Performance Reviews for Academic Professional and Administrative Employees

The University of Minnesota (University) is committed to a performance management system for academic professional and administrative (P&A) employees that is delivered in a manner that is appropriate to the nature of the work, appropriately recognizes and rewards exemplary performance, provides for the growth and development of the employee, and addresses substandard performance. The University (a) requires the conducting of annual written performance reviews and (b) promotes the ongoing practice of regular feedback to the employee and candid discussion about performance throughout the year.

Two additional types of reviews that may be conducted include:

• Comprehensive reviews that provide for an assessment of performance over a longer period of time and involve feedback from a wide spectrum of people, both internal and external to the University.
• Developmental reviews, the focus of which is on identification of areas for growth and development.

These two additional reviews are required for deans and senior administrators and are optional for others at the discretion of the responsible administrator/supervisor.

This policy establishes general procedures for performance reviews and delegates to the senior administrator of each campus, college, or administrative unit oversight of specific delivery formats and procedures. Criteria for these reviews will vary according to the nature of the position and the unit in which it is located. A key aspect of this process is the relationship of the responsible administrator/supervisor and the employee, paired with the recognized value and importance of shared responsibility between the two individuals.

For other related performance review requirements, see Related Information.

Provisions and Terms

Scope

This policy governs a performance management system for P&A (93xx, 96xx, 97xx) employees. Excluded from coverage under this policy are academic appointments that are (1) “Without Salary” appointments, and (2) graduate assistants (select 95xx) or professionals-in-training (select 95xx).

Performance Management Evaluation and Development System

1. Components

   Critical components of the University's performance management system include:

   1. Communicating performance expectations to individual employees;
   2. Assisting employees in connecting their objectives to the University’s overall mission through goal setting;
   3. Adjusting performance expectations as the unit’s business needs change;
   4. Conducting an annual review of employee performance with written documentation;
   5. Measuring the degree to which expectations are met;
   6. Addressing areas needing improvement through training, coaching, and other methods;
   7. Encouraging, guiding, and supporting individual development plans;
   8. Dealing with substandard performance;
   9. Recognizing and rewarding performance;
   10. Providing one basis upon which salary increases are determined; and
   11. Making decisions, as appropriate, as a function of performance evaluation.
2. Participation in Decisions with Regard to University Employment

   The Board of Regents Policy: Nepotism and Personal Relationships states that actions by a University member that directly influence University employment (e.g., hiring, promotion, supervision, evaluation, and determination of salary) of any other University member with whom a personal relationship exists is prohibited. Within this context, a personal relationship will mean a marital or other committed relationship, significant familial relationship, or consensual sexual or romantic relationship. The restriction of the nepotism rule is also to be applied to ex-spouses as well since that relationship may also interfere with objective evaluation.

Types of Review

1. Annual Performance Reviews (Required).

   Responsible administrators/supervisors must conduct an annual performance review for P&A employees that report to them. Annual performance reviews are designed as a formal mechanism to evaluate the past year's performance of P&A employees. They are conducted in general for the following purposes:

   1. Evaluating performance for the year;
   2. Improving individual performance to benefit personal, unit, and institutional effectiveness;
   3. Recognizing professional growth and achievements;
   4. Determining salary increases based on an assessment of the performance of responsibilities and, where applicable, service activities; and
   5. Identifying performance goals and professional growth areas for the next year.

   General criteria to be used in the review of all P&A employees include:

   1. Achievement of goals that support the mission of the department/division, the campus, college, or administrative unit, and the University;
   2. Behavioral and functional competencies;
   3. Service delivery to internal colleagues and external constituents;
   4. Promotion of, and sensitivity to the University’s diverse community with attention to equal opportunity, affirmative action, and improvement of climate for diverse groups; and
   5. Responsible leadership, management, and use of the University’s human, physical, and financial resources.

   Additional criteria for reviews will vary according to the nature of the position and the unit in which it is located.

   The campus, college, or administrative unit head will ensure that an evaluation and development process is conducted for the P&A employees for which responsibility is held, and that the process is properly and fairly implemented within the unit.

