"Mind Bugs: The Ordinary Origins of Bias" - Dr.

Brian Nosek

Performance Management @
Stanford
Pat Keating, L&OE

Agenda
Why should you care?
What is our
approach/objectives/outcomes?
Who involved?
When will we execute?
How can you participate?

Change Drivers
80%

68%
66%

70%

54%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

57%

69%

76%

78%

79%

79%

80%

80%

The Business Case

Engagement, Performance and Retention

Business Value of Engaged Employees

The Manager, Employee Development

and Performance
Employees of managers who are very effective at development can
outperform their peers by up to 25 percent
Impact of Manager-Led Development on Employee Performance
Employees Reporting
to Manager A

Employees Reporting
to Manager B

Manager A is very
ineffective at
developing employees

Manager B is very
effective at developing
employees

25%

Performance
Improvement
directly attributable to
Manager Bs
effectiveness at
employee
development

Source: Learning and Development Roundtable 2003 Employee

7
Development Survey

FIVE LEAD ROLES FOR MANAGERS

The manager-led development activities that impact employee
performance fall into five basic roles
Planning

Execution

Evaluation

Performance and
Development
Strategist

Solutions
Enabler

LearningExperience
Architect

Opportunity
Broker

Honest
Appraiser

This role consists of activities

that ensure employees
know performance evaluation
criteria, have development
plans, and acquire
needed knowledge and skills.

This role includes activities

undertaken to help
employees apply newfound
skills and knowledge or to
help employees learn from
their managers experiences.

This role consists of

activities that enable
employees to learn from the
experiences acquired
through their projects
and assignments.

This role includes activities

undertaken to help
employees locate
development opportunities,
in their current jobs and
beyond.

Activities falling into this role

consist of apprising direct
reports of their job
performance and progress
against their development
plans.

Activity & Impact

Activity & Impact

Activity & Impact

Activity & Impact

Activity & Impact

Explain Performance
Evaluation Standards
19.8%

Help Employees Apply

New Skills/Knowledge
11.6%

Ensure Projects Are

Learning Experiences
19.8%

Help Employees Find

Training
13.6%

Assess Development
Progress
13.8%

Create Individual
Development Plans (IDPs)
12.0%

Teach New Skill

or Procedure
7.7%

Provide Experiences That

Develop Employees
19.1%

Pass Along Job Openings

10.3%

Give Feedback on
Personality Strengths
13.3%

Ensure Necessary
Skills/Knowledge
6.7%

Give Advice from Own

Experience
6.7%

Pass Along Development

Opportunities
8.7%

Give Feedback on
Performance Weaknesses
11.9%
Give Feedback on
Performance Strengths
8.0%

Average Impact of Role Activities on Employee Performance

12.8%

8.7%

19.4%

10.9%

11.8%

Source: Learning and Development Roundtable 2003 Employee Development Survey.

Our Goals
To design a best-in-class performance
management system that aligns employee
performance and development with Stanfords
mission and culture of excellence.

People

Process

Technology

Expected Outcomes
An easier, less cumbersome process
An easy-to-use performance management process
A common rating scale and set of competencies

Better performance conversations

Managers and employees will have the skills and
knowledge to have more meaningful performance
conversations
A fresh focus on employee development

Technology that drives efficiency

Easier to complete the process online
Reduces the burden on managers by reducing paperwork
and time taken to complete the process

10

Two-pronged Approach
DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION
Focus on defining the new
process and competencies
Creating the tools, the
content and the training
etc.
Planning the logistics for
implementing the new
program
Performance Management
Program

CHANGE MANAGEMENT &

COMMUNICATION
Focus on getting leader
engagement and buy-in
Creating the plan to ensure
that changes are seamless
at all levels in the
organization
Develop communications
11

Performance Management Maturity

Model
Performance Management
Drives Development
Performance Management Drives
Accountability and Compensation

Performance Management as
Required Mandate
Performance Management as
Fragmented HR Process
12

