Upload
hathuy
View
217
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
MANAGING FOR EXCELLENCEManual
2018
ROYAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
Excellence in Service
རྒྱལ༌གཞུང༌ཞི༌གཡོག༌ལྷན༌ཚོགས།
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | iii |
Table of ContentsList of Abbreviations ........................................................................................... v
Introduction .......................................................................................................1Purpose ................................................................................................................2
Chapter 1: Preliminary Performance Assessment..............................................31.1. Performance Appraisal Form for PMC and SSC .................................................. 3
1.1.1. Section A: Employee Details .................................................................. 31.1.2. Section B: Performance Assessment (Individual Work Plan) 70%.......... 31.1.3. Section C: Competency Behavior (30%) ................................................. 61.1.4. Section D: Performance Evaluation Score (Section B & C) ..................... 6
1.2. Example on how to evaluate Performance Appraisal Form ............................... 81.3. The Performance Appraisal Form for Operational category (OC): ................... 10
Chapter 2: Mechanics of Moderation Exercise................................................. 112.1. Moderation Exercise (ModEx) .......................................................................... 112.2. Agency Categorization Framework (ACF) ......................................................... 112.3. Performance Evaluation of Moderation Committee Members and Specialist (ES3-ES1) .......................................................................................... 122.4. Assignment of scores to civil servant at various Position Level ....................... 12
2.4.1. Executive (EX3-EX1) ............................................................................. 122.4.2. Specialist (ES3-ES1) .............................................................................. 132.4.3. Professional and Management (P1) ..................................................... 132.4.4. Professional and Management (P5-P2), Supervisory and support (S5-SS1) .................................................................................. 132.4.5. Civil servants on Secondment, Long Term Study Leave, Maternity Leave, EOL and Transfer ...................................................... 13
2.5. Composition of Moderation Committee and Assignment of Performance Rating to Committee Members ....................................................................... 152.6. Prerequisite for Moderation Exercise .............................................................. 202.7. Determining the Distribution Percentage for assignment of performance category to individual staff ......................................................... 202.8. Different Roles in the Moderation Exercise ..................................................... 212.9. Consideration/Criteria ..................................................................................... 232.10. Summary of ModEx process ............................................................................ 24
Chapter 3: Managing for Excellence for Teaching and Support Services in school .............................................................................................. 253.1. Performance Appraisal Form for PMC and SSC ................................................ 25
3.1.1. Section A: Employee details ................................................................. 253.1.2. Section B: Performance Assessment (IWP) 70% .................................. 253.1.3. Section C: Competency Behavior (30%) ............................................... 263.1.4. Section D: Preliminary Performance Evaluation Score (section B and C) .................................................................................. 26
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| iv | Page
3.2. Example on how to evaluate Performance Appraisal Form ............................. 263.3. Performance Appraisal Form for Operational Category .................................. 263.4. Procedure of Moderation Exercise and Agency Categorization Framework .... 263.5. Performance Rating for Moderation Committee Members ............................ 273.6. General Principle for performance evaluation rating of staff in schools ......... 273.7. Moderation Exercise Guideline for Schools .................................................... 27
Chapter 4: Performance Linked HR Incentives, Appeal System and Max Calender ............................................................................................. 284.1. Performance linked HR Actions ....................................................................... 284.2. Appeal Procedure ............................................................................................ 334.3. MaX Calendar for civil servants: Fiscal Year (July-June) ................................... 344.4. MaX Calendar for civil servants in schools ( Jan -Dec) ..................................... 35
Annexure ........................................................................................................ 36Annexure 1: Performance Appraisal Form for Professional and Management, and Specialist Services Group ................................................................ 36Annexure 2: Performance Appraisal Form for Supervisory and Support Services Group ......................................................................... 41Annexure 3: Performance Appraisal for O category .................................................. 46Annexure 4: Performance Calibration through Moderation Exercise ........................ 47Annexure 5: Sample Meeting Agenda ....................................................................... 49Annexure 6: Schedule A ............................................................................................. 50
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | v |
List of Abbreviations
APA : Annual Performance AgreementACF : Agency Categorization FrameworkAPT : Annual Performance TargetsAWP : Annual Work PlanEOL : Extra Ordinary leaveDEO : Dzongkhag Education OfficerGPMS : Government Performance Management SystemG : GoodHR : Human Resource HRC : Human Resource CommitteeIWP : Individual Work Plan IC : Investigation CommitteeQQCT : Quality, Quantity, Cost, and TimeMaX : Managing for ExcellenceMC : Moderation CommitteeModEx : Moderation ExerciseNI : Need ImprovementOS : OutstandingOC : Operational CategoryPAF : Performance Appraisal formPE : Performance EvaluationPL : Position LevelPMC : Professional & Management CategoryPMS : Professional & Management SystemPER : Performance Evaluation RatingPIP : Performance Improvement Plan RCSC : Royal Civil Service CommissionSI : Success IndicatorsSIP : School Improvement PlanSPMS : School Performance Management SystemSSC : Supervisory & Support CategoryTRC : Teacher Resource CentresVG : Very Good
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 1 |
Introduction
In 2014, the Royal Civil Service Commission identified Performance Management System (PMS) as one of the areas of reform for the Bhutanese Civil Service. In order to assess the effectiveness and efficacy of the existing PMS, an exercise was carried out in 2014 to evaluate it and the following were the findings:
• All civil servants were rated outstanding category and average PE rating was 3.82 out of 4 across all Agencies;
• The PE forms indicating the strategic planning and/or strategic involvement of civil servants were minimal; and
• All expected performance output identified lacked objective indicators and linkages to organizational objectives, if any, were weak.
Therefore, the RCSC in order to strengthen existing PMS, worked to institute procedures that strengthen performance planning, monitoring and evaluation by creating a mechanism for linking and aligning individual performance to the organizational objectives and results. Organizational objectives, in turn, are drawn from the national vision and the Five Year Plans. The title of the new PMS is “Managing for Excellence” (MaX). The objectives of MaX are:
• Alignment: To align individual performance targets with the organization’s strategic vision/missions/objectives;
• Accountability: To ensure organizational effectiveness by cascading institutional accountabilities to the various levels of the organization’s hierarchy; and
• Differentiation: To enhance Agency’s overall performance by differentiating performer from non-performer.
The key elements of the “Managing for Excellence” framework are as follows:• Clear organizational targets linked to national targets;• Organizational targets cascaded down to division level and then down to
individual level with clear performance targets and competency behaviors;• Evaluation of Performance and Competency Behaviors at the end of the
cycle based on agreed performance targets.• Ranking of individuals during Moderation Exercise (ModEx) for Professional
and Support Categories to Outstanding, Very Good, Good and Need Improvement categories based on the Agency Categorization Framework; and
• The results of ModEx, which is the performance rating of civil servants, will be the basis for all HR Actions.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 2 | Page
PurposeThis “Managing for Excellence” Manual shall be used as a guide to the manager and employees for managing and evaluating Performance and Competency Behavior of civil servants. It shall therefore, provide a step-wise guide on the four important aspects of the MaX system elaborated in detail in its respective Chapters as given below:Chapter 1: Preliminary Performance Assessment;Chapter 2: Mechanics of the Moderation Exercise;Chapter 3: Managing for Excellence Framework for Teaching Services and School Support Services; andChapter 4: Performance based HR Incentives & Appeal System, and MaX Calendar.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 3 |
Chapter 1 Preliminary Performance AssessmentThe supervisor and supervisee shall jointly develop the Performance Appraisal Form (PAF) to organize and manage individual activities to effectively contribute to achieving the annual and Five Year Plan objectives of the Agency. The assessment of the Individual Work Plan (IWP) shall be conducted using the Performance Appraisal Form which shall then be input to the Moderation Exercise for assignment of the final rating.
1.1. Performance Appraisal Form for PMC and SSC
The Performance Appraisal Form shall be used to formulate division outputs, identify activities, set target values, and identify Competency Behavior (refer Annexure 1 and 2 for the Performance Appraisal Form). The Performance Appraisal Form consists of four Sections.
1.1.1. Section A: Employee Details
Section A requires civil servants to fill up the details such as Appraisal Period, Employee ID number, Name, Position Title, Position Level, Division, and Department or Ministry. The pictorial depiction is as follows:
Section A: Employee Details
APPRAISAL PERIOD:EMPLOYEE ID No.NAME OF THE EMPLOYEE:POSITION TITLE: POSITION LEVEL:DIVISION: DEPARTMENT/AGENCY:
1.1.2. Section B: Performance Assessment (Individual Work Plan) 70% An Individual Work Plan is a clear plan of action for an individual in
an Agency to organize and manage individual activities to effectively contribute to achieving the annual objectives of the Agency. A rigorous individual work planning exercise will ensure alignment of work done by civil servants to the higher order strategic objectives of their Agencies thereby making the individual performance appraisal more purposeful and effective. It carries 70% weightage.
In this section civil servants are required to formulate Division Output, identify performance activities and set target values.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 4 | Page
a. Formulating Division Outputs After Agency’s Annual Performance Agreements/Annual Performance
Target are signed, Divisions shall come up with clear outputs for the fiscal year based on their Departmental objectives. As such, division outputs must be clearly substantiated by Success Indicators (SI) and target values in the same format as Departmental and Agency Annual Performance Agreement/Annual Performance Target.
These division outputs are achieved as a result of activities implemented by individuals working in the Division.
b. Identifying Activities Activities are essential work items that an individual need to execute in
order to achieve the division outputs. Activities should concisely indicate how an individual intends to utilize inputs and overcome constraints to attain the outputs. Each activity listed must be related to one of the outputs, and only activities which have direct contribution to achievement of division outputs should be included in the IWP.
c. Setting the Target Values After identifying the activities, individuals shall set a target value each to
the activities that merits a rating of Level 4/Level 3/Level 2/Level 1 using the QQCT (Quantity, Quality, Cost, and Time) framework. The values are set in terms of Quantity, Quality, Cost or Time. It is not necessary to have all the four factors fitting in one target value. Either, a combination or any of the four factors from the QQCT framework should be reflected in the target values depending on the nature of activity.
It is not necessary to fill target values for all four levels. However, it is mandatory to set the target value for Level 2. If the target value for only Level 2 is drawn, the supervisor shall make the judgment on how to assess the other three levels, at the end of the appraisal period using Level 2 target value as the yardstick.
The target value shall be derived as per the definition given in the table:
Performer Category Definition Rating Scale
Level 4 Achieved exceptionally high level of performance above the requirement of the job 3.00-4.00
Level 3 Performed at higher level than requirement of the job 2.00-2.99Level 2 Employee fulfilled requirement of the job 1.00-1.99Level 1 Results/Behaviour far below performance requirement <=0.99
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 5 |
Following process shall apply for developing individual work plan:
Signing/finalization of Agency APA/APT
Signing of Dept./ Division /Sector Level APA/APT
Formulation of Division Outputs
Formulating Activities and
performance Targets
All Agencies sign APA/APT with clear organizational objectives and targets on an annual basis.
The System mandates each Ministry, Dzongkhag and autonomous Agency to sign APA at various levels, Department, Sector and Division level respectively.
Divisions/Sector shall come up with clear outputs for the fiscal year based on the agency’s objectives. Chief of Division will have to identify Division outputs during the planning phase.
- Individual to identify activities and performance target.
- Managers to vet target/activities identified by individuals.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 6 | Page
The pictorial depiction of Section B is as follows:
SECTION B: Performance Assessment (Individual Work Plan) (70%)
Division Output
Activities
Targets Values Target Achieved specified
by individual
Employee’s Feedback/comment/
justification
Score by Supervisor1
Level 4 =[3.00-4.00]
Level 3 =[2.00-2.99]
Level2 =[1.00 -1.99]
Level 1 [<=0.99]
1. 1. 1………
1.2. ……..
