Results-Based Performance Management System

Jennifer V. Misa

The Department of Education (DepEd) is committed to provide the members of its organization with opportunities to link their individual achievements and make a meaningful contribution to the attainment of the institution’s Vision and Mission.

It also gives its employees a chance to promote individual and team growth, participation and commitment, as well as grow professionally and personally.

In line with this Philosophy, DepEd implements a Results-Based Performance Management System. It is a shared undertaking between the superior and the employee that allows an open discussion of job expectations, Key Results Areas, Objectives and how these align to overall departmental goals. It provides a venue for agreement on standards of performance and behaviors which lead to professional and personal growth in the organization.

Each employee plays a vital part in the achievement of his/her department’s objectives. At the beginning of the Results-Based Performance Management Cycle, the employee and his/her superior jointly determines goal and measures that will lead to the achievement of the overall departmental goals. After which, weights are assigned to those goals based on priorities. The total of the weights should not exceed 100. At the end of the performance cycle, the employee is rated on the effectiveness/quality, efficiency (including cost), and timeliness in delivering the goals agreed upon.

The success of the employee in fulfilling his/her role and delivering exceptional performance is dependent on how s/he applies various competencies on the job. The employee is rated based on the effectiveness and consistency by which s/he demonstrates behaviors relevant to the competencies. The overall rating is computed by adding the rating for each competency and dividing the sum by the total number of competencies. Half-points (e.g. 3.5) may be given if the employee’s performance level falls in between descriptions of the scale positions.

The areas where the employee excels and areas for development are both identified. In this manner, the employee’s strengths are highlighted and recognized. Development needs on the other hand are addressed through formal and informal training and development approaches.

Effectiveness/Quality means the extent to which actual performance compares with targeted performance. The degree to which objectives are achieved and the extent to which targeted problems are solved. In management, effectiveness relates to getting the right things done.

Efficiency, meanwhile, is the extent to which time or resources is used for the intended task or purpose. It measures whether targets are accomplished with a minimum amount or quantity of waste, expense, or unnecessary effort.

Timeliness measures whether the deliverable was done on time based on the requirements of the law, orders and/or clients/stakeholders. Time-related performance indicators evaluate such things as project completion deadlines, time management skills and other time-sensitive expectations.

These ratings refer to the accomplishment of targets or objectives. Evaluation should be based on indicators and measures. CSC MC NO. 13, SERIES OF 1999 (REVISED Polices on the Performance Management System) have the following descriptions:

Outstanding – performance exceeding targets by 30% and above of the planned targets on the previous definition of performance exceeding targets by at least fifty (50%); Very Satisfactory – performance exceeding targets by 15% to 29% of the planned targets; from the previous range of performance exceeding targets by at least 25% but falls short of what is considered an outstanding performance; Satisfactory – performance of 100% to 114% of the planned targets. For accomplishments requiring 100% of the targets such as those pertaining to money or accuracy or those which may no longer be exceeded, the usual rating of either 10 for those who met targets or 4 for those who failed or fell short of the targets shall still be enforced; Unsatisfactory – performance of 51% to 99% of the planned targets; and Poor – performance failing to meet the planned targets by 50% or below.

The author

--oOo-

is Administrative Assistant North

II at Bacolor Elementary School, Bacolor District