Benchmarking Ivy Leagues

School

Uniform
Process

Online

Goals
and Yearend
Appraisal
s

Mid-year
check-ins

Stanfor
d

Pilot
phase

Some
units

Penn

Reviewin
g options

Some
units

MIT

Reviewin
g options

Informal
process

Reviewin
g options

Some
units

Recommend
ed baseline
process
across
university

Harvar
d

Forms,
scales differ,
components
of
performance
managemen
Not
a current
t are

= Consistently

One
Rating
Scale

Universal
set of
Competen
cies

13

Common Themes at Stanford

Ineffective Process
Managers dont want to deliver tough
messages around performance.
Managers and employees are only
evaluated on goals and not people skills,
therefore, how you achieve your goals is
not important. People can display bad
behaviors and are not accountable.
People here have been in their jobs for a
long time, there really arent any goals to
set.

Managers Are Unskilled at PM

Managers lack the skills to manage
performance effectively.
There are no career growth
opportunities here, therefore
development planning isnt that
beneficial.
Faculty and staff would rather hold on
to their people than help them advance
their careers.

No line level sponsorship

Faculty dont want to be bothered with
performance management.
Performance management is seen as
an HR practice.
This is not a true pay-for-performance
culture.

Lack Effective Tools for PM

There is limited training for managers
around how to conduct good performance
management conversations.
Managers dont have the time to focus
on performance management.
Merit increases are awarded evenly
across teams to avoid employee
dissatisfaction.

14

Current State Summary

Over 40 performance management forms across Stanford

Rating scales vary from a 3 point scale to a 7 point scale and include
numbers, letters and descriptors, makes managing talent across the
organization a challenge
At least 3 different technologies are being used for performance
management across Stanford
Performance cycles vary greatly
We measure hundreds of competencies and up to 17 competencies in one
review
Certain key elements of performance management that impact high
performance including multi-rater feedback, development planning etc. are
not done consistently
Lack the ability to track performance year-over-year
Senior leaders cannot get a snapshot of their organization (unless using an
online system)
People management skills are not evaluated resulting in an over-emphasis on
goals

$1.5 BILLION unmanaged asset in

payroll!!

15

PM Objectives:
What Are We Trying to Change Or
Improve?

Poor
Performanc
e

Stellar
Performanc
e

Improving
performance across
the organization
(raising the bar)

Greater recognition of top talent

and ready now successors

Retention &

Poor
Performanc
e

Stellar
Performanc
e

Improving manager
effectiveness with
performance management

Getting rid of old behaviors and

rewarding new behaviors
16

Behavior Change

Best in Class Performance Management

Programs
Managers meet to
calibrate performance
Final ratings are
assigned
Compensation pools are
distributed according
to performance
Pay-forperformance
approach

Compensati
on
Decisions
Solicit
feedbac
kFormal
review,
employee
writes self-review,
gives self-ratings,
manager adds
and rates
Manager and employee
meet to discuss
performance

Goal Setting
&
Development
Planning

On-going
feedback
and
coaching
throughout
the year

Year-end
Review

Set organizational ,
team and individual
goals
Communicate
goals, develop
strategy
Discuss
developmen
t
Creat
e plan

Performance
Check-in/
Feedback/ Midyear review

Solicit
feedbac
Formal
or
k
informal
performance
check-in
via a mid-year
review clear
Communicate
or feedback
messages
around
session
performance based on
goals and
competencies

17

Components of the PMP - Outline

Process

Competencies

Goal Setting
Development Planning
Mid-Year Reviews
Coaching and
Feedback
Multi-rater feedback
Year-End Reviews
Rating scales &
Calibration
Link to Compensation

Competency Model
Application
Measurement of
competencies
Behavioral Descriptors

PMP
People
University and
School/Business unit
Leadership
Manager commitment,
capability, confidence
Employee
commitment,
capability, confidence

Tools/Technolog
y for goal setting,
Form
dev planning,
appraisals etc.
Forced distribution
curves
Training curriculum
and format
Job- aids to learn the 18
new process

Performance Management

Talent
Management

Compensation

Performance
Management

Employee Survey
Experience

19

Pilot Issues
Focus
Scope
Leadership

20

Pilot Group Focus and Scope

Unit

Focus

Scope

GSB

Changing behavior, driving

innovation

Whole organization

H&S

Improving manager
effectiveness with the PMP,
recognizing top talent,
challenged with faculty
supervisor reviews