2. 2.1………
2.2………
TOTAL
Score B. Total score/No. of activities =…………
1.1.3. Section C: Competency Behavior (30%)
The Competency Behavior required for Professional and Management Category (PMC), and Supervisory and Support Category (SSC) are different. Refer Performance Appraisal Forms (Annexure 1 and 2) on the details of Competency Behavior for PMC and SSC.
The Competency Behaviors are used to evaluate qualitative aspect of performance of individual and this will include skills and values required to carry out performance targets indicated in Section B of the Performance Appraisal Form. It carries 30% weightage.
Please note, the lists of Competency Behaviors are an indicative list. Agencies based on the requirements can add additional competencies and customize it accordingly with the description of Competency Behavior and indicating different levels of competencies.
1.1.4. Section D: Preliminary Performance Evaluation Score (Section B & C) This Section contains the final Preliminary Performance Score derived
from Section B (70%) and Section C (30%).
1
Note1 Concrete results achieved during the year that were agreed and rate them in the scale indicated in the target
values.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 7 |
SECTION D: Preliminary Performance Evaluation Score [Section B &C]
Particular Score Received Preliminary Score Supervisor’s
Comment, if any
B. Performance 70% of Score B=……..
C. Competency Behaviors 30% of Score C=……Total
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 8 | Page
1.2.
Ex
ampl
e on
how
to E
valu
ate
Perf
orm
ance
App
rais
al F
orm
a.
Eval
uatin
g th
e In
divi
dual
Wor
k Pl
an [S
ectio
n B
of P
erfo
rman
ce A
ppra
isal
For
m]
This
secti
on w
ill fo
rm 7
0% o
f the
tota
l sco
re a
nd th
e fo
llow
ing
tabl
e sh
ows
an e
xam
ple
on h
ow to
pro
vide
ratin
g by
th
e su
perv
isor
for
the
targ
ets
spec
ified
in th
e In
divi
dual
Wor
k Pl
an.
For
exam
ple:
if h
e/sh
e ha
s pe
rfor
med
the
activ
ity
and
achi
eved
Lev
el 4
, the
cor
resp
ondi
ng r
ating
will
be
betw
een
3.00
- 4
.00.
Sim
ilarly
, if
s/he
ach
ieve
s “L
evel
3”,
the
corr
espo
ndin
g ra
ting
will
be
chan
ged
as p
er sc
ale.
Ho
wev
er, i
t is
not n
eces
sary
to fi
ll ta
rget
val
ues
for a
ll fo
ur le
vels.
A m
inim
um ta
rget
val
ue fo
r Lev
el 2
is s
uffici
ent.
If th
e ta
rget
val
ue fo
r onl
y up
to L
evel
2 is
dra
wn,
the
supe
rviso
r sha
ll m
ake
the
judg
emen
t on
how
to a
sses
s at t
he e
nd o
f the
ap
prai
sal p
erio
d us
ing
Leve
l 2 a
s the
yar
dstic
k.
SECT
ION
B: P
erfo
rman
ce A
sses
smen
t (70
%):
Eval
uatin
g th
e In
divi
dual
Wor
k Pl
an
Divi
sion
Out
put
Activ
ities
Targ
ets V
alue
sTa
rget
Ac
hiev
ed
spec
ified
by
indi
vidu
al
Empl
oyee
’s Fe
edba
ck/
com
men
t/
justi
ficati
on
Scor
e by
Su
perv
isor
Leve
l
4=[3
.00-
4.00
]
Leve
l
3=2.
00-
2.99
]
Leve
l
2=[1
.00
-1.9
9]
Leve
l 1[
<=0.
99]
1.Ci
vil s
erva
nt’s
perf
orm
ance
m
anag
ed
1.1.
Con
duct
m
oder
ation
Ex
erci
seJu
lyAu
gust
Sept
embe
rLa
ter t
han
Sept
embe
r 30
Sept
embe
r1.
50
2. O
D re
com
men
datio
ns
Impl
emen
ted
2.1
Impl
emen
t ap
prov
ed C
2 re
com
men
datio
ns10
0%90
%80
%Le
ss th
an 8
0%80
%2.
00
Tota
l 3.
50
Fina
l Sco
re B
(Tot
al/N
o. o
f acti
vitie
s)1.
75 (3
.50/
2)
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 9 |
b.
Eval
uatin
g Co
mpe
tenc
y Be
havi
or [S
ectio
n C
of P
erfo
rman
ce A
ppra
isal
For
m]
Th
is Se
ction
will
form
30%
of t
he to
tal s
core
and
eva
luati
on w
ill b
e do
ne a
s fol
low
s. T
he ra
tings
of c
ompe
tenc
y be
havi
or w
ill b
e ba
sed
on th
e as
sess
men
t are
as th
at h
ave
been
agr
eed
betw
een
the
supe
rviso
r and
supe
rvise
e.
For e
xam
ple:
SECT
ION
C: C
ompe
tenc
y Be
havi
or (3
0%)
Com
pete
ncy
Beha
vior
Desc
riptio
nLe
vel 4
[3.0
0-4.
00]
Leve
l 3 [2
.00-
2.99
]Le
vel 2
[1.0
0-1.
99]
Leve
l 1 [<
=.99
]Sc
ore
by S
uper
viso
r w
ith E
vide
nce
of
Beha
vior
1. A
naly
tical
an
d In
telle
ctua
l Ca
paci
ty
1.1.
Sen
se o
f Pe
rspe
ctive
:De
mon
stra
tes i
ntel
lect
ual
flexi
bilit
y, im
agin
ation
an
d so
cio-
politi
cal
sens
itivi
ty in
dev
elop
ing
a ho
listic
app
reci
ation
of
the
situa
tion
and
in
gene
ratin
g in
nova
tive
idea
s and
solu
tions
that
br
ing
prac
tical
ben
efit.
Thin
ks a
head
to
anti
cipa
te
issue
s,
iden
tifies
op
port
uniti
es
and
appr
ecia
tes
impl
icati
ons.
Take
s st
rate
gic
step
s an
d w
ays t
o ac
hiev
e an
d en
hanc
e th
e ac
hiev
emen
t of
the
targ
et.
Nee
d gu
idan
ce in
id
entif
ying
th
e op
port
uniti
es
and
solu
tions
to
solv
e w
ork
tow
ards
ac
hiev
ing
the
targ
et.
Is h
asty
in
form
atting
op
inio
ns a
nd
judg
men
t ta
king
acti
on
befo
re a
sses
sing
impl
icati
ons a
nd
Focu
ses o
n da
y to
day
pro
blem
s at
the
expe
nse
of lo
nger
tern
pl
anni
ng.
Leve
l 3=2
.5
Mr.
X w
hen
assig
ned
a ta
sk o
n HR
Pl
anni
ng su
bmitt
ed
reco
mm
enda
tion
that
was
app
rove
d by
the
Agen
cy.
Com
pete
ncy
Beha
vior
Sco
re(T
otal
scor
e/nu
mbe
r of c
ompe
tenc
y be
havi
or)
2.5/
1=2.
5
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 10 | Page
c. Evaluation of Performance and Competency Behavior The preliminary performance rating for the individual will consist of
70% Performance and 30% Competency Behavior. With reference to the aforementioned example, the final rating will be as follows:
Particular Score received Preliminary Score Supervisor’s
Comment, if anyPerformance 1.75 70% of 1.75=1.23Competency Behavior 2.50 30% of 2.50=0.75
Evaluation Score 1.98
The scores from Preliminary Performance Assessment and Competency behavior will be used as an input during the Moderation Exercise of the employees. Therefore, the Evaluation Score of IWP and Competency Behavior will not be the individual’s final evaluation score. Note2
1.3. The Performance Appraisal Form for Operational Category (OC)
The Performance Appraisal Form for OC consist of details of the employee and the assessment is based on competency behavior since the roles and responsibilities of civil servants under this category are routine and often repetitive. Overall, staff under this category is required to comply with set of objectives, methodology and specific assignment. They are not required to fill in online Performance Appraisal Forms (the PAF for OC is attached as Annexure 3).
Note
Agencies listed under schedule A of this manual due to their unique circumstances will be exempted from the moderation exercise. However, all civil servants in those Agencies including Executives will have to complete the appraisal forms and the evaluation score of appraisal forms will be their final performance score.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 11 |
Chapter 2 Mechanics of Moderation Exercise2.1. Moderation Exercise (ModEx) The Moderation Exercise is ranking of civil servants into different performance
categories (Outstanding, Very Good, Good and Need Improvement) based on Agency Categorization Framework.
For agencies which sign Annual Performance Agreement, the performance score of their Agency/Department whichever is applicable will be used as the basis for determining the distribution of civil servants into different performance categories.
For agencies without APA, the basis for distribution of performers into different performance categories will be the scores assigned under the APT evaluation report.
2.2. Agency Categorization Framework (ACF)
Agency Categorization Framework (ACF) will be the basis for categorizing civil servants into different performance categories. The framework will use the APA/APT scores as the basis for distribution of employees into different performance categories. The ACF is subject to change depending on how the APA/APT is assessed.
Following categories will be used for the purpose of ranking employees into different performance categories. Agencies have the option to put lesser number of staff than the assigned numbers in outstanding and more number of staff than the assigned number in the Need Improvement i.e the assigned quota for OS and NI are the maximum and minimum numbers respectively.
Note: If the agency fails to identify the required number of staff under Need Improvement as per assigned ACF derived from APA/APT/EMS score, the Moderation Committee/TRC Members shall be all assigned NI as proxy rating.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 12 | Page
Agency Categorization Framework to Distribute Employees in Different Performance Categories
Agency Category
Agency’s Score Outstanding Very Good Good Need
ImprovementCategory 1 95.00-100.00 3% 17% 80% 0%Category 2 85.00-94.99 2% 16% 81% 1%Category 3 70.00-84.99 1% 15% 82.5% 1.5%Category 4 <=69.99. 0% 14% 84% 2%
2.3 Performance Evaluation of Moderation Committee Members and Specialist (ES3-ES1)Civil servants at Executive and Management Levels are provided proxy scores based on the Division/Department/Agency performance. The rationale for providing proxy scores for Executives and Management level are:• They are directly accountable for the performance of division/department/
Agency; and• They are the members of the moderation Committee; therefore, they
cannot be moderated and rank themselves.
The performance of those in management positions which include Executives, Chief of Division, Sector Head and/or members of Moderation Committee, shall be as follows:
GPMS report/ Achievement (%)
Proxy score for moderation committee members and specialist
95.00% -100% Outstanding
85.00% -94.99% Very Good
70.00% -84.99% Good
<=69.99% Need Improvement
2.4. Assignment of Scores to Civil Servant at Various Position Level
2.4.1. Executive (EX3-EX1)a. For Executive heading Agencies, the Agency’s score will be proxy
for his/her performance.b. For Executive heading Departments, the ratio of APA scores
between Agency and Department (50:50) will be the performance rating of the executive.
c. For Executives heading Agencies, which do not have Agency score, will have to complete performance appraisal forms, which will be evaluated by the Chairman of Board/Commission. Refer Annexure 6.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 13 |
2.4.2. Specialist (ES3-ES1)a. All Specialists (ES) will get the Departments or Agency’s score as
proxy.
2.4.3. Professional and Management (P1)a. Head of division at P1 or officiating head at P2 in Ministries will
receive the Ministry/ Department’s score as Proxy rating.b. Head of Sector/Division at P1 or officiating head at P2 in the
Dzongkhag and Autonomous Agencies will receive the Agency’s score as Proxy rating.
c. All other P1 (Specialist) who do not head division will fall in the general pool considered for ranking purpose during the moderation exercise.
d. Chief of Division, which do not have Agency scores, will have to complete performance appraisal form which will be evaluated by an Executives.
2.4.4. Professional and Management (P5-P2), Supervisory and Support (S5-SS1)a. Civil servants under this category including contract employees will
be ranked into different performance category during moderation exercise as per Agency’s score and ACF.
