BTSR guidebook ~ Training & skills self-evaluation

What provision at this level looks like and feels like

For the organisation

In 2008, 64% of broadcasters evaluated at this level. 20% were lower and 16% were higher.

At this level, most of the aims of a performance review system have been achieved – in whole or in part – and the organisation, its people and its training & development should all feel like they are headed in the same direction. Team members should feel that they get a fair deal: achievement and potential are recognised, development needs are met.

For the training function

The trainer who tunes in accurately to the results of the performance review process should be able to make a strong contribution. Two reasons:

• the results are a goldmine of information about areas where job performance doesn’t meet the organisation’s requirements… in other words, training needs
• the very fact that management is committed to a performance review process means that it is likely to be supportive of the trainer’s contributions to improving performance.

On the other hand, the trainer who doesn’t tune in accurately to the results of the performance review process is at risk.

Benefits & risks of provision at this level

Benefits

At this level an organisation should be able to reap most of the benefits of a performance review process:

• Improved organisational performance
• Improved morale and retention
• More effective training.

Compared to the effort of implementing base provision, the additional effort needed to get to this level has an attractive cost:benefit ratio.

Benefits at this level could prove sufficient for some organisations with modest aspirations.

Risks

The main risk is that the organisation will be out-performed by a rival committed to a higher level of provision.

Processes & benchmarks for evaluating provision at this level

Distinguishing from «base« provision

Superficially base and medium provision can look very similar. The differences that make a difference are mainly to do with the way the system is implemented. At this level:

• Performance reviews are carried out regularly – at least once a year
• They are carried out systematically, with defined procedures, standard forms and deadlines
• Those who review performance receive suitable training in the organisation’s expectations, values and processes
• The criteria against which performance is judged bear a discernible relation to the organisation’s goals
• Performance review forms are completed with some care and consistency
• Performance review meetings are regular and purposeful
• The process is two-way: they are valued as an opportunity for the team member to provide feedback to the organisation, as well as the other way round

Distinguishing from »high» provision

Medium provision is less sophisticated, less integrated and less pervasive than high provision. At this level:

• Day-to-day, feedback – especially EBI Even Better If… (= not so good!) feedback – is rare; it is mainly stored up and delivered via the formal system
• Performance reviews might be carried out only once a year, and/or might measure attributes other than individuals’ impact on the organisation
• Individuals’ training needs identified during the review are addressed in straightforward cases, but can end up classified as “too hard” in more intricate cases; training needs are not necessarily aggregated across the organisation
• The performance review process itself can run for several years before it is formally reviewed.

Processes

Here are some diagnostic questions:

• Are there regular and formalised arrangements for individual performance review?
• Do they include standardised forms, guidance material and training?
• Are reviews carried out at least annually, and documented? With deadlines that are adhered to?
• Are promotion and pay decisions influenced by the results of performance reviews?
• Once devised, are performance review processes left to run for several years at a time?
• Do team members believe that senior executives support the performance review process?
• Are well over 50% of team members assessed as above average?
• Do training needs identified during performance reviews often result in training and development interventions for the individuals concerned?
• Does the organisation tend to plan and deliver some of its training independently of needs identified by, or criteria used in, performance reviews?

If the answers are mostly Yes, that’s a fairly strong indication that the organisation is providing at this level.

Reference material relevant to this strand and level

Need it meets	Title	Words	Link

Examples of provision at this level

Here are some examples of evidence used by broadcasters, in previous years, to demonstrate provision at this level:

• Personal Development Review (PDR) forms and guidance
• PDR training pack
• Report on development needs across the division (“Development Planning Report 2008”)
• Employee performance review assessment, training needs identified and documented through the assessment process
• Template objective form and appraisal toolkit; completed objective form
• Appraisal records, performance data, management summary information, interview evidence
• Performance Appraisal Form
• Memo describing appraisal process and giving deadlines for its various stages
• Appraisal summaries by department and by training need type
• Website document describing appraisal process
• Three-month follow-up memo
• Online EMS [employee management system] records, online appraisals
• Formal documentation of the appraisal process from induction material
• Appraisal records, performance data, management summary information, interview evidence.

The wording is broadcasters’ own, and does not necessarily follow our usage preferences

What it takes to get to the next level

The first thing to realise is that this is not a bad place to be. So you shouldn’t plan a move up until you’re sure that the organisation is ready to invest the time, money and effort required.

Here are some ways to plan your move up:

• Begin with a review of the performance review process itself… which should result not only in actions for changing it, but also in a firm date for the next review
• Involve a sample of team members in the review – their perspective can be highly instructive (and occasionally surprising)
• Extend the review out to other systems: at the next level, performance review should integrate tightly with pay and promotion reviews and with the training cycle
• Consider buying some time from a specialist, someone who has helped other organisations make this step
• Work with senior management to craft a set of staff performance criteria that map directly onto the organisation’s performance criteria. The goal is to ensure that people are considered successful if and only if they contribute to making the organisation successful. Allow for plenty of iterations – this is difficult stuff.