Sub group within H&S,

including some faculty
supervisors

OOD

Retention of top talent,

succession planning

Whole central OOD

organization (excludes
schools)

R&DE

Improving performance,
compliance, influencing the
design of the new PMP

Sub group within R&DE

based on leaders
support and interest, will
not include bargaining
unit employees

SOM

Employee satisfaction and

retention, challenged with
faculty supervisor reviews

Sub-group within SOM

based on leader interest

SOE

Better PMP tools, Influencing

the design of the PMP,
challenged with faculty
supervisor reviews

Sub-group within SOE

21

Executive Sponsors

David Jones, VP HR
Jeanne Berent, Executive Director of Finance and
Administration, OOD
Marcia Cohen, Sr. Associate Dean, Finance and Administration,
SOM
Shirley Everett, Sr. Associate Vice Provost, R&DE
Adam Daniel, Sr. Associate Dean, H&S
Clare Hansen-Shinnerl, Sr. Associate Dean, Finance and
Administration, SOE
Gary Edwards, Performance and Culture Strategist, GSB

22

Successful Change

23

Engaged Leadership

24

A Phased Approach (PILOT)

Phase
1 (Year 2011)
Phase
1 (FY2011)
A select pilotProgram
group will Design &
participate in Phase
Implementation
1 of the
program.
Define a high level university-wide
program which will include a
performance management
philosophy and recommended
steps as part of the program
including development planning
Review university wide and
organization specific competencies
to create a model that can be
broadly applied
Create a common rating scale and
definitions
Recommend a format for writing
appraisals
Gain line level sponsorship
Assess ePerformance to see if it will
meet the organizations needs
Design appropriate training tools
for managers and employees
Create a robust change

Phase 2 (FY2012)
Review various technology
options, costs etc. based on the
needs defined in Phase 1
Design and test online
performance management tool
Test new technology
Create appropriate training and
job-aids for employees and
managers
Launch new technology

25

Multi-Year Timeline
FY2011

Designing the
refreshed
program

FY2012

FY2013

FY2014

Launching the
Launching the
refreshed
online technology
in a paper
program
to the pilot group
process with
Launching the
pilot group
refreshed
Review and design
program in a
the technology for
paper process to
online
the rest of the
performance
organization?
management
Communicating
Evaluating the
the new program
technology on an
to the rest of the
ongoing basis
organization

Introducing
online
performance
management to
the entire
organization

26

Benefits of Participating in the

Pilot

Influence and
Co-create

Build
Higher
Manager
Engagement
and Productivity
Influence and co-createCapabilities

Improve manager
Greater employee
a performance
management program
that is meaningful to
your organization
Be part of a pilot that
will test best practices
in a variety of settings
Collaborate with peers
on a fast paced project

effectiveness

Improve
results on
the
employee
survey
under
coaching
and
feedback

engagement and
morale

Higher
productivity

27

Detailed Timeline
FEB
Solidify
timeline
Define our
performance
management
philosophy
Understanding
the unique
challenges of
performance
management
with faculty
supervisors

MARCH
Refining the
Stanford
Competencies
Defining the
components of
our refreshed
program?
Answeringwhat do we
want to
measure- single
vs. dual rating?
Rating scales

Complet

In

APRIL
Designing a
new form
Designing a
template for
multi-rater
feedback
Creating a
change
management
and
communication
plan
Defining an
implementation
Not
plan

MAY
Getting buy-in
across all levels
in the university
Testing the new
appraisal form
Define the
training needs,
identify training
format, vendors
etc.

