3.1 Consistent application
Organisations should aim to apply a set of standards to support a consistent application of final performance ratings.
A good practice process that could be applied is as follows (additional guidance at Appendix 4):
- Performance feedback is provided by a manager to an executive on an ongoing basis that incorporates feedback from a range of sources.
- A formal annual performance review process occurs between each executive and their manager. Through this process, ratings are discussed by managers and moderated by People and Culture, or the equivalent, at every executive level to ensure consistency.
- Once ratings are finalised by managers, performance outcomes and insights are collated centrally and provided to the relevant public sector body Head and/or Executive Remuneration Committee for review and approval.
- After the internal collation and review process occurs and is approved by the public sector body Head, final performance outcomes are communicated to executives.
3.2 Performance outcomes
Executive performance expectations should be assessed against a defined rating scale to identify the level of accomplishment or fulfilment of target performance outcomes.
Target performance outcomes need to be specific, with planned results to be achieved against defined measures. As a guide, the four-point rating scale is outlined in Table 2.
Table 2: Good practice four-point rating scale
|Four-point rating scale||Definition|
|1. Does not meet expectations||The executive consistently fails to meet agreed expectations|
|2. Meets most expectations||The executive meets most agreed expectations|
|3. Meets all expectations||The executive meets all agreed expectations|
|4. Exceeds expectations||The executive always meets and sometimes exceeds agreed expectations|
It is a requirement of all managers and employees, including human resources, to maintain confidentiality when discussing performance of executives and any possible interventions.