PNOC EC’s PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL AND RANKING SYSTEM

POLICY STATEMENT:

The Company seeks to develop employees through the annual performance appraisal with an established system of evaluating job performance whose results serve as the basis for planning and introducing intervention programs and improvement initiatives towards employees’ professional advancement. OBJECTIVES:     

Clarify roles, performance expectations and responsibilities of employees Measure and evaluate the competencies of employees and determine area/s where an employee excels or needs improvement Identify an employee’s capacity for advancement in the organization Identify training needs of employees and frame training programs which will respond to these training needs Serve as a guide in making decisions on succession planning, employee retention, disciplinary action and termination

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL GUIDELINES 1. All regular employees with at least one (1) year of service as of the date of the Performance Appraisal must be appraised covering a specified appraisal period. 2. Appraisers should see to it that newly transferred employees will be appraised only for the period said transferees were under them. Thus, if the appraisee/transferee had two or more supervisors/managers during the appraisal period, the past and present superiors should appraise the employee. The current supervisor/manager shall be responsible for the consolidation of all appraisals of the employee. 3. Employees who are on Foreign Training/Educational Leave during the specified appraisal period should not be appraised. However, the Department Manager may opt to submit a report of the employee’s academic performance. 4. Rating of “3” need not be justified. However, ratings higher than “2” or lower than “3” should be justified. Justification may be made in narrative or through comparison of actual vs. performance standard. 5. The appraiser should use the assigned weights per factor of performance. The assigned weights should be in intervals of 0.5. 6. To get the over-all rating, use the following steps: a.

Multiply rating of each factor by the weight assigned to it to get the score.

b.

Add all the scores of the factors of performance by the predetermined weight to get the weighted score per element of performance.

c.

Multiply the total score per element of performance by the predetermined weight to get the weighted score per element of performance.

d.

Add all the weighted score per element of performance to get the sum of all weighted scores.

e.

The sum of all weighted scores should be rounded off to the nearest rating which shall be the over all appraisal rating. e.g. Sum of all weighted scores = 2.6 or over all appraisal rating = 2.5 Sum of all weighted scores = 3.35 or over all appraisal rating = 3.5

In cases where the difference between the sum of all weighted scores and the next lower or higher rating is equal, the final rating should be the one favorable to the employee. e.g. Sum of all weighted scores = 2.75 or over all appraisal rating = 2.5 instead of 3 7. Appraisal form should be signed by the appraiser and approved by the respective approving authority. 8. Appraisal should be appraisee/employee.

discussed

and

duly

acknowledged/signed

by

the

9. Deadline of submission of the Performance Appraisal Forms must be strictly observed.

RANKING GUIDELINES 1. All regular employees with at least one (1) year of service as of the date of the Performance Appraisal and who were included in the Annual Performance Appraisal Schedule shall be ranked consistent with these guidelines. 2. A newly-transferred employee must be ranked under the current Department provided he/she has completed at least six (6) months of the appraisal cycle under the new Department. Otherwise, he/she should be ranked under his/her previous Department. 3. The ranking report must be done and submitted by the Division/Department Manager and approved by the next higher Approving Authority. All employees occupying Manager and up positions will be ranked by the President & CEO. 4. Department Managers, in coordination with Supervisor/s may refer to below ranking criteria: a. b. c. d.

their

Superintendent/s

and/or

Resourcefulness or Innovation: Concepts and ideas translated into actual and practical accomplishment. Unique contribution of the individual which normally cannot be expected from anyone in the same assignment. Targets exceeding quantity and quality (with volume not directly built into the work targets of the position). Magnitude and impact of output (corporate-wide application vs. section or department)

e. f.

Contributions exceeding the requirement of position – approximating results expected at next higher level. The level of skill: The staff competence as a factor in producing the desired output.

5. The ranking report to be submitted should include the performance ratings of employees arranged from highest to lowest. A performance rating below 3.0 should not be included in the ranking report. 6. The following distribution shall be followed for satisfactory performers: Performance Rating 1 2 3

Distribution 10% 25% 65%

7. Units with less than eight (8) employees shall be grouped together with units reporting to the same highest approving authority. 8. Deadline of submission of the Ranking Report must be strictly observed.