28

High Level Strategy and Metrics

Adoption to Impact
Adoption
Staff is using the
new program and
ultimately the
technology
Staff finds the new
program and
technology effective
and easy to use
Performance
management is
established as a key
accountability at
every level in the
organization and
from the top down

Expertise
Managers develop
the skills to
conduct effective
performance
reviews
Managers give
more frequent and
more effective
coaching and
feedback
Stanford University
is able to track and
manage
performance and
talent across the
organization
Performance rating
distributions are
normalized
Employees
understand

Engagement
Employee
engagement,
professional
development,
employee
recognition and
employee
commitment are
higher
Discretionary effort
and intent to stay
are higher
High performing
employees are
identified and
rewarded
appropriately

Productivit
y
Employee
productivity is
higher as a
result of the new
program
It is easier to
identify poor
performers and
create an action
plan
It is easier to
identify and
reward high
performers
Turnover for high
performing
employees is
lower
Better business
results
29

The Business Case

30

Questions

31

Backup Slides

32

Recommended Plan &

Deliverables
Defining a Meaningful
Program
Define a high level university-wide
program
Performance Management
Philosophy
Recommended steps
Reviewing university wide and
organization specific competencies to
create a flexible model that can be
broadly applied and easily customized
A common rating scale and definitions
Recommended format for writing
appraisals

Selecting an Online Tool for

PM

Select an online performance

management system based on
refreshed program, feedback on current
PeopleSoft pilot and defined needs
Pilot the new online system to a small
population and solicit feedback
If feasible, roll-out new system across
the university

Line level Performance

Champions

Shift from performance management

being an HR initiative to being a line
level initiative
Sponsorship and launch at the highest
level
Identify line level performance
champions who will support a culture of
performance management
Champions model new behaviors
Build channels of accountability at the
line level to ensure that managers are
following the program

Training for Managers and

Employees

Online training for managers to

understand the refreshed philosophy
and program
Support online training with classroom
Q&A
Tools for managing performance are
available online
Online training for employees to write
an effective self-appraisal
Online and classroom seminar
for web33
based performance management
training

FOCUSING ON WHAT MATTERS MOST

Impact of Specific Manager-Led Development Activities

A Refreshing Message:
A Refreshing Message:
The most powerful
The most powerful
development activities are
development activities are
already part of you daily
already part of you daily
responsibilities.
responsibilities.

*For a complete definition of each activity,

please see the previous slide.

Source: Learning and Development Roundtable 2003 Employee Development Survey

34

Overall Employee Satisfaction Rate: 73%

Percent favorable = Total positive responses (Strongly Agree, Agree) divided by total valid
responses.

Slide 35

Overall Engagement Rate: 78%

Percent favorable = Total positive responses (Strongly Agree, Agree) divided by total valid
responses.

Slide 36

Strongest Dimension of Teamwork (tie)

Items in the Teamwork dimension:

I enjoy working with my co-workers.

My co-workers and I work well together
as a team.
There is good cooperation between my
team and others.
Teamwork is encouraged in my work
group.

Slide 37

Strongest Dimension of Supervisory Consideration (tie)

Items in the Supervisory Consideration dimension:

My supervisor holds me accountable for

my responsibilities.
When I face challenging situations at
work, my supervisor supports me.
If I speak up, my supervisor will listen.
I know what is expected of me at work.
My supervisor distributes work
appropriately.
My supervisor treats me fairly.
Slide 38

Weakest Dimension: Feedback and Coaching

Items in the Feedback and Coaching dimension:

My supervisor or someone at work

coaches me on how to improve the
way I do my job.
I regularly receive useful feedback
about my work performance.
My last performance evaluation
helped me understand my
strengths.
My last performance evaluation
Slide 39

Strongest Rated Individual Items: ~ 90% or higher Favorable

Dimensio
n

Item

%
Favorab
le (scale
of 0 to
100)

Organizatio I genuinely care about my

nal
internal/external clients (such
Direction
as students, staff, faculty,
patients, parents, alumni).

94%

Commitme I plan to stay working at

nt
Stanford for more than one
year.

90%

Job
The work I do is meaningful.
Compatibili
ty

90%

Supervisor
ySlide 40

92%

My supervisor holds me
accountable for my

Items: ~50% or lower

Favorable
%
Dimensi Item
on

Favorabl
e (scale of
0 to 100)

Feedback My supervisor or someone at

and
work coaches me on how to
Coaching improve the way I do my job.

51%

Change
When organizational changes 51%
Managem occur, I understand the
ent
rationale for those changes.
Change
I am well informed in
Managem advance of organizational
ent
changes when they occur.

49%

Profession In the last year, I have been

al
encouraged to advance my
Developm career.
Slide 41
ent

46%