2.4.5. Civil servants on Secondment, Long Term Study Leave, Maternity Leave, EOL and Transfer
2.4.5.1. Secondment Civil servants on secondment will be given default performance
rating of “Good”. If the seconded Agency submits non-performance record on the civil servant during secondment, s/he shall be put under Need Improvement Category. Employees on secondment will not be included in the pool of staff being moderated for respective Agency for the particular performance appraisal period.
2.4.5.2. Long Term Study Leave Civil servants on long-term study will be given default
performance rating of “Good” on submission of successful course completion certificate. Employees on study will not be counted in the pool of staff for moderation in the respective Agency for that particular performance appraisal period only if he/she is away for the entire assessment year.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 14 | Page
2.4.5.3. Maternity Leave Civil servants on maternity leave shall be included in the pool of
moderation and shall be given default minimum performance rating of “Good”.
For Section 2.4.5.1, 2.4.5.2 and2.4.5.3, the default performance score is good. However, the Moderation Committee has the discretion to assign such civil servants to other performance categories based on evidence.
2.4.5.4. Extra Ordinary Leave (EOL) Civil servants on EOL will not have Performance Evaluation for
the period of EOL only if he/she is away for the entire assessment year as the duration for EOL is considered as inactive service and as such this period is not included for any HR actions.
2.4.5.5. Transfer Any civil servant transferred during the appraisal period will be
moderated in the Agency where he/she is currently serving for the appraisal period, irrespective of the length/duration.
For Civil servants receiving proxy score, proxy score of agency in which s/he has served for the fiscal year of the performance period exceeding 6 months shall be their performance score.
Note3
1. Civil servants from S5 to P1 Specialist need to fill in appraisal forms including Chief of Division for all Agencies.2. Qualitative aspect of Managers’ (Head of division/department/agency) performance will be evaluated through
online leadership feedback system, which will have equal weightage) as quantitative aspect of performance score vetted through department/agency score
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 15 |
2.5.
Co
mpo
sitio
n of
Mod
erati
on C
omm
ittee
and
Ass
ignm
ents
of P
erfo
rman
ce R
ating
to C
omm
ittee
Mem
bers
The
follo
win
g ta
ble
outli
nes t
he va
rious
type
s of A
genc
ies a
nd w
ithin
it o
n ho
w e
mpl
oyee
s bas
ed o
n th
eir f
uncti
ons,
line
s of r
epor
ting
/acc
ount
abili
ty w
ill b
e cl
uste
red
and
mod
erat
ed
Profi
le/P
ositi
on T
itle
Perf
orm
ance
Rati
ng
Com
posi
tion
of M
oder
ation
Co
mm
ittee
Rem
arks
1. M
INIS
TRY
Secr
etar
y of
Min
istry
Min
istry
’s pe
rfor
man
ce
scor
e.N
A
Dire
ctor
/ Dire
ctor
Gen
eral
of
Depa
rtm
ents
Equa
l rati
o be
twee
n M
inist
ry’s
scor
e an
d re
spec
tive
Depa
rtm
ent’s
sc
ore.
Chi
ef o
f Div
ision
/Cor
e Di
visio
nRe
spec
tive
Depa
rtm
ent’s
scor
e.
Chie
f of D
ivisi
on/S
ecre
taria
l Ser
vice
sM
inist
ry’s
perf
orm
ance
sc
ore.
Empl
oyee
s
Secr
etar
iat S
ervi
ces/
Staff
Fu
nctio
n
PPD,
Inte
rnal
Aud
it Se
rvic
es
Mod
erat
e th
em
acco
rdin
g to
Min
istry
’s sc
ore
to d
iffer
ent
perf
orm
ance
cat
egor
ies.
For S
ecre
taria
t:M
C w
ill c
onsis
t of:
1. S
ecre
tary
of M
inist
ry
(Cha
irper
son)
.2.
Dire
ctor
, Dire
ctor
ate
(Mem
ber)
.3.
Chie
f of D
ivisi
ons &
Ser
vice
s (M
embe
r).
4. C
hief
HR
Offi
cer/
HR O
ffice
r (M
embe
r Sec
reta
ry).
1. A
n offi
ciati
ng h
ead
at
P3 a
nd b
elow
will
not
be
a
mem
ber o
f the
MC.
2. S
ecre
tary
to re
pres
ent
staff
dire
ctly
repo
rting
to
Secr
etar
y.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 16 | Page
Profi
le/P
ositi
on T
itle
Perf
orm
ance
Rati
ng
Com
posi
tion
of M
oder
ation
Co
mm
ittee
Rem
arks
Empl
oyee
s
Core
Div
ision
/Lin
e Fu
nctio
nM
oder
ate
them
ac
cord
ing
to
Depa
rtm
ent’s
scor
e to
di
ffere
nt p
erfo
rman
ce
cate
gorie
s.
For L
ine
Depa
rtm
ent
MC
will
con
sist o
f:1.
Dire
ctor
/Dire
ctor
Gen
eral
, De
part
men
t (Ch
airp
erso
n)2.
Chi
ef o
f Div
ision
, Div
ision
(M
embe
r)3.
HR
Offi
cer (
Mem
ber S
ecre
tary
).
Com
mis
sion
, Aut
onom
ous A
genc
y, T
hrom
des
Secr
etar
y of
the
Com
miss
ion/
Dire
ctor
Ge
nera
l/Dire
ctor
of A
genc
y Ag
ency
’s sc
ore
NA
Chie
f of D
ivisi
ons
Agen
cy’s
scor
e Em
ploy
ees
Secr
etar
iat S
ervi
ces/
Staff
Fu
nctio
n.M
oder
ate
them
ac
cord
ing
to A
genc
y’s
scor
e.
For A
genc
y:M
C w
ill c
onsis
t of:
1. S
ecre
tary
, Age
ncy
(Cha
irper
son)
2. D
irect
or, D
irect
orat
e/Se
cret
aria
t (M
embe
r)3.
Chi
ef o
f Div
ision
(Mem
ber)
4. H
R O
ffice
r (M
embe
r Sec
reta
ry)
OR
MC
will
con
sist o
f:1.
Dire
ctor
, Age
ncy
(Cha
irper
son)
2. C
hief
of D
ivisi
on (M
embe
r)3.
HR
Offi
cer (
Mem
ber S
ecre
tary
)
An o
ffici
ating
hea
d at
P3
and
belo
w w
ill n
ot b
e a
m
embe
r of t
he M
C.
Core
Div
ision
/Lin
e Fu
nctio
n.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 17 |
Profi
le/P
ositi
on T
itle
Perf
orm
ance
Rati
ng
Com
posi
tion
of M
oder
ation
Co
mm
ittee
Rem
arks
1. D
ZON
GKH
AG
Head
of D
zong
khag
/Dzo
ngda
gDz
ongk
hag’
s pe
rfor
man
ce sc
ore.
NA
1. S
ecto
r Hea
d at
P3
and
belo
w w
ill n
ot b
e a
mem
ber o
f the
MC
2. D
zong
dag
and
Dzon
grab
shal
l rec
eive
w
ritten
feed
back
from
ot
her S
ecto
r Hea
ds w
ho
are
P3 a
nd b
elow
on
thei
r em
ploy
ees.
Head
of S
taff
Func
tion/
Dzon
grab
/Du
ngpa
Dzon
gkha
g’s
perf
orm
ance
sco
re.
Dzon
gkha
g St
affPl
anni
ng S
ervi
ces,
DT
Secr
etar
y, Le
gal S
ervi
ces,
In
tern
al A
udit
Serv
ices
, En
viro
nmen
t ser
vice
s.
Mod
erat
e th
em
acco
rdin
g to
dz
ongk
hag’
s pe
rfor
man
ce sc
ore.
For D
zong
khag
:M
C w
ill c
onsis
t of:
1. D
zong
dag,
Dzo
ngkh
ag
(Cha
irper
son)
2. D
zong
rab,
Sec
reta
riat (
Mem
ber)
3. D
rung
pa, D
rung
khag
(Mem
ber)
4. H
ead
of S
ecto
r/BH
U I/
Hosp
itals
(Mem
ber)
5. H
R O
ffice
r (M
embe
r Sec
reta
ry)
Staff
func
tion/
HR
Serv
ices
, IT
Serv
ices
, Fi
nanc
e an
d Ad
min
Se
rvic
es.
Sect
ors/
Heal
th S
ecto
r, Ed
ucati
on S
ecto
r, RN
R Se
ctor
-Agr
icul
ture
, Li
vest
ock,
Cen
sus,
Cu
lture
, lan
d re
cord
.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 18 | Page
Profi
le/P
ositi
on T
itle
Perf
orm
ance
Rati
ng
Com
posi
tion
of M
oder
ation
Co
mm
ittee
Rem
arks
BHU
s Gra
de I/
Hosp
itals
3. M
edic
al S
uper
viso
r he
adin
g Ho
spita
ls/BH
U
to re
pres
ent e
mpl
oyee
s
Dung
khag
St
affAd
min
istra
tive
Staff
, in
clud
ing
GAO
and
Ge
wog
Acc
ount
ants
.
1. D
ungp
a sh
all r
ecei
ve
writt
en fe
edba
ck fr
om
Gup,
HR
and
Plan
ning
Se
rvic
es o
n GA
O’s
Perf
orm
ance
.
2. D
ungp
a sh
all
rece
ive
feed
back
fr
om D
zong
khag
Ac
coun
ts O
ffice
r on
Gew
og’s
Acco
unta
nt’s
perf
orm
ance
.
3. D
urin
g th
e M
odEx
th
e D
ungp
a/re
spec
tive
Sect
or H
ead
will
re
pres
ent t
he D
ungk
hag
sect
or st
aff.
Sect
or/E
duca
tion,
Hea
lth
and
RNR-
Agr
icul
ture
, Li
vest
ock
& F
ores
t.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 19 |
Profi
le/P
ositi
on T
itle
Perf
orm
ance
Rati
ng
Com
posi
tion
of M
oder
ation
Co
mm
ittee
Rem
arks
Gew
og S
taff
GAO
, Gew
og
Acco
unta
nts a
nd a
ny
othe
r adm
inist
rativ
e st
affs.
1. D
zong
rab
shal
l rec
eive
w
ritten
feed
back
from
Gu
p, H
R an
d Pl
anni
ng o
n GA
O’s
perf
orm
ance
.
2. S
ecto
r Hea
ds to
get
w
ritten
feed
back
on
indi
vidu
als f
rom
Gup
fo
r the
pur
pose
of
Mod
erati
on.
Sect
or/E
duca
tion,
Hea
lth
and
RNR-
Agr
icul
ture
, Li
vest
ock
& F
ores
t.
Not
e4
i. Sp
ecia
list(
ES) a
s the
Adv
isor t
o th
e De
part
men
t/Ag
ency
shal
l be
the
mem
ber f
or M
oder
ation
Com
mitt
ee.
ii.
Offi
ciati
ng h
ead
at P
2 an
d ab
ove
leve
l will
be
the
mem
ber o
f the
Mod
erati
on C
omm
ittee
, if h
e/sh
e is
offici
ating
for t
he fo
llow
ing
reas
on:
a.
Post
of C
hief
is v
acan
t [th
ere
is no
full
fledg
ed c
hief
];b.
If
the
incu
mbe
nt C
hief
is o
n sh
ort-t
erm
trai
ning
for 3
mon
ths a
nd m
ore;
c.
If
the
incu
mbe
nt C
hief
is o
n M
edic
al L
eave
exc
eedi
ng 3
mon
ths;
and
d
.
An
offici
ating
Hea
d in
P3
and
belo
w w
ill n
ot b
e a
mem
ber o
f Mod
erati
on C
omm
ittee
. Rel
evan
t Exe
cutiv
e w
ill re
pres
ent t
hat D
ivisi
on fo
r the
ME.
iii.