2. Reviews and Developmental Assessments of Deans and Senior Administrators (Required).

   The process of reviewing and evaluating deans and senior administrators includes both a three-year evaluative and developmental component. These assessments are designed to foster their professional success and enhance their performance effectiveness in a constructive way. It supports the broad goals of leadership excellence and managerial accountability. The evaluative review incorporates use of a standardized survey in which assessment information is solicited from multiple reviewers, both internal and external to the University. The developmental review is a 360-degree web-based process with follow-up coaching. Responsible administrators are expected to conduct and budget for appropriate performance appraisals and are held accountable for doing so.

   The description and procedures for both a comprehensive three-year evaluation and the 360-degree developmental assessment are outlined in Appendices: Review and Evaluation of Deans and Review and Evaluation of Senior Administrators.

3. Comprehensive Reviews of Other Administrators (Optional).

   Responsible administrators/supervisors may choose, at their discretion, to conduct a comprehensive review for those administrators reporting to them. Comprehensive reviews are broad in scope and dimension and build upon the results of the annual performance reviews that have occurred since the initial hire or last comprehensive review. Assessment information may be solicited from a wide spectrum of people who are affected by the individual's performance. Such evaluations might be sought from colleagues, from others with whom the P&A employee interacts or for whom the administrator performs a service, from other administrators at both higher and lower levels, and from faculty, P&A employees, civil service and union-represented staff and students, or other constituencies as appropriate. Done well, the reviews provide a more robust view of performance and a more sweeping assessment of effectiveness in carrying out responsibilities.

   Comprehensive Reviews are conducted for the purposes of:

   1. Providing a formal systematic and reliable means of reviewing performance over a longer period of time, providing one measure of administrative accountability to both internal and external constituents;
   2. Recognizing, on a more broad basis, professional growth and achievements attained over time;
   3. Improving individual performance to benefit personal, unit, and institutional effectiveness and achievement of goals; and
   4. Providing information for making personnel decisions including those related to compensation and reappointment.

   This type of review usually includes a small committee specifically appointed for purposes of assisting in this effort. Such reviews may be conducted every three to five years for administrators on annual or multiple year contracts.

4. Developmental Reviews (Optional).

   Responsible administrators/supervisor may choose, at their discretion, to conduct developmental reviews for those P&A employees reporting to them. Such reviews are designed to provide primarily administrators, but also individual employee’s feedback that can be used to help identify areas for professional growth and development. This type of review is especially important during the first years in the position. Feedback is solicited from a variety of individuals with whom the administrator generally interacts when carrying out their responsibilities. A multi-source (e.g., "360-degree") assessment is a typical type of tool used to gather information for this purpose. The results of this type of review may or may not be shared with the responsible administrator/supervisor and are not used in making personnel decisions.

In order to ensure the excellence of the institution, the University provides for an effective performance management system that facilitates the achievement of individual, unit, and institutional goals and the growth and development of its employees. This policy gives further definition to Board of Regents Policy: Employee Performance Evaluation and Development.

• Conducting Annual Performance Reviews of Academic Professional and Administrative Employees

• Conducting Comprehensive Reviews of Deans and Senior Administrators

  Refer to Appendices:

  • Review and Evaluation of Deans
  • Review and Evaluation of Senior Administrators

There are no forms for this policy.

Subject	Contact	Phone	Fax/Email
General Information or Procedural Assistance	Primary: Responsible administrator/supervisor Secondary: Local campus, college, or administrative unit HR administrator Other (as needed): Office of Human Resources specialist or consultant	Office of Human Resources Specialist and Consultant List	Office of Human Resources Specialist and Consultant List
Procedural Assistance with Review and Evaluation of Deans and Senior Administrators	Office of Human Resources Chief of Staff	612-626-9831

Academic Administrative Employees

Employees appointed in the 93xx or 9631-9640 classifications established by the Office of Human Resources.

Academic Professional Employees

Employees appointed in the 97xx or 9621-9630 classifications established by the Office of Human Resources.

