Performance Review

Director Performance Appraisal

A formal, written performance appraisal is an essential management practice. The board’s evaluation of the library director is the foundation of the evaluation process for the library as a whole. The performance appraisal should be closely tied to the successful implementation of the library’s strategic plan.

Purposes of the Performance Appraisal

• To provide the director with a clear understanding of the board’s expectations
• To ensure that the director is aware of how well those expectations are being met
• To serve as a formal vehicle of communication between the board and director
• To identify and give credit for a job well done
• To identify the board’s existing concerns so that appropriate action can be taken
• To review annual accomplishments of the library and ensure the continued effectiveness of the director
• To demonstrate sound management practices and accountability to community stakeholder

Factors in Reviewing the Performance of Library Directors

Directors are accountable to varied and sometimes conflicting constituencies. The board and the director must recognize these groups and agree on the prioritization of the demands of each:

• Elected officials and the appointed governing officer who supervises other municipal department heads
• The library staff members who have diverse personal expectations for their director
• Public groups that exert pressure on the director to respond to their concerns
• Individual members of the board of trustees who have personal priorities for the library and the director

Good communication, good public relations, a written strategic plan, and clear library policies will all help the board and director deal with any conflicting expectations. The performance appraisal method and process can be designed to include input from all these groups, but the final responsibility rests with the board.

The following are some factors that could be considered in the director’s performance appraisal. The list is not all-inclusive, nor is every item necessary for every library. These factors are a reference point for the board to develop the type of evaluation that is best for its institution and its situation.

• Board relationship
• Strategic planning
• Preparing and managing the budget
• Personnel administration
• Professional knowledge and awareness of best practices and trends
• Implementation of board decisions
• Collection development
• Staff development
• Library service
• Activity in professional organizations
• Policy recommendations to board
• Working relations with friends, foundation, community, city (if a city library)
• Maintenance and development of facilities and vehicles

Performance Management

Performance management is the ongoing collaborative process to support library employees’ success and accomplish the strategic mission of the library. It is a year-round partnership between the director and the board and between the director and the staff to create shared understanding about the results to be accomplished and how that will be done. As a part of planning for the future, performance management requires continually asking ourselves:

• What we need to do
• How we need to do it
• How we can do it better

All employees will know what their job is and what impact their daily activities have on the mission and values of the library. Employees are responsible for their work and accountable for results.

A successful performance management process manages real and potential conflict through open and honest communication focusing on the growth and improvement of individuals. The ideal is to communicate openly, frequently, and freely – up, down, and across the library – so that problems are solved before they become crises.

Performance management is a cyclical process that involves:

• Developing the Results-Oriented Job Description (ROJD)
• Developing the work plan for the coming year
• Observing performance
• Providing and receiving feedback
• Learning from experiences and applying that learning to clarify expectations and improve performance
• Planning, coaching, feedback, and development for all employees

Components of Performance Management

Results-Oriented Job Description (ROJD)

• Focuses on the library’s desired results for the position
• Identifies specific tasks and activities to achieve each result
• Aligns with the library’s mission and strategic plan goals

Results and goals are commonly used interchangeably in these job descriptions. Results are the outcomes or consequences of activities. Most positions will have two or three primary results. Focusing on results instead of tasks allow employees to be more flexible and creative in their jobs. It also helps employees understand how their position fits into the structure of the library.

In addition to the results, an ROJD includes:

• The purpose of the position
• The position’s place in the library
• The customers to be served
• The general, typical, or ongoing activities under each result
• How the position relates to:
  • Library values
  • Customer service
  • Relationships
  • Collaboration
  • Being a learning organization

Annual Work Plan

In the context of the ROJD’s results, the work plan describes for the next year:

• Major activities
  • Projects
  • Accomplishments
• Some items may duplicate those in the ROJD
• Others reflect specific
  • Targets
  • Areas of focus
  • High priorities
• May be incorporated into the ROJD or may be a separate document
• Aligns with the library’s mission and strategic plan goals

Performance Appraisal

The performance appraisal is the collaborative process between the library’s director and board to assess the work performance and critical work behaviors of the employee. Performance appraisals should be done at the end of the director’s entrance probation (six months) and at least annually after that. This appraisal process is used to review the ROJD, the results achieved, and the relationships between the director, the board, staff members, and customers. The performance appraisal is an annual documentation of the regular discussions held throughout the year.

Guidelines:

1. The performance management process is ongoing.
2. Within a month after a new employee begins work, the employee and supervisor and, if appropriate, other team members, meet to discuss and agree upon the ROJD and set the work plan for the six-month training period. At the successful completion of this training period, another review of the work plan takes place. The work plan is then reviewed as needed, and at least annually.
3. Feedback is provided to individuals on their performance expectations and how they can improve. Using the ROJD, employees have regular discussions with their supervisor, and when appropriate, with other team members, for feedback on performance to share what they’ve learned and how it’s been applied and to identify areas that require problem-solving or additional training. Key areas to consider include:
   • Are expectations being met?
   • How do we know?
   • What are we learning?
   • What proficiencies are being developed?
   • How are these proficiences being applied to the job to achieve results?
   • What adjustments need to be made to the ROJD?
   • What are the recent successes and failures?
   • What was learned and applied from these experiences?
4. The completed performance appraisal document consists of:
   • Employee self-appraisal
   • Peer and customer input as appropriate
   • Review of the ROJD and work plan from the completed appraisal period
   • Completion of the performance appraisal form by the board
   • Assessment of overall performance
   • Description of identified employee development, if any
   • ROJD and work plan for the next appraisal period agreed upon by the employee and supervisor
5. Performance appraisals may be used in disciplinary actions and therefore are open for review by some individuals outside the library if legal issues surface.