HR O
ffice
r as
the
mem
ber s
ecre
tary
for M
oder
ation
Com
mitt
ee w
ill b
e as
ked
to le
ave
disc
ussio
n w
hen
the
disc
ussio
n is
abou
t him
/her
and
join
as
soon
as
the
disc
ussio
n is
over
and
sam
e pr
otoc
ol w
ill b
e fo
llow
ed fo
r all
mem
bers
of t
he M
oder
ation
Com
mitt
ee in
the
even
t the
re is
any
con
flict
of i
nter
est.
iv.
For l
arge
r Div
ision
s, it
is re
com
men
ded
that
the
Chie
f sha
ll co
nsul
t with
Sec
tion/
Uni
t Hea
ds p
rior t
o th
e fin
al M
odEx
by
cons
tituti
ng su
b-co
mm
ittee
with
in
the
Divi
sion
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 20 | Page
2.6. Prerequisite for Moderation Exercise In order to carry out moderation exercise, the following prerequisites have to
be considered:
a. APA/APT Assessment Report Completed; and The GPMD will publish an annual report on the Agency’s performance.
Similarly, other competent Agencies will prepare report on Agencies with APT evaluated by Gross National Happiness Commission.
b. Evaluation of Performance Appraisal Form Completed. PE Score of all civil servants will be completed online which comprise
of Performance assessment (70%) and Competency Behavior (30%). The managers shall produce either print or reference the soft copy of the appraisal form from the MaX online system during the moderation exercise.
2.7. Determining the Distribution Percentage for Assignment of Performance Category to Individual Staff
The ModEx is the next step following the completed evaluation of individual Performance Appraisal Form by the supervisor. Refer Annexure 4 for guidance on performance calibration.
As explained earlier, after the evaluation of Agencies’ performance the Agencies’ performance is cascaded down to individuals through the process of the Moderation Exercise.
The ACF will determine the “quota” assigned to various performance categories based on Agencies’ APA/APT score. When the ACF is applied, decimal figures are likely to emerge. Below is the process of rounding off of the decimal to get the differentiation for the performance category 1, 2, 3 and 4:1. Category 1 = The rounding off shall be done as follows; 1st round off - OS Category, 2nd round off - VG category, rest employee in - G
category
2. Category 4 = The rounding off shall be done as follows; 1st round off - NI Category, 2nd round off - G category, rest employee in - VG
category
3. Category 2= The rounding off shall be done as follows; and 1st round off - OS category, 2nd round off - NI category, 3rd round off = VG
category, rest employee in G category
4. Category 3= The rounding off shall be done as follows: 1st round off - OS category, 2nd round off - NI category, 3rd round off - G
category, rest employee in VG category
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 21 |
For example: Total Number of Staff: 30
Agency Category
Agency Score
Rounding offRemarks
OS VG Good NI
Category 1
95%-100%
3% of 30 (0.9=1)
17% of 30 (5.1=6)
80%(23) 0%
1st round off OS2nd round off VGRest in G
Category 2
85.00%-94.99 %
2% of 30 (0.6=1)
16% of 30 (4.8=5)
81%
(23)
1% of 30
(0.3=1)
1st round off OS2nd round off NI3rd round off VGRest in G
Category 3
70.00%-84.99 %
1% of 30 (0.3=1) 15% (3)
82.5% of 30
(24.75=25)
1.5% of 30
(0.45=1)
1st round off OS2nd round off NI3rd round off GRest in VG
Category 4 <=69.99% 0 14% (3)
84% of 30
(25.2=26)
2% of 30
(0.6=1)
1st round off NI2nd round GRest in VG
2.8. Different Roles in the Moderation Exercise There are three primary stakeholders in a ModEx. The Chairperson, Members of
the Moderation Committee, and Secretariat (HR Division). Refer Section 2.5 for Composition.
a. Chairperson: The Chairperson will be the Secretary/Director General/Director/ Dzongdag/Executive Secretary depending on the type of Agency.
The Chairperson shall:• Maintain order and fairness throughout the moderation exercise;• Ensures that all relevant considerations in the moderation process
are adhered to; • Makes the final decision to dissolve gridlocks (if any); and• Ensure that all the members declare the conflict of interest prior to
the moderation exercise.
Chairperson has the prerogative to appoint the member secretary from amongst the members of moderation committee if he/she so decides.
b. Members: The members are the Head of Division/Sectors within each Agency based on type of Agency- whether it’s Ministry, Autonomous Agency, or Dzongkhags (Refer Section 2.5).
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 22 | Page
The Members shall:• Evaluate performance appraisal forms of their employees and provide
performance score to the Secretariat, prior to the Moderation Exercise;
• Prepare and collate the evidences for each employee to justify the proposed rating for him/her;
• During the preliminary assessment, the members should ideally align their assessment of respective supervisees in accordance with the Agency/Department score and its allocated quota as per the ACF;
• Take full ownership of final ranking decision and maintain confidentiality of the moderation discussions; and
• Communicate results of moderation exercise to employees, individually.
c. Member Secretary: The HR Officer/s from HR Division/Services within the Agency shall:
• Collect Agency’s score from GPMD and GNHC and work out the distribution curve using Agency Categorization Framework;
• Collate and analyze past and current Moderation Exercise data, identify pertinent issues and brief the Chairperson prior to the Moderation Exercise;
• Share the above information and brief on overall performance score collected from relevant department/division with the Chairperson prior to Moderation Exercise;
• Serve as the member secretary for Moderation Exercise and shall maintain records/minutes of discussions made during the Moderation Exercise;
• Assist the Chairperson (when appropriate) on adherence to relevant considerations during Moderation Exercise;
• Schedule Moderation Exercise in advance and publish a time-line with key dates to all managers so that they understand the preparations required for the exercise;
• Seek endorsement of primary and supplementary consideration before actual Moderation Exercise and facilitate preliminary assessment and preparatory meetings/discussions by different division/sector to prepare for final Moderation Exercise;
• Prepare to facilitate by compiling and examining performance data for the Agency/Department/Division including average ratings across critical factors, performance distributions and the identification of outliers;
• Ensure that the final performance appraisal meetings between managers and employees are conducted to convey the final moderation decisions;
• May recommend to the Chair on the need to have preparatory meetings in the run up to the final ModEx; and
• For Divisions/Dzongkhag Sectors not headed by P1/P2 Officer or
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 23 |
large division, the member secretary should organize preliminary/sub-committee meetings to get the views of all officiating division heads, sector heads and section/unit heads on the performance of their employees, prior to the final ModEx.
2.9. Consideration/Criteria
To ensure that the moderation exercise achieves the intended objectives, the following indicative considerations are recommended for application during the moderation exercise. The considerations are to be factored but not limited to, in the course of assigning employees to the various performance categories during the Moderation Exercise.
a. Primary Considerations • Requirement of their IWP: The performance targets set and specified
in the IWPs and achievement against it; • The manner in which the performance targets were fulfilled:
Qualitative aspect of the performance vetted in terms of competency behavior displayed during the evaluation period;
• Job sizes held by the employee vis-à-vis position level of the employee: Assess an employee against the size, volume, quality and value of work delivered vis-à-vis his/her current position and terms of reference;
• Degree of impact upon the mission of the Agency/Department/Division: The contribution of the staff against achievement of the core mission of the Agency; and
• Reference to bouquets and brickbats but confined to the period of assessment/appraisal period: Any merits, special achievements, recognition, or otherwise any negative behaviors, which are confined to that period of assessment/appraisal period.
b. Supplementary Considerations In the event that the principal considerations are exhausted, supplementary
considerations as established by respective Agencies can be applied wherever appropriate. Some of the recommended supplementary considerations are: • Potential of the employee: Ability of an individual to shoulder higher
responsibility. This assessment should be made considering past performance i.e. beyond the current evaluation period;
• Profile of the employee: The importance and criticality of the job responsibility shouldered by individuals for meeting organization’s objective and targets;
• Signaling effect: The kind of signal an Agency would want to convey for promoting different performers/groups/occupations/teams within the Agency based on set of criteria or an intuition that shall be
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 24 | Page
in the mind of the Members that the OS/NI employee should be from that particular division; and
• Economies of Experience: Number of years of experience and contribution in achieving Agency’s performance targets and other benefits to Agency concerned. An outstanding/very good worker will usually be up to speed in his/her work with fewer years of experience as compared to a less efficient staff entering at the same time or earlier who may take longer to learn.
The primary and supplementary criteria/consideration outlined above is very broad to suit all Agencies. However, they can be customized by Moderation Committees to fit their own specific needs.
2.10. Summary of ModEx Process
The moderation exercise comprises of three steps: Step 1: Appraisal (by Manager/Member of Moderation Committee, before
Actual ModEx) The process begins with evaluation of performance appraisal forms (i.e. review
of the Individual Work Plan), between the manager and each employee. Close attention should be paid to the rating scale definitions that will be used to make assessments. Managers should note specific cases/evidence to substantiate the proposed rating for the employee.
Step 2: Actual ModEx Meeting During the ModEx meeting, Chairperson and members will moderate employees
according to different performance categories, guided by the primary and supplementary considerations as well as other relevant considerations to be applied at the discretion of the moderation committee. This is to be done in addition to references made to the performance score as mentioned in Step 1 above.
Step 3: Declaration and Submission of Moderation Results in the MaX Online System (by Manager/Member of Moderation Committee)
The moderation result shall be communicated to the respective employees within three working days after the completion of the ModEx and the results are to be entered in the Max online system. The Managers shall conduct one-on-one performance review discussions with the employees. At this point, managers should have a comprehensive understanding of the organizational performance standards as well as how their team members are performing relative to others within and outside.
Sample ModEx Agenda can be referred in Annexure 5. Agencies in Schedule A will not be moderated because of their unique circumstances (Refer Annexure 6).
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 25 |
Chapter 3Managing for Excellence for Teaching and Support Services in schoolThe principal and the subordinates shall jointly develop the Performance Appraisal Form to organize and manage individual activities to effectively contribute to achieving the six key areas of the School Improvement Plan (SIP). The assessment of individual shall be conducted using the Performance Appraisal Form which shall be input to the moderation exercises for assignment of final rating.
3.1. Performance Appraisal Form for PMC and SSC The Performance Appraisal Form shall be used to formulate school outputs,
identify/develop activities, set target value and identify competency behavior by the employees in schools (refer Annexure 1 and 2). The form consist of four sections.
3.1.1. Section A: Employee details For details, refer Section 1.1.1
3.1.2. Section B: Performance Assessment (IWP) 70% The School Performance Management System (SPMS) shall be the basis
for developing the IWP of the principals, teachers and support staff in schools.
a. Formulating School Output The following six key areas of School Improvement Plan (SIP) shall
be used as the school outputs. However, an individual can choose only those relevant outputs that he/she contributes:i. Leadership and Management Practices;ii. Green School domain;iii. Curriculum Practices: Planning and Delivery;iv. Holistic Assessment;v. Broader Learning Domain; andvi. School Community Vitality.
b. Identifying Activities While developing IWP, a civil servant needs to identity individual
activities that will contribute to the achievement of the output. The list of indicators from the SIP is recommended to use as guideline to formulate activities. Each activity listed must be related to one of the output, and only those activities which have direct contribution to the achievement of the output should be included in the IWP.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 26 | Page
c. Setting Target Value After identifying the activities, individuals shall set a target value
each to the activities that merits a rating of level 4/level3/level 2/level 1 using the QQCT (Quantity, Quality, Cost and Time) framework. It is not necessary to have all the factors fitting in one target value. Either a combination or any of the four factors from the QQCT framework should be reflected in the target values depending on the nature of activity. It is also not necessary to fill the target value for all four levels. However, it is mandatory to set a target value for level 2. If the target value for only level 2 is drawn, the supervisor shall make the judgment on how to assess the other three levels at the end of the appraisal period using level 2 as the yardstick.
