be used for the City Manager but could easily be adapted for use with the City Attorney and City Clerk. 7 - Salary considerations : It is often the case that performance evaluations and salary review occur concurrently. The City Council may wish to explore this area. If they do, depending upon the action taken, separate Council action may be required. In the City' s current pay plan, the City Manager salary (a set amount) and the City Clerk salary (a salary range) are both established by formula on the adopted salary schedule. The City Attorney has a contracted amount which includes both a retainer amount and specific hourly fees . This contract is separate from the salary schedule and should remain as such. Employment Agreement Issues : As part of the evaluation process , the City Council may wish to consider an employment agreement for the City Manager. The City Manager' s original contract expired long ago . The importance of an employment agreement is that it provides continuity to the City. It also makes the City Manager less sensitive to political swings and allows the Manager to stay focused on doing the job he or she was hired to do. It is becoming increasingly uncommon for City Managers not to have such an agreement with their respective Board or Council . If the Council wishes to explore this area in greater detail, staff can provide examples of language and the types of items which should be included in the agreement. Staff would not recommend an employment agreement for the City Clerk. In the case of the City Attorney, the retainer agreement serves this purpose. SUMMARY: The evaluation should reflect performance during the entire period. Make sure everyone agrees on the process . If the evaluation is scored all bad or all good, you are either too severe or too gentle . . Remember performance appraisal is an on-going process . Keep each other informed throughout the whole year and not just during the formal evaluation process . c:\projects\perfeval.sr 8 CITY OF PALM DESERT ADM I Isl.I STRATIVE POLICI ES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL SUBJECT: PERFORMANCE EVALUATION POLICY DATE: October 8, 1992 FOR COUNCIL APPOINTED OFFICIALS PAGE: 1 OF 2 1. PURPOSE To clearly establish a flexible performance evaluation system for the three City Council appointed positions of City Attorney, City Clerk and City Manager. 2. GENERAL GOALS OF THE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEM The City Council relies heavily on staff support and input from the City Attorney, City Clerk and City Manager. In an effort to promote a productive working relationship with these positions, the City Council has adopted a performance evaluation system with the following general goals: A. Develop and maintain with these individuals, their respective leadership roles in the City. B . Develop harmonious working relationships between the City Council and these three appointed positions. C. Review performance and agree on vision for carrying out the City's policies relating to service delivery, mission, organization, budget, legal and business affairs. D. Provide a forum for open discussion and feedback. 3. GENERAL PROCEDURES The following procedures would be used for the performance evaluation process: A. At the first regularly scheduled City Council meeting in January of each year, the Director of Human Resources will provide the City Council with a staff report notifying them that the annual evaluation process has arrived. Appropriate forms with instructions (copies attached) will be distributed to the City Council for their individual completion. The City Council will set a date for an executive session in which the performance evaluation can be discussed with the full City Council. B. Each councilmember should complete their respective components of the evaluation process. This is to be done confidentially and privately. C. After each councilmember has completed their individual rating, each will meet individually with the respective person being evaluated. These meetings will be scheduled and completed within two weeks from receipt of the forms and prior to the executive session. • SUBJECT: PERFORMANCE EVALUATION POLICY DATE: October 8, 1992 • FOR COUNCIL APPOINTED OFFICIALS PAGE: 1 OF 2 D. The scheduled executive session would then be held with the full City Council and the specific appointed official being evaluated. No other staff should be in attendance. The Mayor would be responsible for having each member of the City Council orally report on their specific evaluation and meeting with the employee. Feedback and candid discussion should be encouraged. Appropriate direction and vision should be addressed. Based upon all of the comments and discussion given, the Mayor will be responsible for creating the summary performance evaluation to be given to the employee. E. The original of the summary evaluation, signed by the Mayor and employee, will be placed in the employee's personnel file. F. In the case of the City Attorney, a personnel file has not been established. A "personnel file" would be established with the sole purpose of having a confidential location for the evaluations. This policy is approved to be effective immediately. The Director of Human Resources is responsible for implementing this policy and working with the City Council as needed to insure its success. The items contained in this policy have been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney's office. R a elly D e Mayor, City of Palm Desert Bruce Altman Date City Manager Sheila Gil 'gan ] i Date City C � r ve n ate City torney � J ave Millheim Date Director of Human Resources \policies\perfeval.pol • INDIVIDUAL COUNCILMEMBER EVALUATION OF CITY MANAGER NOTE: This form is to be completed by the individual Councilmember and then discussed in a private meeting with the City Manager. After this meeting, the Councilmember may amend the form based upon the discussion. A copy of the final version ( if amended) will be provided, by the Councilmember, to both the City Manager and the Mayor at least two days prior to the scheduled executive session. 1 . What specific recommendations do you have for the City Manager to improve performance? 2 . What impressed you most about the City Manager' s performance this year? 3 . What direction would you like to see the City take over the next year? 4 . List the specific things the City Manager does which you would like to see discontinued? 5 . List the specific things the City Manager does now that should be promoted? Councilmember signature Date INDIVIDUAL COUNCILMEMBER EVALUATION OF CITY CLERK NOTE: This form is to be completed by the individual Councilmember and then discussed in a private meeting with the City Clerk. After this meeting, the Councilmember may amend the form based upon the discussion. A copy of the final version (if amended) will be provided, by the Councilmember, to both the City Clerk and the Mayor at least two days prior to the scheduled executive session. 1 . What specific recommendations do you have for the City Clerk to improve performance? 2 . What impressed you most about the City Clerk' s performance this year? 3 . What would you like to see differently regarding agenda preparation? 4 . List the specific things the City Clerk does which you would like to see discontinued? 5 . List the specific things the City Clerk does now that should be promoted? Councilmember signature Date ATTORNEYINDIVIDUAL COUNCILMEMBER EVALUATION OF CITY NOTE: This form is to be completed by the individual Councilmember and then discussed in a private meeting with the City Attorney. After this meeting, the Councilmember may amend the form based upon the discussion. A copy of the final version ( if amended) will be provided, by the Councilmember, to both the City Attorney and the Mayor at least two days prior to the scheduled executive session. 1 . What specific recommendations do you have for the City Attorney to improve performance? 2 . What impressed you most about the City Attorney' s performance this year? 3 . How do you feel about the quality of the legal advice received and the quality of the work provided? 4 . List the specific things the City Attorney does which you would like to see discontinued? 5 . List the specific things the City Attorney does now that should be promoted? Councilmember signature Date