Performance Management System

A process undertaken between responsible administrators/supervisors and the employees reporting to them. This process includes assessing, guiding, improving, and recognizing employee performance, resulting in effective achievement of organizational and individual goals.

Responsible Administrator

An administrator with oversight/supervisory responsibilities for a P&A employee.

Annual Performance Reviews

Unit

1. Establish unit specific procedures for conducting annual reviews and evaluating performance of P&A employees.
2. Ensure performance review policy compliance throughout the unit with timely reviews conducted; establish appropriate consequences for not conducting evaluations.

P&A Employee Being Reviewed

1. Provide the responsible administrator/supervisor with a written summary of the year’s work and accomplishments toward goals.
2. Participate in identification of goals and a professional development plan for the next year.

Responsible Administrator/Supervisor Conducting Review

1. Articulate clear expectations within areas of responsibility and work.
2. Provide regular feedback to the employees on their performance.
3. Conduct performance reviews of all P&A employees for which supervisory responsibility is held in accordance with University and unit policy.
4. Work with the employee to develop a set of goals for the next year and any modifications that may be appropriate throughout the year.

Review and Evaluation of Deans and Senior Administrators

Refer to the Procedure: Conducting Comprehensive Reviews of Deans and Senior Administrators.

• Review and Evaluation of Deans
• Review and Evaluation of Senior Administrators

• Review and Evaluation of Deans (PDF)
• Review and Evaluation of Senior Administrators (PDF)

<p>In support of this policy, the above appendices are found under the Procedure: Conducting Comprehensive Reviews of Deans and Senior Administrators:</p>

1. What is private information and what is public information regarding an individual's performance review?

   Performance reviews are private personnel data, but may be shared within the institution where employee job responsibilities require reasonable access to the information.

(1) For performance review requirements for academic professional employees with teaching responsibilities, refer to the Administrative Policy: Academic Appointments with Teaching Functions and the applicable Collegiate Personnel Plan.
(2) For performance review requirements for academic professional employees on probationary (H) appointments, refer to the Administrative Policy: Appointments of Academic Professional and Administrative Employees, Appendices: Administrative Guidelines, Criteria, and Procedures for Review of Probationary (H) Academic Professionals Considered for Continuous (G) Appointment, and Information for the Probationary (H) Academic Professional Candidate Being Reviewed for Continuous (G) Appointment.
(3) For performance review requirements for collegiate departmental chairs or heads, refer to the applicable Collegiate Constitution.

• Board of Regents Policy: Academic Misconduct
• Board of Regents Policy: Code of Conduct
• Board of Regents Policy: College Constitutions
• Board of Regents Policy: Nepotism and Personal Relationships
• Administrative Policy: Academic Appointments with Teaching Functions
• Administrative Policy: Appointments of Academic Professional and Administrative Employees
• Administrative Policy: Compensation for Academic Professional and Administrative Staff
• Administrative Policy: Graduate Assistant Employment
• Administrative Policy: Postdoctoral Appointments

Amended:

May 2008 - Policy converted to the new University-wide format for administrative policies.

Amended:

May 2007 - Language was revised to reflect current performance review processes and to align with the recently adopted Board of Regents Policy: Employee Performance Evaluation and Development. The administrative policy: Ex-Spouse Participation in Reviews was incorporated into the language of this policy. Two appendices were added to this policy: (1) Appendix A: Review and Evaluation of Deans and (2) Appendix B: Review and Evaluation of Senior Administrators.

Amended:

October 2002 - Language contained in Performance Appraisals for Academic Professional and Administrative Staff incorporates information on performance reviews heretofore contained in the Academic Professional and Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual (Issued February 1984) and the administrative policy on Review and Evaluation of Academic Administrators (Issued January 1992). Edits were made and information updated and expanded. Policy information was put into standard University-wide policy format.

Adopted:

January 1992 - Administrative Policy: Review and Evaluation of Academic Administrators

Adopted:

1984 - Information initially included in the Academic Professional and Administrative Staff Policies and Procedures Manual.

Effective:

September 2005