Performance Appraisal Procedure

The performance appraisal is intended to be a positive, developmental process that includes praise and constructive guidance on how the employee’s performance might improve in the future.

Evaluation should be based on the director’s demonstrated ability to meet the objectives of the annual library work plan. This is not intended to be the board’s subjective appraisal of the director’s personality traits. It should consider the entire range of responsibilities summarized in the director’s job description. The board should work with the director to develop an evaluation process that includes stated criteria and a rating system. Neither the evaluation process, nor the criteria used to evaluate performance, nor the content of the evaluation should come as a surprise to the director. The director should know the expectations of work and the criteria that will be used to measure success. The following indicators may serve as criteria to evaluate the performance of a library director in fulfilling the essential functions of the position:

• Ability to use public funds wisely
• Ability to prepare budgets that can support library services and programs
• Ability to prepare accurate and clearly written financial reports
• Ability to meet milestones of both long-range and annual plans
• Ability to keep the board informed of library concerns and achievements
• Ability to serve as technical advisor to the board regarding library issues
• Ability to maintain good relationships with those the library serves, library supporters, library staff, other libraries, and political and professional entities
• Ability to learn from past mistakes by avoiding performance problems that had been raised in the past

United for Libraries offers Organizational Tools for Trustees, which includes sample library director evaluations.

When meeting to work on the library director’s annual performance evaluation or to discuss the evaluation with the director, the board does so in executive session. The procedure for going into executive session is given in section 206(b), title 74, Idaho Code.

The steps in the annual documentation of performance are as follows:

• The director completes a performance self-appraisal for the past year and submits it to the board.
• Peer and/or customer review input is requested, if desired.
• The board prepares written comments on the employee’s performance using the performance appraisal form and reviewing the relevant documents.
• The board members meet without the director present to complete the final appraisal form. They attempt to reach consensus on how they, as a body, summarize the appraisal.
• The board’s written appraisal is given to the director and then discussed in an executive session scheduled as part of a regular or special board meeting.
• The director and board discuss the appraisal and any developmental issues that need to be addressed.
• Once both the board and director have agreed on the appraisal results, the appraisal form is signed, and copies go to the employee and to the employee’s personnel file.
• At this meeting, or at a subsequent meeting, the board and director agree upon a work plan for the next appraisal period.

Self-Appraisal

What is a self-appraisal?
A self-appraisal is both a process and a document. It is a process of reflecting back on the job over the past year. It is a time to compare what actually happened to what the ROJD and last year’s work plan said was expected to happen, to evaluate what worked well, what did not work so well, and what was learned. It is also a time to look forward and propose a work plan for the coming year. The self-appraisal is also a written document that describes the result of the reflection process. It makes up one piece of the performance appraisal.

Why is the self-appraisal important?
The appraisal process at the library is a collaboration between employee and supervisor. Because an employee best understands what challenges were encountered and what was learned, that employee’s own perspective is essential for a complete appraisal. Supervisors can observe and comment on the results of employee actions but cannot know for certain what was learned. Supervisors can provide direction and coaching, but each employee has the ultimate responsibility for doing the job, making improvements, and accomplishing results.

Who reads the self-appraisal and why?
The self-appraisal is written for both the employee and the supervisor. It will be an important starting point for the appraisal discussion. A director’s self-appraisal will be read by members of the library board. It is included with the performance appraisal documents filed in the employee’s confidential human resource files.

When is the self-appraisal written?
A self-appraisal is prepared as part of each employee’s annual performance appraisal. Employees reflect throughout the year on what is happening with their jobs, what they are learning, and in which areas they need training and development.

What is the link between the self-appraisal and:

• The ROJD and work plan? The ROJD includes a job purpose statement, two to three results to be achieved, and both ongoing activities and activities specific to the year that contribute to each result. The ROJD puts the annual work plan in context, detailing why it is relevant and important for the position. At least once a year, during the performance appraisal, the ROJD is reviewed by employee and supervisor and, if necessary, updated to describe the position more accurately. Determining the work plan for the coming year is another important part of the annual performance appraisal. Reflecting on what happened the past year is used as a basis for deciding what needs to be learned, improved upon, or undertaken in the coming year.
• The library’s mission and goals? Employees use these when setting and evaluating their work plan and to identify their roles in achieving the team’s results.
• The supervisor’s appraisal? As mentioned above, the employee and supervisor collaborate in doing the performance appraisal. The supervisor will use the employee’s self-appraisal in preparing for the appraisal discussion and in writing any additional appraisal comments.

What information does the self-appraisal contain? What does it look like?
The self-appraisal focuses on the accomplishments of the work plan that was set for the year as well as on the employee’s performance as it relates to the performance evaluation measurements. The employee will briefly describe what has happened; what has worked; what has not worked; what has been accomplished; how those accomplishments have contributed to the results of the position; how the job has changed; and, most importantly, what has been learned from the experience.

The purpose of the ROJD is to avoid describing the job and listing activities. It is best to avoid writing a very long, or very short, self-appraisal. For many people, focusing on three or four significant events, accomplishments, or experiences is more effective than going into great detail. Another approach is to comment briefly on some expectations and go into more detail on a few. The employee and supervisor can determine how much detail is appropriate.

The self-appraisal notes how the work of the position has changed over the past year as circumstances have changed. For example, if new computer software has been installed or new co-workers have been hired. It is fine for the employee and supervisor to change or add to the work plan during the year to reflect changes in the job. The self-appraisal may also include a section of “unexpected” or “additional activities or accomplishments.”

The format of a self-appraisal is clear and easy for all appraisal reviewers to understand and to link self-appraisal comments with the employee’s work plan and ROJD results. The work plan and self-appraisal elements can be inserted into the ROJD document, under the appropriate result.