The target areas from the SIP indicators shall be used as the guide to frame the target value for each activity. For determining target value for the activities, refer Section 1.1.2 (C).
3.1.3. Section C: Competency Behavior (30%) List of Competency behavior as per Annexure 1 and 2 are recommended
for Professional and Management Category and Supervisory & Support Services Group respectively.
The competency behaviors are used to evaluate qualitative aspect of performance of individual and this will include skills and values required to carry out performance target indicated in section B of the Performance Appraisal Form. It carries 30% weightage.
Please note, the lists of competency behaviors are an indicative list. The schools based on the requirement can add additional competencies and customize it based on the relevancy and need of the schools.
3.1.4. Section D: Preliminary Performance Evaluation Score (Section B and C) For performance evaluation, refer Section 1.1.4
3.2. Example on how to Evaluate Performance Appraisal Form Refer Section 1.2
3.3. Performance Appraisal Form for Operational Category (OC) Refer Section 1.3
3.4. Procedure of Moderation Exercise and Agency Categorization Framework Following Agency Categorization framework based on School Performance
report will be used to determine bell curve to identify performance categories for schools:
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 27 |
Category TRC score Outstanding Very Good Good NICategory 1 95.00%-100.00% 3% 17% 80% 0%Category 2 85.00%-94.99% 2% 16% 81% 1%Category 3 70.00%-84.99% 1% 15% 82.5% 1.5%Category 4 <=69.99% 0% 14% 84% 2%
Note: TRC score is the average PMS score of all schools under the TRC.
3.5. Performance Rating for Moderation Committee Members The performance rating of moderation committee members shall be:
EMD report/ Achievement (%) Principals95.00-100.00 Outstanding85.00-94.99 Very Good70.00-84.99 Good
<=69.99. Need Improvement
3.6. General Principle for Performance Evaluation Rating of staff in Schoolsa. Principal
• Principal shall receive 50% of his school PMS score and 50 % of the TRC score as proxy.
b. Vice Principal, Teachers and Support Staff• All staff in the schools shall be moderated as per TRC performance
score and agency categorization framework. • Moderation pool shall comprise of both regular and contract
employees
c. Operational-Level• Evaluated by immediate supervisor based on the standard
Performance Evaluation Forms as per Annexure 3.
3.7. Moderation Exercise Guideline for Schools: Schools shall be clustered based on Teacher Resource Centre (TRC). The
Education Monitoring Division shall provide school cluster performance report. Moderation Exercise shall be conducted based on TRC score. The moderation Committee for school shall be as follows:• Chief DEO will be the chairperson;• All principals at P2 and above under each TRC shall serve as members;
and• HR Officer as the member secretary.
Refer Chapter 2 on Procedures for the Moderation Exercise and roles of
Chairperson, Member and Member Secretary.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 28 | Page
Chap
ter
4Pe
rfor
man
ce L
inke
d HR
Ince
ntiv
es,
Appe
al S
yste
m a
nd
Max
Cal
ende
r4.
1. P
erfo
rman
ce li
nked
HR
Actio
ns
Man
agem
ent
Posi
tion
Leve
lPr
ofile
HR A
ction
s
Out
stan
ding
Very
Goo
dG
ood
Nee
d Im
prov
emen
t
Chai
rper
son/
mem
bers
of
mod
erati
on
com
mitt
ee
who
will
be
give
n Ag
ency
sc
ore
as th
eir
perf
orm
ance
sc
ore.
EX3-
EX1
/ES
3-ES
1He
ad o
f Ag
ency
, He
ad o
f De
part
men
t, Dz
ongd
ag.
•Re
com
men
d ap
prop
riate
Civ
il Se
rvic
e Aw
ard
for
Exce
llent
Ser
vice
for
min
imum
of t
hree
yea
rs
cons
ecuti
ve o
utst
andi
ng
perf
orm
ance
.•
Cons
ider
/ rec
omm
end
for n
ext l
evel
pr
omoti
on. O
ther
co
nditi
ons a
s per
Pr
omoti
on ru
le sh
all
appl
y.•
Targ
eted
Lea
ders
hip
Trai
ning
s.
•Ta
rget
ed L
eade
rshi
p Tr
aini
ngs.
•Co
nsid
er/
reco
mm
end
for n
ext
leve
l pro
moti
on.
O
ther
con
ditio
ns a
s pe
r Pro
moti
on ru
le
shal
l app
ly.
• T
arge
ted
Lead
ersh
ip
Trai
ning
s.
•W
ill b
e on
Wai
ting
list.
(Rel
evan
t Cl
ause
s fro
m B
CSR
on w
aitin
g lis
t ap
ply)
.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 29 |
Man
agem
ent
Posi
tion
Leve
lPr
ofile
HR A
ction
s
Out
stan
ding
Very
Goo
dG
ood
Nee
d Im
prov
emen
t
P1Ch
ief o
f Di
visio
n,
Dzon
grab
, Du
ngpa
, Se
ctor
Hea
ds,
Scho
ol
Prin
cipa
ls .
•Re
com
men
d ap
prop
riate
Civ
il Se
rvic
e Aw
ard
for
Exce
llent
Ser
vice
for
min
imum
of t
hree
ye
ars c
onse
cutiv
e ou
tsta
ndin
g pe
rfor
man
ce.
•El
igib
le fo
r ope
n co
mpe
tition
.•
Targ
eted
Lea
ders
hip
Trai
ning
s.
•El
igib
le fo
r ope
n co
mpe
tition
.•
Prov
ide
Targ
eted
Le
ader
ship
Tr
aini
ngs.
• N
ot e
ligib
le
for o
pen
com
petiti
on.
•N
ot E
ligib
le fo
r ex
ecuti
ve P
ositi
ons
for n
ext 2
yea
rs.
•Re
fer h
im/ h
er to
re
leva
nt a
utho
rity
base
d on
reas
on
falli
ng u
nder
NI.
•Ta
rget
ed c
apac
ity
deve
lopm
ent
prog
ram
(in-
coun
try)
.
Oth
ers
Offi
ciati
ng
Chie
f of
Depa
rtm
ent/
Di
visio
ns,
Sect
or H
eads
, sc
hool
pr
inci
pals.
•Re
com
men
d ap
prop
riate
Civ
il Se
rvic
e Aw
ard
for
Exce
llent
Ser
vice
for
min
imum
of t
hree
ye
ars c
onse
cutiv
e ou
tsta
ndin
g pe
rfor
man
ce.
•Aw
ard
full
mar
k fo
r PE
Sco
re d
urin
g op
en
com
petiti
ons.
•Aw
ard
95%
mar
ks
for P
E ra
ting
durin
g op
en c
ompe
tition
s.•
Nor
mal
Pro
moti
on.
•Aw
ard
80%
m
arks
for
PE ra
ting
durin
g op
en
com
petiti
on.
•N
orm
al
Prom
otion
.
•N
ot e
ligib
le to
pa
rtici
pate
in a
ny
open
com
petiti
on
for n
ext o
ne y
ear.
•N
ot a
llow
ed to
hea
d th
e Ag
ency
/sec
tor
•Pr
ovid
e in
cou
ntry
ta
rget
ed c
apac
ity
deve
lopm
ent
prog
ram
.•
Refe
r him
/her
to
rele
vant
aut
horit
y.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 30 | Page
Man
agem
ent
Posi
tion
Leve
lPr
ofile
HR A
ction
s
Out
stan
ding
Very
Goo
dG
ood
Nee
d Im
prov
emen
t
Spec
ialis
tES
3 - E
S1Pr
oxy
Scor
e•
Reco
mm
end
appr
opria
te C
ivil
Serv
ice
Awar
d fo
r Ex
celle
nt S
ervi
ce fo
r m
inim
um o
f thr
ee
year
s con
secu
tive
outs
tand
ing
perf
orm
ance
.•
Cons
ider
/ rec
omm
end
for n
ext l
evel
pr
omoti
on.
•Ta
rget
ed L
eade
rshi
p Tr
aini
ng.
Oth
er c
ondi
tions
as
per P
rom
otion
rule
sh
all a
pply.
•Ta
rget
ed
spec
ializ
ed
Trai
ning
s.•
Nor
mal
Pro
moti
on.
O
ther
con
ditio
ns a
s pe
r Pro
moti
on ru
le
shal
l app
ly.
•Ta
rget
ed
spec
ializ
ed
Trai
ning
s.•
Nor
mal
Pr
omoti
on.
Oth
er
cond
ition
s as
per P
rom
otion
ru
le sh
all
appl
y.
•W
ill b
e on
Wai
ting
list.
(Cla
uses
from
BC
SR o
n w
aitin
g lis
t sh
all a
pply
).•
Refe
r him
/ her
to
rele
vant
aut
horit
y.
Pool
for
Mod
erati
on
Exer
cise
Pool
ed
Empl
oyee
s (S
5 - P
1(s)
P1 sp
ecia
list
positi
on
not h
eadi
ng
divi
sion,
O
ther
s
•M
erito
rious
Pro
moti
on
if 3
cons
ecuti
ve
year
s of o
utst
andi
ng
perf
orm
ance
. Oth
er
cond
ition
s as p
er
Prom
otion
rule
shal
l ap
ply
for P
1 Sp
ecia
list.
•Aw
ard
full
mar
k fo
r PE
ratin
g du
ring
open
co
mpe
tition
s.
•Aw
ard
95%
mar
ks
for P
E ra
ting
durin
g op
en c
ompe
tition
s.
•N
orm
al P
rom
otion
Oth
er c
ondi
tions
as
per P
rom
otion
rule
sh
all a
pply.
•Aw
ard
80%
m
arks
for
PE ra
ting
durin
g op
en
com
petiti
ons.
•N
I yea
r to
be
cons
ider
ed a
s in
activ
e ye
ar fo
r th
e pu
rpos
e of
pr
omoti
on o
nly.
•Aw
ard
40%
mar
ks
for P
E ra
ting
durin
g op
en c
ompe
tition
s fo
r lon
g te
rm
trai
ning
.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 31 |
Man
agem
ent
Posi
tion
Leve
lPr
ofile
HR A
ction
s
Out
stan
ding
Very
Goo
dG
ood
Nee
d Im
prov
emen
t
•Re
cogn
ition
with
Ce
rtific
ate
and
othe
r aw
ards
by
the
Agen
cy
thro
ugh
HRC.
•M
ay b
e as
signe
d as
m
ento
r/gu
ide
in th
e Ag
ency
to c
o-w
ork
with
the
NI c
ateg
ory.
•N
orm
al
prom
otion
. O
ther
co
nditi
ons a
s pe
r Pro
moti
on
rule
shal
l ap
ply.
•.P
rovi
de b
asic
ca
pabi
lity
deve
lopm
ent
oppo
rtun
ities
fo
r per
form
ance
im
prov
emen
t.•
Attac
h th
e em
ploy
ees t
o a
men
tor w
ithin
th
e Ag
ency
/De
pt./
Div
ision
fo
r Men
torin
g,
coac
hing
and
gu
idan
ce.
•Re
fer h
im/h
er to
re
leva
nt a
utho
rity.
•Re
depl
oy/R
etra
in
the
empl
oyee
w
here
ver h
is/he
r ski
lls a
re
appr
opria
te.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 32 | Page
Man
agem
ent
Posi
tion
Leve
lPr
ofile
HR A
ction
s
Out
stan
ding
Very
Goo
dG
ood
Nee
d Im
prov
emen
t
Ope
ratio
nal
Cate
gory
O4-
O1
Driv
er,
Disp
atch
er,
Rece
ption
ist,
Tele
phon
e O
pera
tor)
1.
Rati
ng o
f Goo
d an
d ab
ove,
elig
ible
for n
orm
al p
rom
otion
2. N
I yea
r to
be c
onsid
ered
as i
nacti
ve y
ear f
or th
e pu
rpos
e of
pro
moti
on o
nly.
