|
|
|
 |
New Performance Rating Definitions
|
Date: 8th Feb 2006
Members will know from LTU Newsletters that Balanced Scorecard has not always lived up to its promise and that the Union has been critical that it has become much more a stick with which to beat staff than a motivational carrot.
In November LTU reported that members of the Branch Network Salesforce below 90% of target were to be managed through the Performance Improvement Process. This meant that, as the Union predicted, over half the Salesforce - some 4,345 staff - would be on PIP’s with for many of them the very real threat of dismissal. Having so many staff who had previously been deemed to be good performers on PIP’s should have made the Bank question whether it was its targets and not individual performance that was wrong, but it didn’t.
However, at the time the Union also reported that progress was being made on some aspects of the Balanced Scorecard with the Bank recognising that Performance Management is too complex and drawn out; that there has been limited ability to rate real differences in performance and that ratings of performance have been inconsistently applied across the Group. The changes the Union agreed at the time involved:
- a new timetable for completion of reviews covering the performance year 2005 and for setting objectives for 2006
- a new ‘5 point’ rating system for the performance year 2006 that importantly would apply to all staff across the Bank.
Since then negotiations have continued and the new 5 Point system the Bank is to use to define different levels of performance introduced.
However, the Union has said that the new system is not a cure for all problems and it still has reservations over the definitions to be used to differentiate performance.; the target setting process; whether staff can achieve what is being asked of them; whether if staff meet their objectives they will actually get the ratings they expect and what financial rewards they can expect to receive for achieving defined levels of performance. On those aspects the Bank’s Balanced Scorecard Performance Management System still fails to ‘Meet Expectations’.
 |
|
|
|
