Home >> Motivation Initiatives >> Performance Management >> Resources

Background

Agencies and universities (A/Us) are required to evaluate their performance management (PM) systems every three years, per Administrative Rule (25 NCAC 01O .0106) and by State Personnel Policy (Section 10): 

Each agency shall evaluate its performance management system at least every three years to determine how effectively the system is meeting the purposes stated in 25 NCAC 01O .0102 and take actions to improve the system if necessary.  Evaluation findings and any improvement actions shall be reported to the State Personnel Director.

The Administrative Rule describes the purposes as follows:

The purposes of the performance management system are to ensure that:

1. The work performed by employees accomplishes the work of the agency;
2. Employees have an understanding of the quality and quantity of work expected from them;
3. Employees receive ongoing information about how effectively they are performing relative to expectations;
4. Awards and salary increases based on employee performance are distributed accordingly;
5. Opportunities for employee development are identified; and
6. Employee performance that does not meet expectations is addressed

The triennial review, therefore, is not an audit. It does not seek to determine if an organization is following its PM policy (for example, that new employees have work plans within 60 days of employment). The triennial review is, rather, an evaluation. It seeks to determine if the organization’s practices result in the reasonable satisfaction of these six purposes (for example, to what extent employees have clear performance expectations).

Results 

Forty-two A/Us submitted input to the first triennial review in 2010. The results may be accessed at any one of three levels of detail:

• Executive analysis – A brief summary of the results and a list of conclusions to be taken into account as changes to the statewide PM policy are considered.
• Summary report – A detailed summary of the input received.
• Individual A/U reports – The individual reviews submitted by each of the participating A/Us.
• Policies and work plans – A/Us were also asked to provide copies of their PM policies, work plan templates, and other PM-related tools.

HOW TRIENNIAL REVIEW information is used

OSP uses the information to propose changes in statewide PM policy and/or provision of tools or assistance to A/Us. A/U HR staffs are also expected to follow through on the local improvement ideas they propose in their reviews, consistent with statewide policy or any policy changes.

Methodology 

To maintain some level of consistency across A/Us in how the triennial reviews were conducted and reported, OSP, with input from A/U HR directors, established a structured process for conducting and reporting the triennial evaluation.

• Memo from State Personnel Director – Memo initiating the process.
• Suggested survey content – OSP’s suggestions for conducting a survey to gather employee input for the triennial review.
• Suggested focus group format – OSP’s suggestions for using focus groups to gather employee input.

Once user input was gathered, HR staffs analyzed the input and prepared a summary along with action recommendations, which were submitted via online questionnaires during the period from October 1 to November 15, 2010:

• Profile questionnaire – Format for A/Us to report basic information about their PM policies and practices.
• Evaluation questionnaire – Format for A/Us to submit their evaluative summaries.