Not
e5
1.
Civ
il se
rvan
ts c
an b
e pu
t und
er W
aitin
g Li
st fo
r rea
sons
oth
er th
an p
erfo
rman
ce a
s pe
r rel
evan
t sec
tions
of B
CSR
.2.
Fo
r all
Prom
otio
n, re
leva
nt c
laus
es o
n pr
omot
ion
from
the
BCSR
sha
ll ap
ply
3.
All c
ivil
serv
ants
fallin
g un
der “
Nee
d Im
prov
emen
t” ca
tego
ry fo
r thr
ee c
onse
cutiv
e ye
ars
shal
l be
Com
puls
orily
Ret
ired
4.
All M
erito
rious
pro
mot
ion
for c
ivil s
erva
nts
in s
ched
ule
A (n
on-m
oder
atio
n Ag
enci
es) a
nd O
pera
tiona
l cat
egor
y ci
vil s
erva
nts
shal
l be
proc
esse
d th
roug
h R
CSC
.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 33 |
4.2. Appeal Procedure A civil servant who is not satisfied with the decision of the Moderation
Committee can appeal to the relevant authority as detailed below. However, the appeal submitted shall be supported by sufficient evidence of injustice.
4.2.1 Appellate Authority to Review Appeal Cases of Moderation Exercisea. The HRC of the respective Agency shall be the first level to review
and decide the appeal pertaining to Moderation Exercise.b. RCSC shall be the highest appellate authority to review the decision
rendered by the HRC of the Agency, if there is any appeal against the decision of HRC.
4.2.2. Appeal Perioda. Aggrieved civil servant shall appeal to respective HRC within 10
working days from the declaration of moderation results.b. Any appeal to RCSC against the decision of HRC shall be submitted
within 10 working days from the day the decision of HRC is conveyed formally.
4.2.3. Appeal Process
4.2.3.1. HRC of the Working Agencya. The HRC of the working Agency shall deliberate on the
appeal within 5 working days from the date of the appeal received, and form Investigation Committee.
b. The investigation, if required, shall be conducted within 10 working days after the formation of the Investigation Committee.
c. The Investigation Committee shall submit investigation report within 5 working days after the investigation.
d. The HRC, after receiving the investigation report, shall render final decision within 5 working days.
e. The HRC shall convey the decision to the appellant .
4.2.3.2. Royal Civil Service Commissiona. A civil servant aggrieved by the decision of the HRC of
the Agency shall appeal to the RCSC within 10 working days after receiving the decision of the HRC.
b. The RCSC shall deliberate on the appeal within 15 working days from the date of the appeal received, and assign an Investigator or form an Investigation Committee, if required.
c. The Investigator/Investigation Committee shall submit investigation report within 5 working days after completion of the investigation.
d. The RCSC, after receiving the investigation report, shall render final decision within 15 working days.
e. The decision of the RCSC shall be final and binding.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 34 | Page
4.3
MaX
Cal
enda
r for
Civ
il Se
rvan
ts: F
isca
l Yea
r (Ju
ly-J
une)
Sl. N
oAc
tiviti
esRe
spon
sibl
eJu
lAu
gSe
pO
ctN
ovDe
cJa
nFe
bM
arAp
rM
ayJu
n
1
Deve
lop
IWPs
and
cor
e co
mpe
tenc
ies f
or th
e
fisca
l yea
r.Su
bmit
Appr
aisa
l For
m
onlin
e.
Supe
rviso
r and
co
ncer
ned
civi
l se
rvan
ts
2M
id-Y
ear R
evie
w o
f Ap
prai
sal F
orm
Supe
rviso
r and
co
ncer
ned
civi
l se
rvan
ts
3
Eval
uatio
n of
Pe
rfor
man
ce A
ppra
isal
Form
for p
rece
ding
fisc
al
year
Supe
rviso
r
4
Mod
erati
on E
xerc
ise
for t
he e
valu
ation
of
per
form
ance
for
pr
eced
ing
fisca
l yea
r
Mod
erati
on C
omm
ittee
5U
pdat
e Sc
ore
of M
odEx
on
MaX
onl
ine
Syst
emHR
D
6Pe
rfor
man
ce li
nked
HR
Actio
nsHR
D
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 35 |
4.4.
M
aX C
alen
dar f
or C
ivil
Serv
ants
in S
choo
ls: C
alen
dar Y
ear (
Janu
ary-
Dece
mbe
r)
Sl.
No
Activ
ities
Resp
onsi
ble
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1
Deve
lop
IWPs
and
cor
e co
mpe
tenc
ies f
or th
e cu
rren
t yea
r
Subm
it Ap
prai
sal F
orm
on
line
Supe
rviso
r and
co
ncer
ned
civi
l se
rvan
ts
2M
id-Y
ear R
evie
w o
f Ap
prai
sal F
orm
Supe
rviso
r &
conc
erne
d ci
vil
serv
ants
3Ev
alua
tion
of A
ppra
isal
Form
for t
he c
urre
nt
year
Su
perv
isor
4
Mod
erati
on E
xerc
ise
for t
he e
valu
ation
of
perf
orm
ance
for t
he
prec
edin
g ye
ar
Mod
erati
on
Com
mitt
ee
5U
pdat
e Sc
ore
of M
odEx
on
MaX
onl
ine
Syst
emHR
D
6Pe
rfor
man
ce li
nked
HR
Actio
nsHR
D
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 36 | Page
Annexure 1: Performance Appraisal Form for Professional and Management, and Specialist Services Group
Section A: Employee DetailsAPPRAISAL PERIOD:EMPLOYEE ID No.NAME OF THE EMPLOYEE:
POSITION TITLE: POSITION LEVEL:DIVISION: DEPARTMENT/AGENCY:
Assurance on Accuracy of CV: I have verified my CV in CSIS and hereby declare that the information is correct as of (dd/mm/yy) …………………………….
SECTION B: Performance Assessment (70%)
Division Output Activities
Targets Values* Target Achieved specified
by individ-ual
Employee’s Feedback/ comment/
justification
Score by
Super-visor4
Level 4=[3.00-
4.00]
Level 3=2.00-
2.99]
Level 2=[1.00 -1.99]
Level 1[<=0.99]
1.1.1. ………
1.2. ………
2.2.1 ………
2.2 ………
Total
Score B (Total score/No. of activities)
*It is not necessary to fill target values for all four Levels. However, it is mandatory to set the target value for Level 2.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 37 |
SECT
ION
C: C
ompe
tenc
y Be
havi
or (3
0%)
Pote
ntial
As
sess
men
t Are
aQ
ualit
y &
Des
crip
tion
[3.0
0-4.
00]
Leve
l 4
[2.0
0-2.
99]
Leve
l 3
[1.0
0-1.
99]
Leve
l 2
[<=.
99]
Lev
el 1
Scor
e by
su
perv
isor
w
ith
Evid
ence
of
Beha
vior
1.An
alyti
cal
and
Inte
llect
ual
Capa
city
1.1.
Sen
se o
f Pe
rspe
ctive
Dem
onst
rate
s in
telle
ctua
l flex
ibili
ty,
imag
inati
on a
nd
soci
o-po
litica
l se
nsiti
vity
in
deve
lopi
ng a
hol
istic
appr
ecia
tion
of
the
situa
tion
and
in g
ener
ating
in
nova
tive
idea
s and
so
lutio
ns th
at b
ring
prac
tical
ben
efit.
• T
hink
s ahe
ad
to a
ntici
pate
iss
ues,
iden
tifies
op
port
uniti
es
and
appr
ecia
tes
impl
icati
ons.
• E
xerc
ises i
mag
inati
on
and
crea
tivity
to
gene
rate
a ra
nge
of
alte
rnati
ve so
lutio
ns.
• T
akes
stra
tegi
c pe
rspe
ctive
whe
n fo
rmul
ating
pro
posa
ls an
d re
com
men
datio
ns.
• Ta
kes s
trat
egic
st
eps a
nd w
ays
to a
chie
ve a
nd
enha
nce
the
achi
evem
ent o
f th
e ta
rget
.
• N
eed
guid
ance
in
iden
tifyi
ng th
e op
port
uniti
es
and
solu
tions
to
solv
e w
ork
tow
ards
ac
hiev
ing
the
targ
et.
• Is
has
ty in
fo
rmin
g op
inio
ns
and
judg
men
t ta
king
acti
on
befo
re a
sses
sing
impl
icati
ons a
nd
focu
ses o
n da
y to
day
pro
blem
s at
the
expe
nse
of lo
nger
term
pl
anni
ng.
1.2
Anal
ysis
and
Ju
dgm
ent
Dem
onst
rate
s pow
er
of a
naly
sis a
nd a
se
nse
of re
ality
in
the
cont
ext o
f co
mpl
ex is
sues
and
so
lutio
ns.
• A
naly
ses s
ituati
ons
and
prob
lem
s in
a sy
stem
atic
and
logi
cal
man
ner t
o id
entif
y ke
y iss
ues.
• M
akes
soun
d ju
dgm
ent b
ased
on
rigor
ous,
inde
pend
ent
thin
king
.•
Mak
es g
ood
use
of b
ackg
roun
d kn
owle
dge.
• Pr
opos
es st
rong
ju
dgm
enta
l. re
com
men
datio
n to
war
ds
over
all i
ssue
s fo
r a re
alisti
c ac
hiev
emen
t.
• Li
mite
d to
su
perv
isory
di
recti
ves i
n ta
cklin
g th
e pr
oble
ms a
nd
issue
s and
do
es p
rovi
de
any
stro
ng
judg
men
tal.
reco
mm
enda
tion
to o
wns
issu
es.
• M
akes
ass
umpti
on
base
d on
su
perfi
cial
an
alys
is.•
Spen
ds to
o lo
ng
on a
naly
sis a
nd
delib
erati
ng a
t th
e ex
pens
e of
re
spon
ding
in a
tim
ely
fash
ion.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 38 | Page
Pote
ntial
As
sess
men
t Are
aQ
ualit
y &
Des
crip
tion
[3.0
0-4.
00]
Leve
l 4
[2.0
0-2.
99]
Leve
l 3
[1.0
0-1.
99]
Leve
l 2
[<=.
99]
Lev
el 1
Scor
e by
su
perv
isor
w
ith
Evid
ence
of
Beha
vior
2.In
fluen
ce
&
Colla
bora
tion
2.1.
Influ
enci
ng a
nd
Insp
iring
Pers
uade
s,
moti
vate
s and
in
spire
s oth
ers,
de
velo
ping
a se
nse
of p
urpo
se a
nd
unity
.
• Pu
ts te
am’s
succ
ess
ahea
d of
per
sona
l su
cces
s.•
Wor
ks to
reso
lve
confl
ict a
mon
g te
am
mem
bers
by
show
ing
resp
ect f
or o
ther
s’
opin
ions
and
wor
king
to
war
d m
utua
lly
agre
eabl
e so
lutio
ns.
• M
aint
ains
wid
e ne
twor
k of
go
od w
orki
ng
rela
tions
hip
with
pee
rs,
subo
rdin
ates
, su
perv
isor,
cust
omer
and
cl
ient
s.
• M
akes
con
siste
nt
effor
ts to
ge
nera
te tr
ust
and
co-o
pera
tion
to fo
ster
pos
itive
an
d pr
oduc
tive
team
spiri
t.
• S
ticks
to
good
wor
king
re
latio
nshi
p w
ith m
ost o
f th
e pe
ers,
su
bord
inat
es,
supe
rviso
r and
th
e cl
ient
s.•
Initi
ates
en
cour
agem
ent
of tr
ust a
nd
coop
erati
on
amon
g ot
hers
.
• B
lam
e ot
hers
for
mist
akes
and
/or
setb
acks
that
ne
gativ
ely
affec
t te
am re
sults
.
2.2
Colla
bora
tion
&
Enga
gem
ent
Take
s lea
d in
co
mm
unic
ation
an
d co
nsul
tatio
n,
enga
ging
with
a
wid
e ra
nge
of
supe
rviso
rs, p
eers
an
d st
akeh
olde
rs
acro
ss d
ivisi
on,
depa
rtm
ent,
and
Agen
cies
.
• He
lps t
o ke
ep te
am
perf
orm
ance
and
m
oral
e hi
gh e
ven
durin
g pe
riods
of
inte
nse
pres
sure
or
heav
y w
orkl
oad.
• Ac
tivel
y se
eks
deve
lopm
ent
oppo
rtun
ities
for
team
.
• De
mon
stra
te
to w
ork
in a
te
am a
nd fo
ster
sh
arin
g of
w
orkl
oads
whi
le
he/s
he is
not
uti
lized
.
• Co
nfine
s to
his/
her o
wn
assig
ned
task
and
doe
s no
t ext
end
and
seek
s sup
port
to
colla
bora
te a
nd
enga
ge in
a te
am.
• W
ork
only
to se
rve
self-
inte
rest
s and
m
eet p
erso
nal
goal
s.•B
lam
e ot
hers
for
mist
akes
and
/or
setb
acks
that
ne
gativ
ely
affec
t te
am re
sults
.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 39 |
Pote
ntial
As
sess
men
t Are
aQ
ualit
y &
Des
crip
tion
[3.0
0-4.
00]
Leve
l 4
[2.0
0-2.
99]
Leve
l 3
[1.0
0-1.
99]
Leve
l 2
[<=.
99]
Lev
el 1
Scor
e by
su
perv
isor
w
ith
Evid
ence
of
Beha
vior
3. M
otiva
tion
for
Exce
llenc
e
3.1.
Ach
ievi
ng
Resu
ltsSt
rives
har
d to
ac
hiev
e fi
ve y
ear
and
annu
al ta
rget
s by
focu
sing
on
natio
nal i
nter
est t
o en
sure
effi
cien
cy
and
high
stan
dard
s of
del
iver
y.
• Ac
hiev
es a
ll ta
rget
s set
w
ithin
the
allo
cate
d re
sour
ces w
ithou
t co
mpr
omisi
ng o
n th
e qu
ality
.•
Min
imize
s was
te o
f his
Agen
cy a
nd N
ation
’s re
sour
ces
• Al
way
s loo
ks
tow
ards
ac
hiev
ing
the
resu
lt w
ith b
est
qual
ity w
ithin
th
e re
sour
ces
unde
r his/
her
cont
rol.
• W
ork
hard
to
war
ds
achi
evin
g th
e re
sults
but
nee
ds
extr
a re
sour
ces
to a
chie
ve it
.
• Do
es n
ot d
eliv
er
as p
er th
e se
t ta
rget
s and
bud
get
allo
cate
d.•
Was
tes h
is Ag
ency
an
d na
tion’
s re
sour
ces.
3.2
Com
mitm
ent
and
Acco
unta
bilit
y
Dem
onst
rate
s pe
rson
al in
tegr
ity
and
com
mitm
ent
to se
rvin
g Bh
utan
’s na
tiona
l int
eres
t.
• U
phol
ds b
oth
expl
icit
and
impl
icit
term
s an
d un
ders
tand
ings
he
has
with
the
Roya
l Gov
ernm
ent,
publ
ic, f
amily
, Age
ncy,
supe
riors
, pee
rs,
subo
rdin
ates
and
cl
ient
s.•
Read
y an
d w
illin
g to
take
add
ition
al
resp
onsib
ility
by
one’
s ow
n in
itiati
ves.
• De
mon
stra
te
stro
ng b
ond
tow
ards
th
e Ro
yal
gove
rnm
ent
and
upho
ld th
e be
long
ingn
ess
tow
ards
the
Nati
on a
s a
fam
ily.
• N
eeds
gui
danc
e to
take
the
initi
ative
s.
• U
phol
ds th
e be
long
ingn
ess
tow
ards
the
Nati
on a
s a fa
mily
as
and
whe
n re
quire
d on
ly
and
resis
t to
take
in
itiati
ves .
• Br
each
the
norm
s an
d va
lues
of t
he
soci
ety.
• Sp
eaks
and
act
s in
a w
ay th
at is
not
in
con
form
ity to
th
e Ci
vil S
ervi
ce
Valu
es o
f int
egrit
y, pr
ofes
siona
lism
, ho
nest
y, im
parti
ality
, ac
coun
tabi
lity,
lo
yalty
, and
le
ader
ship
.•
Does
not
pa
rtici
pate
n a
ny
extr
a as
signm
ents
.To
tal
Scor
e C
(Tot
al sc
ore/
No.
of c
ompe
tenc
y be
havi
or)
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 40 | Page
SECTION D: Preliminary Performance Evaluation Score [Section B &C]
Particular Score received Preliminary Score Supervisor’s
Comment, if any
B. Performance 70% of Score B=………………
C. Competency Behaviors
30% of Score C=……………….
Total
Employee SignatureDate ____________________________________________________________________
Supervisor SignatureDate
Overall Rating Table:
Performer category Definition Rating scale
1. Level 4 Achieved exceptionally high level of performance 3.00-4.002. Level 3 Performed at higher level than required 2.00-2.993. Level 2 Employee fulfilled requirement of the job 1.00-1.994. Level 1 Results/Behavior far below performance requirement <=0.99
Note: The Preliminary Performance Evaluation Score shall be an input to the Moderation Exercise for assigning the final rating.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 41 |
Annexure 2: Performance Appraisal Form for Supervisory and Support Services Group
Section A: Employee Details
APPRAISAL PERIOD:EMPLOYEE ID No.NAME OF THE EMPLOYEE:POSITION TITLE: POSITION LEVEL:DIVISION: DEPARTMENT/AGENCY:
Assurance on Accuracy of CV: I have verified my CV in CSIS and hereby declare that the information is correct as of (dd/mm/yy)…………………………….
SECTION B: Performance Assessment (Individual Work Plan) (70%)
Division Output Activities
Targets Values*Target
Achieved specified by individual
Employ-ee’s
Feedback/ comment/ justifica-
tion
Score by Supervi-
sorLevel
4=[3.00-4.00]
Level 3=2.00-
2.99]
Level 2=[1.00 -1.99]
Level 1[<=0.99]
1.1.1. ……
1.2……
2.2.1 ……
2.2 ……
Total
Score B (Total score/No. of activities)
*It is not necessary to fill target values for all four levels. However, it is mandatory to set the target value for Level 2.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 42 | Page
SECT
ION
C: C
ompe
tenc
y Be
havi
or (3
0%)
Com
pete
ncy
Beha
vior
Desc
riptio
n[3
.00-
4.00
]Le
vel 4
[2.0
0-2.
99]
Leve
l 3[1
.00-
1.99
]Le
vel 2
[<=0
.99]
Leve
l 1
Scor
e by
su
perv
isor
w
ith
Evid
ence
of
Beha
vior
1.An
alyti
cal
Skill
s
Dem
onst
rate
s sen
se
of u
nder
stan
ding
an
d ap
prec
iatio
n of
one
’s w
ork
to
mee
t org
aniza
tiona
l ob
jecti
ves a
nd
resu
lts.
• M
akes
criti
cal
judg
men
t on
her/
his c
ontr
ibuti
on to
or
gani
zatio
n ba
sed
on in
depe
nden
t th
inki
ng b
y m
akin
g go
od u
se
of b
ackg
roun
d kn
owle
dge.
• M
akes
stro
ng
judg
emen
ts
base
d on
the
wor
k ex
perie
nces
up
on re
ceiv
ing
the
guid
ance
fr
om su
perv
isor
to c
arry
the
wor
k ac
tiviti
es.
• M
akes
judg
emen
ts b
y us
ing
limite
d w
ork
know
ledg
e an
d tim
ely
supe
rvisi
on re
quire
d to
car
ry th
e w
ork
activ
ities
.
• C
arrie
s ou
t wor
k ac
tiviti
es
with
out
criti
cal
judg
emen
t an
d no
t pu
tting
th
e w
ork
know
ledg
e in
us
e.
2. P
lann
ing
&
Org
aniz
ing
Dem
onst
rate
s ab
ility
to p
lan
and
orga
nize
wor
k ac
tiviti
es a
roun
d or
gani
zatio
n’s
obje
ctive
s mak
ing
optim
um u
se o
f re
sour
ces a
nd ti
me.
• E
very
day
acti
vitie
s ar
e gu
ided
by
meti
culo
us
wor
k pl
ans a
nd
dem
onst
rate
s goo
d tim
e m
anag
emen
t sk
ills t
o m
eet
Agen
cy’s
obje
ctive
s by
usin
g av
aila
ble
reso
urce
s opti
mal
ly
to
mee
t wor
k ac
tiviti
es w
ithou
t co
mpr
omisi
ng th
e qu
ality
of t
he w
ork
outp
ut.
• S
yste
mati
c w
ork
Plan
ning
on
the
wor
k ac
tiviti
es
are
draw
n cl
early
and
ne
eds m
inim
um
supe
rvisi
on a
nd
reso
urce
and
m
aint
ain
qual
ity
of th
e w
ork.
• W
ork
plan
are
m
aint
aine
d bu
t are
not
fo
llow
ed a
nd re
quire
s ex
tra
reso
urce
s to
carr
y th
e ac
tiviti
es
and
qual
ity o
f wor
k co
mpr
omise
d.
• D
oes n
ot
follo
w c
lear
w
ork
plan
an
d m
ostly
in
volv
ed in
ad
hoc
activ
ities
an
d w
ork
are
not u
p to
th
e ex
pect
ed
qual
ity.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 43 |
SECT
ION
C: C
ompe
tenc
y Be
havi
or (3
0%)
Com
pete
ncy
Beha
vior
Desc
riptio
n[3
.00-
4.00
]Le
vel 4
[2.0
0-2.
99]
Leve
l 3[1
.00-
1.99
]Le
vel 2
[<=0
.99]
Leve
l 1
Scor
e by
su
perv
isor
w
ith
Evid
ence
of
Beha
vior
1.An
alyti
cal
Skill
s
Dem
onst
rate
s sen
se
of u
nder
stan
ding
an
d ap
prec
iatio
n of
one
’s w
ork
to
mee
t org
aniza
tiona
l ob
jecti
ves a
nd
resu
lts.
• M
akes
criti
cal
judg
men
t on
her/
his c
ontr
ibuti
on to
or
gani
zatio
n ba
sed
on in
depe
nden
t th
inki
ng b
y m
akin
g go
od u
se
of b
ackg
roun
d kn
owle
dge.
• M
akes
stro
ng
judg
emen
ts
base
d on
the
wor
k ex
perie
nces
up
on re
ceiv
ing
the
guid
ance
fr
om su
perv
isor
to c
arry
the
wor
k ac
tiviti
es.
• M
akes
judg
emen
ts b
y us
ing
limite
d w
ork
know
ledg
e an
d tim
ely
supe
rvisi
on re
quire
d to
car
ry th
e w
ork
activ
ities
.
• C
arrie
s ou
t wor
k ac
tiviti
es
with
out
criti
cal
judg
emen
t an
d no
t pu
tting
th
e w
ork
know
ledg
e in
us
e.
2. P
lann
ing
&
Org
aniz
ing
Dem
onst
rate
s ab
ility
to p
lan
and
orga
nize
wor
k ac
tiviti
es a
roun
d or
gani
zatio
n’s
obje
ctive
s mak
ing
optim
um u
se o
f re
sour
ces a
nd ti
me.
• E
very
day
acti
vitie
s ar
e gu
ided
by
meti
culo
us
wor
k pl
ans a
nd
dem
onst
rate
s goo
d tim
e m
anag
emen
t sk
ills t
o m
eet
Agen
cy’s
obje
ctive
s by
usin
g av
aila
ble
reso
urce
s opti
mal
ly
to
mee
t wor
k ac
tiviti
es w
ithou
t co
mpr
omisi
ng th
e qu
ality
of t
he w
ork
outp
ut.
• S
yste
mati
c w
ork
Plan
ning
on
the
wor
k ac
tiviti
es
are
draw
n cl
early
and
ne
eds m
inim
um
supe
rvisi
on a
nd
reso
urce
and
m
aint
ain
qual
ity
of th
e w
ork.
• W
ork
plan
are
m
aint
aine
d bu
t are
not
fo
llow
ed a
nd re
quire
s ex
tra
reso
urce
s to
carr
y th
e ac
tiviti
es
and
qual
ity o
f wor
k co
mpr
omise
d.
• D
oes n
ot
follo
w c
lear
w
ork
plan
an
d m
ostly
in
volv
ed in
ad
hoc
activ
ities
an
d w
ork
are
not u
p to
th
e ex
pect
ed
qual
ity.
Com
pete
ncy
Beha
vior
Desc
riptio
n[3
.00-
4.00
]Le
vel 4
[2.0
0-2.
99]
Leve
l 3[1
.00-
1.99
]Le
vel 2
[<=0
.99]
Leve
l 1
Scor
e by
su
perv
isor
w
ith
Evid
ence
of
Beha
vior
3.De
cisi
vene
ss
Dem
onst
rate
s so
und
judg
men
t to
iden
tify
and
reco
gnize
pro
blem
s an
d so
lutio
ns, a
nd
esca
late
them
to
app
ropr
iate
au
thor
ity.
• S
ubm
its p
robl
ems
and
reco
mm
ende
d so
lutio
ns
befo
re ti
me
for s
uper
viso
ry
inte
rven
tion.
• S
ubm
its
prob
lem
s and
re
com
men
ded
solu
tions
on
time
for s
uper
viso
ry
advi
ce.
• S
ubm
its p
robl
ems
with
out
reco
mm
enda
tion
on
time.
• W
aits
for
supe
rviso
ry
inte
rven
tion
to re
solv
e iss
ues.
4.Le
ader
ship
&
Influ
enci
ng
Skill
s
Dem
onst
rate
s ur
genc
y an
d pr
o-ac
tivel
y ta
kes l
ead
in a
ssig
ned
wor
k ac
tiviti
es a
nd so
licits
su
ppor
t.
• In
itiat
es a
ssig
ned
wor
ks p
ro-a
ctive
ly,
iden
tifies
and
trie
s to
solv
e bo
ttle
neck
s in
his/
her o
wn
area
of
wor
k.
• W
ork
assig
ned
are
take
n w
ith st
rong
re
spon
sibili
ty to
be
com
plet
ed.
• A
ny a
ssig
ned
wor
k ar
e do
ne b
ut re
quiri
ng a
m
inim
um su
perv
ision
.
• In
itiat
es
assig
ned
wor
k w
ith re
min
der
only.
5.In
terp
erso
nal
Skill
Dem
onst
rate
s ab
ility
to w
ork
in
team
s and
gar
ner
supp
ort,
build
re
latio
nshi
p an
d de
velo
p co
ngen
ial
wor
k en
viro
nmen
t.
• A
chie
ves i
ndiv
idua
l pe
rfor
man
ce
targ
ets w
hile
m
aint
aini
ng fr
iend
ly
rela
tions
hip
with
in
and
outs
ide
Agen
cy
• A
chie
ves
indi
vidu
al
perf
orm
ance
with
go
od re
latio
nshi
p w
ithin
but
lim
ited
leve
l of
inte
rper
sona
l sk
ills o
utsid
e Ag
ency
.
• A
chie
ves i
ndiv
idua
l pe
rfor
man
ce w
ith
limite
d re
latio
nshi
p w
ithin
and
out
side
Agen
cy.
• W
orks
onl
y to
se
rve
self-
inte
rest
and
m
eet p
erso
nal
goal
s.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 44 | Page
Com
pete
ncy
Beha
vior
Desc
riptio
n[3
.00-
4.00
]Le
vel 4
[2.0
0-2.
99]
Leve
l 3[1
.00-
1.99
]Le
vel 2
[<=0
.99]
Leve
l 1
Scor
e by
su
perv
isor
w
ith
Evid
ence
of
Beha
vior
6.O
ral/
Writt
en
com
mun
icati
on
Dem
onst
rate
s abi
lity
to a
rticu
late
one
’s id
eas,
vie
ws a
nd
opin
ions
cle
arly
and
co
ncise
ly b
oth
in
oral
and
in w
riting
.
• Ar
ticul
ates
in
form
ation
to
othe
rs in
lang
uage
th
at is
cle
ar,
conc
ise a
nd e
asy
to
unde
rsta
nd.
• A
rticu
late
s in
form
ation
to
oth
er in
la
ngua
ges t
hat i
s un
ders
tand
able
.
• A
rticu
late
s inf
orm
ation
to
oth
er in
lim
ited
lang
uage
lim
ited
unto
his/
her l
evel
of
unde
rsta
ndin
g.
• Do
es n
ot
artic
ulat
e in
form
ation
th
at is
cle
ar
and
conc
ise.
Tota
l
Scor
e C
(Tot
al sc
ore/
No
of C
ompe
tenc
y Be
havi
or)
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 45 |
SECTION D: Preliminary Performance Evaluation Score [Section B &C]
Particular Score Received Preliminary Score Supervisor’s
Comment, if any
B. Performance 70% of Score B=………………
C. Competency Behaviors 30% of Score C=……………….
Total
Employee SignatureDate ____________________________________________________________________
Supervisor SignatureDate
Overall Rating Table:
Performer Category Definition Rating Scale
1. Level 4 Achieved exceptionally high level of performance 3.00-4.00
2. Level 3 Performed at higher level than required 2.00-2.99
3. Level 2 Employee fulfilled requirement of the job 1.00-1.99
4. Level 1 Results/Behavior far below performance requirement <=0.99
Note: The Preliminary Performance Evaluation Score shall be an input to the Moderation Exercise for assigning the final rating.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 46 | Page
Annexure 3: Performance Appraisal Form for Operational Category
APPRAISAL PERIOD:EMPLOYEE ID No.NAME OF THE EMPLOYEE:POSITION TITLE: POSITION LEVEL:DIVISION: DEPARTMENT/AGENCY:
Assurance on Accuracy of CV: I have verified my CV in CSIS and hereby declare that the information is correct as of (dd/mm/yy) …………………………….
Competency Behavior Description
Rating by Supervisor
(0-4)Comments
1.Ethics & Integrity
Earns others’ trust and respect through consistent honesty and professionalism in all interactions
2.Communication Skills
The ability to convey information to others effectively and efficiently
3.Service Focus Values and delivers quality service to all4.Team Work Promotes cooperation and commitment
within a team5.Self-Management
Manages own time, priorities, and resources to provide quality services
6.Safety Focus Adheres to all workplace and work safety laws, regulations, standards, and practices
Total RatingAverage Rating = Total Rating/6
(Signature of Employee) (Name and Signature of Supervisor)
Overall Rating Table:
Performer category Definition Rating scale
1.Outstanding Achieved exceptionally high level of performance 3.00-4.00
2. Very Good Performed at higher level than required 2.00-2.99
3. Good Employee fulfilled requirement of the job 1.00-1.994.Needs Improvement Results/Behavior far below performance requirement <=0.99
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 47 |
Annexure 4: Performance Calibration through the Moderation Exercise
Moderation Exercise is a process in which managers within an Agency, a Department or Division, whichever is applicable convenes together to discuss the performance of employees and establish consensus on ratings. The practice of Moderation Exercise refers to the steps taken to make sure that members of the Moderation Committee apply a consistent set of standards in finalizing ratings. The Moderation Exercise ensures:
• Differentiation of Categories of Performers; One of the primary goals of the Moderation Exercise is to effectively differentiate
high performers from average or poor performers so that high performers can be rewarded and retained, and non-performance are given targeted intervention. The performance score provided by managers on performance targets and Competency Behavior in the Performance Appraisal Forms are important data points in HR and leadership decision making. This data not only have an impact on promotion and compensation, but are considered in succession planning and the allocation of developmental resources.
• Improves the Objectivity and Accuracy of Performance Ratings; Moderation Exercise serves to increase the objectivity and accuracy of
performance ratings provided by managers. The moderation process helps to ensure that all employees are evaluated on the same criteria. The collective discussion regarding performance allows managers to have new insight into the performance of employees and reduce potential bias. Peer-to-peer discussion brings about transparency - calling attention to an individual manager’s tendency to rate leniently or harshly. Managers become accountable to each other for the performance appraisal ratings made for all employees.
• Clarifies Criteria for Performance Categorizations; and Moderation Exercise clarifies and reinforces the criteria for performance
categorizations across the management team. During the Moderation Exercise, managers will discuss the supporting reasons for the performance categorization ratings provided. This type of discussion builds a common language around defining performance expectations across all managers. As a result, managers will be better prepared to discuss the reasons behind ratings with employees and create development plans for ongoing performance improvement and career development. The support reasons can be presented in accordance to the discretion of the manager. One suggested format that could be applied by the manager when citing specific cases to substantiate the proposed performance categorization for the employee is as follows:
Brief description of the incident/case. Appraisal Forms can be used to note such incidences;
Description of the action taken by the employee (include the key challenges the employee had to overcome where appropriate); and
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 48 | Page
Description of the impact of the action taken by the employee. Quantify the impact where possible and establish link to the mission and/or core values of the organization.
● Increases Perceptions of Fairness. Together, the accuracy of performance categorization and the clarification of
performance criteria increase the likelihood for those employees to perceive the performance appraisal process is fair. Since compensation, promotion and succession decisions are based in part on performance categorizations, it is important that employees believe that they are being fairly evaluated by their Manager.
Managing for Excellence: Manual
Page | 49 |
Annexure 5: Sample Meeting Agenda
Introduction ● Desired Outcomes of Meeting ● Joint Ownership● Confidentiality
The information discussed and the resulting outcomes should be kept confidential by all managers involved. Participants should be reminded of the expectation regarding confidentiality at the start of the meeting.
Clarify Standards Review of the ratings scale/s and scale definitions used in the performance evaluation process.
Performance Trends of Agency/Department/DivisionExamination of the performance distribution of the Agency/Department/Division including how the distribution compares to the previous performance period and/or desired distribution.
Alignment with Agency/Department/Division Results Discussion of the linkage between initial performance ratings with the results produced by the Agency/Department/Division.
Individual Presentation Review of each employee’s performance rating/s and the supporting rationale behind the rating/s.
ModerationModeration of ratings as necessary to accurately reflect performance over the performance period.
Discussion RecordsSecretariat to minute the details and evidences relating to the decisions leading to assignment of performance ratings, especially for Outstanding and Need Improvement Categories. Chairperson of meeting to vet and approve minutes.
Next Steps in the Performance Management Process Communication of finalized performance rating with the employee and discuss on follow-up developmental plans where appropriate (e.g. those rated as Need Improvement).
Managing for Excellence: Manual
| 50 | Page
Annexure 6: Schedule A Agencies under Schedule A are:1. His Majesty’s Secretariat;2. His Majesty the Fourth Druk Gyalpo Secretariat;3. Office of Gyalpoi Zimpon;4. Anti-Corruption Commission;5. Royal Audit Authority;6. Office of the Attorney General;7. Supreme Court of Bhutan;8. High Court;9. District Court;10. Dungkhag Court;11. Bhutan Olympic Committee;12. Bhutan National Legal Institute;13. Royal Privy Council;14. Bhutan Health Trust Fund;15. Civil Society Organization Authority; and16. Bhutan Medical Health Council.
Note: For any open competition for scholarship or promotion at any level, the RCSC shall establish equivalency for PE rating of the civil servants under Schedule A during the selection process.